Submission 1:

Reporting Category Student Grading Score Collegeboard’s Score Comments
Program Purpose and Function 1 1 The program’s purpose was well stated. The video also showed input, output, and functionality. The functionality was also written in detail.
Data Abstraction 0 0 The list was shown in the first code segment but was not used in the second code segment.
Managing Complexity 0 0 The list wasn’t really shown to manage complexity, and it didn’t say what would happen or alternatives if the list was not used.
Procedural Abstraction 0 0 The procedure was not called at all for the second code segment, it was just a screenshot of the parameter of the procedure.
Algorithm Implementation 0 1 Sequencing, selection, and iteration are in the code segment but the steps are too vague. They did not specify what the if elif statements should contain.
Testing 1 1 The calls, conditions, and results are all adaquetly stated.

Submission 2:

Reporting Category Student Grading Score Collegeboard’s Score Comments
Program Purpose and Function 1 1 The video clearly shows its functionality, inputs, and outputs, and the purpose is valid. The functionality of the code was also written well.
Data Abstraction 0 1 A function is stated instead of a list. The second code segment also looks oddly similar to a for loop in the first code segment, which is very suspicious that they might’ve been copying and pasting code but switching variables for no apparent reason.
Managing Complexity 1 1 The list seems to manage complexity, and the explanation clearly explains the result of not having the list mentioned.
Procedural Abstraction 1 1 The two code segments successfully show a procedure and it being called. Its description is adequate but is also slightly vague. However, I don’t think a point would be lost because it isn’t too vague.
Algorithm Implementation 1 1 Many if statements are used, showing a lot of sequencing, selection, and iteration. The steps of the algorithm are explained in a lot of detail.
Testing 1 1 The testing has valid calls, conditions, and results.

Submission 3:

Reporting Category Student Grading Score Collegeboard’s Score Comments
Program Purpose and Function 1 1 The purpose is well stated and program functionality, input, and output are clearly shown in both the video and the written description.
Data Abstraction 0 0 The list is applied to the program’s purpose, but the first code segment does not really show the list with data being stored into it.
Managing Complexity 1 0 The list was shown to manage complexity by making the code more efficient. The result of not using the list is also clearly explained.
Procedural Abstraction 0 0 A procedure is shown in the first code segment but it is missing parameters. A different function is called in the second code segment.
Algorithm Implementation 0 0 Lots of if and else if statements were used, showing lots of sequencing, selection, and iteration. However, the steps for making the algorithm is too vague.
Testing 1 0 All the calls, conditions, and results are clearly stated and the calls are not outputs.

Submission 4:

Reporting Category Student Grading Score Collegeboard’s Score Comments
Program Purpose and Function 1 1 The video demonstrated input, functionality, and output, the purpose was clear, and the inputs and outputs were stated in great detail.
Data Abstraction 1 1 The list has been shown by how data has been stored in it, and is shown fullfilling the program’s purpose of catching fish. The written description of the list is also clear and concise.
Managing Complexity 1 1 List is shown to manage complexity in the code segment and is well described.
Procedural Abstraction 0 1 The procedure is shown and is called, but the parameters are very weird and I’m not sure if that’s the proper way to use parameters.
Algorithm Implementation 1 1 For loops and if statements are used, demonstrating sequencing, selection, and iteration. The described steps are also detailed enough to be able to know every part of the procedure.
Testing 1 0 The two calls use different arguments and use the procedure in 3c. The conditions and results are explained in adequate detail.

Reflection:

As a final summary, by combining all the CPT scorings I’ve done, the most important lesson would be that I do not have to be extremely detailed when answering some questions. This is because I am a very detail-oriented person, and I always try to make things as detailed as possible. However, based on the CPT scorings, I’ve noticed patterns where you do not have to be extremely detailed(such as in identifying the purpose or list as well as describing the functionality). But, there are some parts where great detail is necessary, such as when explaining the steps of an algorithm and describing the identified procedure. Based on the scorings for just the CPT scoring part 3, I’ve noticed that lists and procedures can have data stored in it and have it called in many creative ways. For example, submission 1 did not just outright show a list being created. Instead, it had data stored inside of a procedure, which demonstrates creativity and innovation. I also learned that the testing should refer specifically to the code and not just on what the user sees when using the program. In addition, the arguments should have specific values and the conditions should be related to the parameter or arguments. If no value is given to the parameters, it is likely that a person will be stating the functionality of the code rather than an actual tested value.