CS 307 Standard Grading Criteria

CS 307 Standard Grading Criteria Guide

This sheet serves two purposes. First it is an attempt to standardize the grading of TAs and proctors and to minimize differences between graders. A given program should receive the same grade regardless of who grades it. Of course there may be variations, but this guide seeks to minimize them. Second this guide can serve as a checklist so students can self evaluate programs. When you turn a program in have you meet all of the following criteria? If not, do not be surprised when the grader takes points off. Assignments are mostly for learning, but we do want to provide an evaluation on how well you did to aid in your learning.

Assignments are worth 20 points. In general 8 points for correctness, 4 points for testing, 4 points for documentation, and 4 points for design / efficiency.

Category
Score

Correctness

8 - Project code meets all requirements in the specification and functions correctly.

6 - Project code addresses and functions correctly for most of the specifications, but does not meet all requirements in some significant way.

4 - Project code addresses and functions correctly for about half the specifications.

2 - Project code addresses less than half the specifications and works for a limited number of cases.

0 - Project code does not function at all or addresses few parts of the specification. A program that does not compile or suffers a runtime error receives a 0 for correctness.

Testing

4 - Excellent test cases all of the program functions

3 - Good test cases cover most, if not all, of the program functions.

2 - Some evidence of test cases.

1 - a few test cases

0 - no test cases

Documentation

4 - Excellent documentation for all public elements of classes using javadoc comments and implementation details. Coding standards followed in all cases

3 - All parts of the process are documented, but some part(s) may lack clear descriptions. Coding standards followed in most cases

2 - Some parts of program documented. Some attempt to follow coding standards

1 - Little attempt to document program

0 - No comments what so ever

Design / Efficiency (style and quality of code)

4 - Excellent, easy to understand solution. Code as efficient as possible in terms of both time and space

3 - Code well designed except for a few minor problems. Efficiency could be improved somewhat.

2 - Problems in design and / or efficiency. Convoluted solution in some cases.

1 - Significant problems in design and / or efficiency. Solution very hard to understand or extremely inefficient.

0 - Almost complete lack of evidence for good design and implementation of the project requirements.

Adapted from grading criteria from Hal Perkins of UW.

Back to the CS 307 Homepage

Category	Score
Correctness	8 - Project code meets all requirements in the specification and functions correctly. 6 - Project code addresses and functions correctly for most of the specifications, but does not meet all requirements in some significant way. 4 - Project code addresses and functions correctly for about half the specifications. 2 - Project code addresses less than half the specifications and works for a limited number of cases. 0 - Project code does not function at all or addresses few parts of the specification. A program that does not compile or suffers a runtime error receives a 0 for correctness.
Testing	4 - Excellent test cases all of the program functions 3 - Good test cases cover most, if not all, of the program functions. 2 - Some evidence of test cases. 1 - a few test cases 0 - no test cases
Documentation	4 - Excellent documentation for all public elements of classes using javadoc comments and implementation details. Coding standards followed in all cases 3 - All parts of the process are documented, but some part(s) may lack clear descriptions. Coding standards followed in most cases 2 - Some parts of program documented. Some attempt to follow coding standards 1 - Little attempt to document program 0 - No comments what so ever
Design / Efficiency (style and quality of code)	4 - Excellent, easy to understand solution. Code as efficient as possible in terms of both time and space 3 - Code well designed except for a few minor problems. Efficiency could be improved somewhat. 2 - Problems in design and / or efficiency. Convoluted solution in some cases. 1 - Significant problems in design and / or efficiency. Solution very hard to understand or extremely inefficient. 0 - Almost complete lack of evidence for good design and implementation of the project requirements.