Re: Autotools GSoC ideas

[olafBuddenhagen]

Hi,

On Wed, Mar 09, 2011 at 12:08:11AM -0800, Harlan Stenn wrote:

> I would suggest that proposals offer useful hints and links to
> information and concepts, but I would recommend against spelling the
> proposals out in significant detail.  The reason for this is that
> sometimes students will do an excellent job of either regurgitating or
> paraphrasing a proposal.  It then becomes more difficult to figure out
> if the student really knows what they are doing (or not).

I don't think so. It's pretty easy to see whether the application
actually contains any content not handed out in the proposal -- it just
requires some experience on the organisation's side to consciously look
out for this...

(Also, doing a really good job at regurgitating would actually require
pretty good understanding... :-) )

> If the written proposals offer a direction and some stepping points
> (only), then the students have a chance to "fill in the blanks" and it
> becomes much easier to identify these "better" students.

Good students will find enough opportunity to show their understanding.
The Hurd has always have had excessively detailed proposals, and we have
never had any trouble identifying the good students -- quite the
contrary.

Detailed proposals are important, so the student reading them actually
gets a feel for what the task implies -- whether the required work is
something he is able to do, and genuinely interested in doing...

-antrik-