home | syllabus | groups | moodle | video | review | © 2022
Work solo. IMPORTANT: read the lecture on ethics before you start.
- Using these 7 steps as an outline
- Address one of the case studies
YOur answer must cover, at the very least:
- who is hurt by the current design;
- how we might fix that?
- Important: ensure that your text justifies why the new design addresses the problems you document.
- and how will your fix empower traditionally disempowered social groups?
- ie. don't just fix this particular problem; rather, address deeper issues that might cause problems in the future).
- No less that three pages (in the format shown below, excluding references);
- no more than four
- HARD LIMITS:
- we will not grade after four pages.
- we will not read if less than three.
- we will not read if it is the wrong format (see below)
Create an overleaf.com account
-
Select :IEEE Bare Demo Template for conferences"
-
Hit "open as template"
-
Add your name and email to list of authors.
-
Add these lines before
\begin{document}\usepackage[switch]{lineno} \linenumbers -
Write at a three to four page paper.
-
Hit the "recompile" button
-
Look to the right of "recompile: for the download icon
-
Submit to Moodle
| Grade | What | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | PROBLEM DEFINITION | +1 if it states the problem and +1 more if does it well; e.g. situates current problem in broader content |
| 2 | GATHER RELEVANT FACTS | +1 if it gather assess relevant facts and +1 more if does it well; e.g. extensive literature review |
| 2 | IDENTIFY STAKEHOLDERS | +1 if it identifies the stakeholders and +1 more if does it well; e.g. shows how skackholder requirements can be contradictory |
| 5 | LIST OF 5 OPTIONS | +5 if it develops a list of iat least five options |
| 3 | SOFTWARE DESIGN | +2 of some of those options need to includes a redesign for a better version of the software where the better software mitigates some of the issues discussed by the original software. And +1 more if it does it well; e.g. clever design |
| 4 | TESTING | 2 if it tests options using criteria like harm, publicity, defensibility, reversibility, virtue, colleague, professional, organizational test ( see guidance on that at https://github.com/txt/se20/blob/master/etc/img/12steps.png) And 2 more if it does it well; e.g. writes extensively insightful notes on three or more of the tests |
| 2 | CHOICE | +1 if tentative choice and +1 if final Choice |
| -2,+1 | OTHER | -2 if the essay is mostly “I think X, I think Y” without any citations or comment on the amazing things other people have thunk in this matter. +1 more if it beyond the specifics of your answer, the real test will be ""does the student understand general principles that can be applied in other contexts”; i.e. if the essay defined clear steps to making ethical decisions (beyond the 12 steps of https://github.com/txt/se20/blob/master/etc/img/12steps.png) for future applications. |
| 20 | TOTAL | plus, maybe, +1 bonus |
