Notebook reviews that feel kind, not performative

We treat notebook review as a craft skill, not a gate. Mentors annotate with three layers: must-fix correctness, readability nudges, and optional polish. Each layer maps to a short rationale so learners can trace decisions without guessing tone.

During cohorts we rotate reviewers so no single voice dominates. That rotation also surfaces disagreements we discuss live, modeling how healthy teams disagree in writing. The goal is a paper trail someone could pick up six months later and still understand.

We avoid screenshot-only feedback. Inline comments anchor to cells, and summary notes capture cross-cutting themes. Learners respond with a brief change log, which keeps diffs disciplined and mirrors how we want operational artifacts to evolve in the wild.

Finally, we cap synchronous critique sessions so energy stays high. Async written review carries most of the load; live time is for questions the written layer could not resolve.