CSC 498 - Senior Project
Fall 2004-2005 Semester

Grading policies & ‘S’ evaluation

Overview: Product and Process.

Each project will receive a “product grade” and a “process grade.” The product grade will be determined at the end of the semester and will be based on the deliverables that are turned in at the project due date, and on a demonstration of the correctness of those deliverables. The process grade is comprised of a number of components, each related to the process you go through during the course. The product and process grades are explained in more detail below.

The Product Grade.

The product grade is based on the deliverables you turn in at the project due date along with a demonstration of the correctness of those deliverables. The deliverables will almost always consist of a software system and a final write-up, although for some projects other deliverables will also be involved. The contents of the write-up may vary from project to project but will generally include:

• A copy of the original proposal including the original bibliography.
• A section describing deviations from the proposal.
• Results of user tests if appropriate for your project.
• Hard copy user manuals if appropriate for your project.
• A section that suggests future work.
• A bibliography (possibly expanded from the proposal bibliography).
• Any other materials that help to demonstrate the work you put into the project.

In order to understand the policies that will be used to determine your product grade, it helps to review the following guidelines quoted from the DePauw University Catalog:

“According to the grading system adopted by the faculty, the grades recorded when courses have been carried throughout the semester are:

A, A-:	Achievement of exceptionally high merit
B+, B, B-:	Achievement at a level superior to the basic level
C+, C, C-:	Basic achievement
D+, D, D-:	Minimum achievement that warrants credit
F:	Failure: the achievement fails to meet course requirements. The student receives no credit.”

Since each senior project is different, it is impossible to provide a “one size fits all” set of criteria that can be used to classify each project into one of the categories shown above. However, experience shows that the following criteria are typical of senior projects that fall into the various categories.

• A project that demonstrates basic achievement typically tackles a straight forward problem and provides a functional but routine solution. The code will usually be modular, well-organized, and adequately commented and will employ appropriate data structures and algorithms. The scope of the project will usually indicate that roughly ten hours of work per week should have been required to complete the project by a senior computer science major. The complexity of the project will usually be at least equivalent to the level of difficulty that is typically encountered in upper-level computer science courses. The project's documentation will typically be appropriate for the intended use of the project, and any documentation that is provided will be complete, well-written, and proof-read. The code will be correct enough to allow the project to meet its basic objectives, although there may be special cases in which the code does not work. Some special issues, if relevant to the project, such as those related to security, backups, invalid user input, may not be dealt with as thoroughly as possible.
• A project that demonstrates achievement superior to the basic level will typically demonstrate basic achievement in all areas listed above and will excel in some, but not necessarily all, of these areas. For example, the project might tackle a problem that is harder than average but might produce only an average solution. Or, the software produced for the project might be excellent, but the documentation and write-up might only demonstrate basic achievement.
• A project that demonstrates achievement of exceptionally high merit will typically excel in all or essentially all of the relevant areas noted in the basic achievement section. Note that not all areas will apply to all projects (for example a particular project might not require user testing). However, in order to demonstrate exceptionally high merit a project will generally excel in all relevant areas.
• A project will typically be designated as showing minimum achievement that warrants credit if it falls short of the basic achievement category in one or more ways.
• A project will be designated as one that fails to demonstrate basic achievement if it either falls short of the basic achievement category in most ways, or falls significantly below the basic achievement level in one or more ways.

NOTE: A final product grade will be assigned using the scale described above. If the final project is turned in late, the product grade will be lowered by one letter grade (i.e. A to B) for each day the project is late.

The Process Grade.

The process grade is comprised of a number of components, each related to the process you go through while working on the project during the course. Each component of the process grade will be graded using the scale

-3    -2    -1     0     1     2     3

A zero is the expected grade for each component, and it will likely be the case that most students will earn zeros on all components of the process. A positive value indicates that you exceeded expectations on this component in some way. A negative value indicates that you fell short of expectations in some way. For example, making no progress toward a checkpoint would likely result in a process grade of -3 for that checkpoint, while falling slightly short of the checkpoint goals might result in a process grade of -1.

