Submission 1:
| Reporting Category |
Student Grading Score |
Collegeboard’s Score |
Comments |
| Program Purpose and Function |
0 |
0 |
The purpose was the functionality of the program, giving it a 0. |
| Data Abstraction |
0 |
0 |
The list was shown but was not shown being used as fulfilling the program’s purpose. |
| Managing Complexity |
0 |
0 |
The list was not shown to be used in the program. |
| Procedural Abstraction |
1 |
0 |
The procedure was shown with at least one parameter, and the procedure was also fully described and implemented into the code. |
| Algorithm Implementation |
0 |
0 |
Sequencing, selection, and iteration are shown but the description is too vague. |
| Testing |
1 |
1 |
The calls, conditions, and results are fully stated. |
Submission 2:
| Reporting Category |
Student Grading Score |
Collegeboard’s Score |
Comments |
| Program Purpose and Function |
1 |
1 |
Function and purpose is clearly stated. |
| Data Abstraction |
1 |
1 |
The list’s function and description were detailed. |
| Managing Complexity |
1 |
1 |
Complexity was described in great detail and was shown in the program code. |
| Procedural Abstraction |
1 |
1 |
The procedure and functionality is shown, and it is fully described. |
| Algorithm Implementation |
1 |
1 |
Sequencing, selection, and iteration are all shown and the steps are detailed enough. |
| Testing |
1 |
1 |
The call, conditions, and results are all stated. |
Submission 3:
| Reporting Category |
Student Grading Score |
Collegeboard’s Score |
Comments |
| Program Purpose and Function |
0 |
0 |
The purpose is the functionality, which subtracts a point. |
| Data Abstraction |
0 |
1 |
The list was not shown to be used in the second code segment. |
| Managing Complexity |
1 |
1 |
List was shown managing complexity and was described in great detail. |
| Procedural Abstraction |
1 |
1 |
The procedure and its utilization was shown, and it was described in detail. |
| Algorithm Implementation |
1 |
1 |
Sequencing, selection, and iteration were all shown. The steps were extremely detailed. |
| Testing |
1 |
1 |
All the calls, conditions, and results are shown. |
Submission 4:
| Reporting Category |
Student Grading Score |
Collegeboard’s Score |
Comments |
| Program Purpose and Function |
1 |
1 |
The video demonstrated input, functionality, and output, and the purpose was clear. |
| Data Abstraction |
1 |
0 |
The list is shown and its functionality is also shown. It is also clearly described. |
| Managing Complexity |
1 |
0 |
List manages complexity and is fully described. |
| Procedural Abstraction |
1 |
1 |
The procedure is shown and is called in the code segment. It is also described in detail. |
| Algorithm Implementation |
1 |
1 |
Many while loops and if statements are used. The algorithm is described in great detail. |
| Testing |
1 |
0 |
Calls, conditions, and results are all shown. |
Reflection:
For most of the time, I gave a point while Collegeboard did not give one. This was because I did not read their descriptions in great detail. I was only looking for key words in their descriptions. This means that I should be more detailed next time to find any problems with the submission’s descriptions. Overall, I think that my program should be very detailed in order to ensure that I get the maximum possible points. The submissions that got low scores had very vague descriptions, while the submissions that got high scores had very detailed descriptions. For the last submission, the testing part failed to meet the standard because it tested for one thing and gave two possible outputs. However, these are outputs and are not two different calls to the function.