🎉 Outstanding（最高评级 · 第二次）：

Dear Qi, Thank you for your work throughout MBA392. I enjoyed reading your submission and learning more about your work within scrap metal trading and business development at Zhengda Prosperity LLC. I loved how you reflected on stakeholder responsibility, fairness, and power asymmetry within supplier negotiations and information sharing processes. Furthermore, I really enjoyed how you used real workplace examples to demonstrate personal ethical growth and self-awareness. This content is awesome! Great work, Qi.

Please note that I will soon be finalizing grading for MBA392. If you have passed both Papers #1 and #2, you have successfully completed this course.

🎉 满分！Khan 历来扣页数也给到 100/100

反馈：Bigger fonts would have been better from a visual perspective.

⚠️ 双扣 -6 分："3 points deducted for failure to follow file naming requirement" + "Did not follow page count requirement (-3 points)"

详细反馈：The submission demonstrates strong understanding of how historical bias, proxy variables, structural inequality, and single-axis thinking contribute to algorithmic discrimination. However, some sections are overly descriptive and repetitive, with limited deeper original analysis beyond summarizing the readings. Minor wording and grammar issues also slightly reduce the overall polish and readability.

反馈：The Federal Reserve 2015 stress test specifics and the adjustable-rate mortgage example as the mechanism for information asymmetry make this paper more precise than most. The Dodd-Frank section covers the key provisions and explains what problem each one addresses rather than just naming them. The systemic risk analysis correctly traces how the interconnection of institutions amplified what would otherwise have been a contained housing market correction.

反馈：Attendance and participation recorded. Thank you for submitting your slides.

反馈：Both chapters are covered accurately and the Chapter 7 Technical question is included and correctly solved. The output gap percentage framing is the right way to show the calculation. The answers in Q1 are well-organized across all four groups.

⚠️ 扣 3 分：页数不达标（page count）

详细反馈：The submission demonstrates a solid and well-structured analysis but could further strengthen its rigor by more deeply evaluating the trade-offs and implementation challenges of the alternatives, particularly in terms of feasibility and organizational constraints. The proposed solution is logical and well-justified, though it remains somewhat high-level without detailed discussion of how the structural reforms would be operationalized and sustained over time. Additionally, while ethical issues are clearly identified, the analysis could benefit from more explicit integration of formal ethical frameworks to enhance depth.

🎉 Outstanding（最高评级）：

反馈：Qi, I appreciate the information that you offered this week about your work in Business Development and Sales at Zhengda Prosperity LLC. Quality content was shared about connecting daily work to macroeconomic concepts. I like what you mentioned about your role contributing to net exports in the GDP formula. AWESOME application of theory. It was interesting to learn more about how you use economic cycles to guide supplier contract decisions. Quality work this week! I hope that you continue to enjoy MBA306. I am looking forward to your submission of Paper #2, which is due on May 10, 2026.

反馈：All four questions are covered correctly. The answers are concise and accurate. The Q3 section handles the indexation trade-off well, including the point that full indexation may not be worth it at low inflation but becomes more useful under extreme inflation. The Tobin Q4 answer captures the nominal wage rigidity argument correctly.

⚠️ 又扣页数分："Failed to follow page count requirement"（这次仍是页数不足）

详细反馈：The submission is well-developed and covers all key areas, but much of the discussion remains descriptive rather than analytically deep, with limited critical evaluation of trade-offs across sections. The proposed law is clear but could be strengthened with more detailed implementation specifics, enforcement mechanisms, and measurable outcomes. Additionally, some arguments could be more concise and focused to enhance overall clarity and impact.

🎉 满分！第一次 closed-book 考试 100/100 通过

反馈：All 12 questions correct. Q7 switches the standard d/c order — the transitory liquidity-constrained consumer (d) ranks highest because any income shock goes immediately to consumption. Q5 and Q10 are the shortest answers and could use more development.

🎉 突破 Khan 高分上限：The infographic clearly presents all required components, but the level of privacy is still described in broad terms (e.g., "highest reasonable level") without precise or measurable standards. Some sections are slightly dense, which reduces quick readability for an infographic format. Overall, the content is strong but could be more concise for sharper impact.

Khan 评语："Presentation lacked confident delivery."（就这一句）· 没踩 -3 文件名 / -3 页数雷，扣 8 分纯演讲风格——下次录制注意：自信感、语速、停顿。

Kunwar 评语：M = mm × H 正式 setup + Carpenter-Demiralp 关于"后危机时代货币乘数失效（银行持有大量超额准备金时）"是 right scholarly anchor. 银行基于信贷需求放贷而非机械按准备金的论述与乘数框架整合到位，不是当成对立观点处理。论文体现了对"现代央行操作框架"的 careful engagement。

🎉 Midterm 阴影翻篇：Midterm 1 当时是答完没点 Submit → 0/100 锁定。Exam #2 这次记得点了 "Finish attempt and submit all"，单选 20 分钟全对。剩 Exam #3（6/18–6/19）继续保持这个习惯。

Kunwar 评语： Goldfeld 关于 money demand 不稳定 + Ball 短/长期弹性 + Alvarez-Lippi 金融创新——三者串联得出"Fed 转向利率目标因 money demand 不可预测"的政策结论 well-supported. 论点连贯。

Khan 评语： "Impersonal. Shouldn't the sender's name be included in such an important communication? Poorly structured: Lacks a Subject line." 内容部分：解释 robot/AI 区别 + workforce transformation/skill evolution/adaptability 强；但 "somewhat lengthy and repetitive for an internal email format"——下次邮件作业可加更多 organization-specific examples + 更深的 ethical/implementation 讨论。

关键教训：邮件作业要带 Subject 行 + 具体人名署名（不是"HR Manager"）。

教训：Khan 论坛政策"missing/late = -50"是硬规则，无论内容质量。原帖 5/21 必须发出；W7 拖到 5/23 直接锁定 50/100，没法挽回。剩余 DF Wk9 / Wk10 / Wk11 任何一周都不能再晚。