[PRE REVIEW]: Nemo Gradebook: An R Package for Calculating Course Grades

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @nikita-jaya (Nikita Jayaprakash)
Repository: https://github.com/gradebook-dev/gradebook
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch):
Version: v1.0.0
Editor: Pending
Reviewers: Pending
Managing EiC: Arfon Smith

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/30dd4aa5d6f1b4abb643bb6851a4a8aa"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/30dd4aa5d6f1b4abb643bb6851a4a8aa/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/30dd4aa5d6f1b4abb643bb6851a4a8aa/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/30dd4aa5d6f1b4abb643bb6851a4a8aa)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @nikita-jaya. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@nikita-jaya if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). You can search the list of people that have already agreed to review and may be suitable for this submission.

Editor instructions

The JOSS submission bot @editorialbot is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @editorialbot can do for you type:

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello human, I'm @editorialbot, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks.

For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:

@editorialbot commands

For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90  T=0.02 s (1461.0 files/s, 225581.9 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R                               14            390            491           2582
Markdown                         5            204              0            722
YAML                             7             19              3            272
Rmd                              4            156            265            193
TeX                              1              8              0             70
CSV                              4              0              0             29
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            35            777            759           3868
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

   241	Nikita Jayaprakash
    84	andrewpbray
    83	mvoutov
    54	nikita-jaya
    11	Andrew Bray
    10	Zach Turner

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 969

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

[editorialbot]

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

✅ OK DOIs

- 10.1145/3051457.3051466 is OK

🟡 SKIP DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: Turnitin acquires Gradescope, expands grading and ...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Nemo Gradebook Web App
- No DOI given, and none found for title: How do I use the Gradebook?
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Grade calculations
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Calculate Grades
- No DOI given, and none found for title: About Grades

❌ MISSING DOIs

- 10.32614/cran.package.grader may be a valid DOI for title: gradeR: Helps Grade Assignment Submissions that ar...

❌ INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

License info:

🟡 License found: GNU General Public License v3.0 (Check here for OSI approval)

[editorialbot]

👉📄 Download article proof 📄 View article proof on GitHub 📄 👈

[arfon]

@nikita-jaya – many thanks for your submission to JOSS. I'm going to start a scope review amongst the JOSS editors to decide if this submission is research software as defined by JOSS. The concern here is that this is actually software designed to support educational scenarios (i.e., grading work)

This process will likely take a week or so to complete.

[arfon]

@editorialbot query scope

[editorialbot]

Submission flagged for editorial review.

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

FielDHub: A Shiny App for Design of Experiments in Life Sciences
Submitting author: @DidierMurilloF
Handling editor: @csoneson (Active)
Reviewers: @Prof-ThiagoOliveira, @dlebauer
Similarity score: 0.6700

profileR: An R package for profile analysis
Submitting author: @cddesja
Handling editor: @marcosvital (Active)
Reviewers: @wjakethompson, @jrosen48
Similarity score: 0.6584

infer: An R package for tidyverse-friendly statistical inference
Submitting author: @simonpcouch
Handling editor: @csoneson (Active)
Reviewers: @prdm0, @kellieotto
Similarity score: 0.6553

Visualizations with statistical details: The ggstatsplot approach
Submitting author: @IndrajeetPatil
Handling editor: @csoneson (Active)
Reviewers: @njtierney, @kevinrue
Similarity score: 0.6545

compareMCMCs: An R package for studying MCMC efficiency
Submitting author: @perrydv
Handling editor: @fabian-s (Active)
Reviewers: @rowlandseymour, @tbrown122387
Similarity score: 0.6545

⚠️ Note to editors: If these papers look like they might be a good match, click through to the review issue for that paper and invite one or more of the authors before considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[nikita-jaya]

@nikita-jaya – many thanks for your submission to JOSS. I'm going to start a scope review amongst the JOSS editors to decide if this submission is research software as defined by JOSS. The concern here is that this is actually software designed to support educational scenarios (i.e., grading work)

This process will likely take a week or so to complete.

@arfon -- thank you for your response. If it assists in the review, here is how we envision this package to be research software.
This tool enables researchers in education to study the effect that different philosophies of grading (e.g. mastery based grading, contract grading, etc.) have on student grades by enacting multiple policies on the same data set. Researchers' ability to do this is currently constrained either by the limited functionality of LMS gradebooks or by their own ability to write correct scripts that implement complex calculations.

[arfon]

@nikita-jaya – thank you for the additional context. After consulting with the editorial team, we've concluded that this software is indeed not in scope for JOSS at this point in time. Should the package form the foundation of a collection of research into grading techniques then this package may be eligible in the future but at this point is not.

You might want to consider the Journal of Open Source Education (https://jose.theoj.org) as a possible alternative for this software. This is not to say that the software would be eligible to be published there, rather, that it is a possible alternate venue.

[arfon]

@editorialbot reject

[editorialbot]

Paper rejected.