Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2015 13:20:45 -0700 From: Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> To: Royce Williams <royce@tycho.org> Cc: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com>, "freebsd-chat@freebsd.org" <freebsd-chat@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: higher education scholarships for open source or BSD? Message-ID: <550DD29D.70106@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <CA%2BE3k92-CkGdbAu1tVZJB_YEgdfy1q6sJt7oATL7nNqq21_ykg@mail.gmail.com> References: <alpine.NEB.2.02.1503201245500.22177@t1.m.reedmedia.net> <CAF6rxgkH8uT4%2Bpyc1GhqaQy483oSn5WdoAJ0ggAZKcrt=oM_-Q@mail.gmail.com> <550D29CD.5030703@freebsd.org> <CA%2BE3k92-CkGdbAu1tVZJB_YEgdfy1q6sJt7oATL7nNqq21_ykg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 03/21/15 06:39, Royce Williams wrote:=0D > Could you redact anything sensitive, and post your entire terms of=0D > reference? Perhaps as a link from the original page?=0D =0D Nothing sensitive; the terms of reference for all awards are available=0D via the university website. Quoted text is the ToR, the rest is my=0D commentary on what it means and why it's there.=0D =0D > The Open Source Software Engagement Award =0D > One award, valued at a minimum of $1,000, will be granted annually in any= term to an undergraduate student who meets the following criteria:=0D =0D Most "service" awards at SFU are $1000, so I went with the same amount.=0D =0D Depending on the pool of applicants, I might give more money and have this= =0D changed to "Two awards... to students of different genders" since (unlike= =0D most of the university, where women are in the majority and receive an even= =0D larger majority of awards) there is a distinct lack of women in OSS; on the= =0D other hand, I don't want to create an award which zero or one people would= =0D be eligible for each year.=0D =0D > is enrolled full-time in a Bachelor=E2=80=99s degree program;=0D > is in good academic standing; and=0D =0D Boilerplate requirements for undergraduate awards. I decided to limit=0D this to undergrads because (a) most service awards are, and (b) it's=0D hard to compare contributions made by undergrads vs. grad students.=0D =0D > has demonstrated excellence in contributing to an Open Source Software pr= oject(s) on a volunteer basis, consisting of code and/or documentation.=0D =0D "demonstrated excellence" is mostly boilerplate text; it provides flexibili= ty=0D to the committee if students apply who have made OSS contributions but they= =0D are all so trivial as to be not deserving of recognition.=0D =0D "contributing ... on a volunteer basis" is because I didn't want to simply= =0D give an extra $1000 to students who were getting $5k from GSoC or even more= =0D from summer co-op jobs.=0D =0D "code and/or documentation" is because I wanted to clarify that, unlike=0D Google, I think documentation is a perfectly worthy contribution.=0D =0D > Preference will be given to students who have taken a leadership role wit= hin a project.=0D =0D In the language of terms of reference at SFU, "preference will be given" me= ans=0D "the committee will look for students who satisfy this criterion, and if an= y=0D do then students who don't satisfy the this criterion won't be considered".= =0D =0D The words "leadership role within a project" are inherently vague, but cove= r=0D my feeling that students who "wear hats" (in FreeBSD-speak) are more worthy= of=0D recognition than those who merely write code; herding cats is hard work.=0D =0D > Applications must include:=0D > a list of contributions to the Open Source Software project(s); and,=0D =0D Obviously, the committee needs to know what they're recognizing.=0D =0D > a letter of reference from another project member describing the project = and the applicant=E2=80=99s contributions.=0D =0D This requirement implicitly but very deliberately excludes one-person open= =0D source projects. I did this because (a) I think a lot of the value of open= =0D source software comes from its nature as a social endeavour, and (b) there= =0D are a huge number of crappy one-person "open source projects" out there --= =0D in a way, "has anyone else joined the project" is a filter for quality.=0D =0D Letters of reference are also a large part of how applications for awards= =0D are typically evaluated. When I proposed this the university suggested tha= t=0D it should be "from a supervisor", but I didn't think that would really work= =0D given the often non-hierarchical nature of open source projects...=0D =0D > The award will be granted by the Senate Undergraduate Awards Adjudication= Committee.=0D =0D This is the standard boilerplate text to indicate that this award goes to= =0D the main university-wide committee to adjudicate. It was suggested to me= =0D that this award could be handled within the department of computer science,= =0D and it's possible that we'll amend the terms of reference to that effect in= =0D the future if SUAAC has too much difficulty evaluating OSS contributions=0D (I doubt humanities professors will know much about code, but they should= =0D still be able to make a judgment based on the letter of reference); but I= =0D find that a lot of good OSS contributions come from non-CS students, and=0D awards which are adjudicated within an individual department tend to only b= e=0D advertised to that department's students.=0D =0D -- =0D Colin Percival=0D Security Officer Emeritus, FreeBSD | The power to serve=0D Founder, Tarsnap | www.tarsnap.com | Online backups for the truly paranoid
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?550DD29D.70106>