At the end of the semester, process grades for each component will be added together to determine your final process grade. If your process grade at the end of the semester is a zero then your final course grade will be your product grade. However, if your process grade is anything other than a zero, your final course grade will be determined by starting with your product grade and adjusting by 1/3 of a letter grade for each point of your process grade. For example, a student with a product grade of B- and a process grade of 2 would earn a B+. On the other hand, a student with a product grade of B- and a process grade of -3 would earn a C-.

The components of your process grade are listed below:

1. Preliminary paragraph description of your project idea.
2. Final hard copy version of your proposal and electronic copy of your project summary (typically one to two paragraphs in length, and suitable for posting on the department web page and including your name, project title and summary information).
3. Content of initial project presentation.
4. Checkpoint 1 progress.
5. Checkpoint 2 progress.
6. Checkpoint 3 progress.
7. Checkpoint 4 progress.
8. Independence in working on your project (see course information sheet).

NOTE: It is impossible to demonstrate satisfactory progress at a checkpoint if you do not have an approved project proposal. Students who do not have an approved project proposal as we approach the first checkpoint will be required to develop a proposal based on one of the ideas provided by the department.

Grading Information Relating to the ‘S’ Competency

There are several ‘S’ components to this course. Each student will make one formal presentation, four informal checkpoint presentations, and also participate in a computing ethics discussion. In addition, the checkpoint presentations will afford the opportunity for the entire group to discuss projects. While we expect everyone to participate fully in all of these activities, the graded portion of the ‘S’ activities will be carried out as follows. This information is based upon literature developed by the DePauw University ‘S’ Center, so the core ideas are therefore shared by instructors and students participating in all ‘S’ courses.

You will receive a grade for each of your presentations in each of the following four categories. In order to earn ‘S’ credit for this course, at least one of your presentations must result in an average grade of 3.5 with no individual category receiving a grade below 3.

Language Skills

• 5 — Excellent oral style; distinctive vocabulary appropriate for the subject; no mispronunciations or grammatical errors
• 4 — Choice of words suited to the subject matter; no more than two or three slips in grammar or pronunciation
• 3 — Adequate vocabulary; errors in pronunciation and grammar do interfere with communication OR stilted “written style of composition”
• 2 — Has some noticeable and apparently habitual grammatical errors; language cluttered with logolalia (“you know”); several mispronunciations
• 1 — Distinctly limited vocabulary and repetition of phrases; very short speech; completely substandard grammar or pronunciation

Voice & Articulation

• 5 — Vocal inflections and movement substantially augment the meanings; pleasant voice; animated and controlled delivery
• 4 — Vocal variety appropriate for subject matter; uses occasional gestures, movement, facial expression
• 3 — Reasonably free from distracting vocal or physical mannerisms OR has effective elements of delivery along with notably distracting ones
• 2 — Noticeably awkward posture, aimless gestures, or distracting vocal quality. Monotonous. Too loud or soft
• 1 — Action and voice interferes with meaning by substantial distraction or lack of control. Mumbles incoherently

Adaptation

• 5 — Adapts specifically to listeners; refers to our experiences or roles
• 4 — Adjusts to specific room conditions; talks directly and conversationally
• 3 — Material and delivery seem neither adapted nor ill-adapted; speech addressed “to whom it may concern”
• 2 — Demonstrates some noticeable insensitivity to likely feelings or values of listeners
• 1 — Material or examples not suitable to us as listeners: Speaker seems oblivious of audience

Good Organization

• 5 — Very coherent structure; explicit transitions and summaries; uses striking examples or other forms of support
• 4 — Main ideas made clear; develops each sub-point with supporting material
• 3 — Ideas have been outlined adequately but without much signposting; no notable fuzzy spots or irrelevant sections
• 2 — Some parts of the talk difficult to follow or irrelevant; supporting material commonplace, trite or missing
• 1 — Apparently aimless rambling; too general or trivial to be meaningful

Other factors involved in delivery and content may be taken into account, as needed. For example, slides (including an outline or overview slide) must be prepared for each presentation.