Writing Deliverable 3

Due: 3/27

Goal: Update your manuscript from the prior deliverable so that it receives valuable new feedback without spending too much extra time on activities that are not relevant to the final product.

Feedback

If you would rather get comments on your Overleaf project, state as much in the abstract of your manuscript, along with a link to the Overleaf project. Your Overleaf project needs to be owned by someone with a premium account for it to receive comments. If you do not have that, then Prof. Stephens-Martinez can own it. Do the following:

1. Share the project with her.
2. Email her with the email addresses to share the copy she owns with.
3. She will copy the project and share it with the email addresses you provide.

Feedback on areas already received feedback on

If you have specific feedback requests for the sections that were fully written before and therefore will be skipped except for noted exceptions (introduction, related work, and context), do the following:

1. State your request in your abstract.
2. Color the text you want feedback on blue as follows:
   1. Add this macro creation command in your main.tex file after the \usepackage calls:

      \newcommand{\feedreq}[1]{{\textcolor{blue}{\bf {#1}}}}

   2. Use this new macro by putting the text inside the curly braces of the \feedreq{}  command, like so

      \feedreq{text you want feedback on.}

   3. Alternatively, you can just color things yourself without the above macro, like so:

      \textcolor{blue}{text you want feedback on.}

   4. You may need to add a color package of some kind like \usepackage{color} to use this latex macro.

Requirements

1. This should be an updated version of your written deliverable 2.
2. The following sections will not get a full in-depth read because they have already received feedback in a prior deliverable. The caveats listed below will be read in full.
   1. Introduction – Only the last paragraph(s) summarizing the results will be read for feedback. Stubs of TBA are encourage if you do not know that result yet. The goal is to convey what you plan to say within the bounds of what you know on submission.
   2. Related work – None of this will be read, unless there was a lot of feedback in deliverable 2.
   3. Context – Only new content compared to your prior submission.
3. The following sections should be written paragraphs except for noted exceptions.
   1. Methods — This should be pretty much fully written unless you have a question for Prof. Stephens-Martinez that you could not get addressed before this deliverable.
   2. Limitations — This should be fully written unless there are some limitations you want feedback on but don’t want to write a full paragraph about just yet.
4. The following sections must have, at minimum, a bulleted list of the primary points you plan to make, including all supporting information. The more paragraph-like it is, the more feedback you can receive.
   1. Results
   2. Discussion
5. You may put bullets in the Conclusion section if you want feedback on what goes in there, but often, this section is similar to what is said at the end of the introduction but with more space. So, the introduction’s ending paragraphs should sufficiently convey what you will likely put here.

Grading

• Exemplary – Above and beyond Satisfactory, such as a fully fleshed-out submission of the required sections that require little feedback on improvements.
• Satisfactory – The submission fulfills all of the above criteria.
• Not Yet – The submission is missing one part.
• Unassessable – There is a submission, but it does not fulfill the Not Yet criteria.