Announcements

ICS-33: Intermediate Programming

In reverse-chronological order


#16: 2/23/18
Program #3 Graded
I have run the automatic batch self-check tests for Program #3 and the grades are now recorded. See the assignment grades and Grades(zipped .xlsm file) files, whose details are discussed below, in Announcement #7. I used a different bsc test file for grading: one that defined a pnamedtuple('Quad1', 'x y z f'), having a different number of fields with different names not in alphabetical order. The class average was about 99% and the median was 104%, meaning that most students correctly solved most problems, and over half (91%) of the class correctly solved all the problems (or had minor deductions). Note that this problem had an extra credit part, as well as the standard extra credit for an early submission. Overall there were 91% As, 2% Bs, 0% Cs, and 6% Ds and Fs. About 45% of the students submitted early, and these early submitters scored better (average of 103%) than students submitting on the due day (average of 95%); I am assuming that some students ran out of time before they finished all the problems, and will plan to get started earlier on later program.

In the assignment spreadsheet, Column A contains the Hashed IDs of all students (in sorted order); Column B contains an X if we believe the student submitted work on time (for pairs, only the submitting student will show an X, not their partner); Column C shows the extra credit points for early submissions (students submitting a few minutes late show -2; students submitting more than a few minutes late were not graded).

Row 2 shows the number of points each group of batch-self checks is worth; row 3 shows the number of tests performed for each problem: all were batch-self check tests. Rows 4-5 shows further information about the tests performed in each column.

Rows 6 and beyond show the number of failed tests for each student (a blank indicates no failed tests: equivalent to 0 failed tests). To compute the number of points for a problem/in a column, compute the percentage of successful tests and multiply it by the number of points the problem is worth. So for example, if a student missed 1 of 4 tests on a 4 point problem, he/she would receive 3/4*4 = 3 points. Column L shows each student's cumulative score, for all the tests in the single problem in this assignment. Columns M-O show each student's cumulative Score, the score Rounded to an integer (what integer is entered in the Grades spreadsheet) and Percent, based on the number of points the assginment is worth (here 50). Note that these columns are filled in both for submitters and their partners (these are the only columns filled in for partners): a partner should see his/her submitter's line for details.

Students should talk to the TA for their Lab first, if they do not understand why they received the marks they did or dispute any of these marks. The best time to talk with your TA about grades is during one of your Labs, when both student and TA are physically present to examine the submission and the grade, possibly running the solution on a computer they can share.

Students should examine their graded work immediately and get any regrade issues settled as soon as possible (within a week of when the grade is assigned).

IMPORTANT Information about Student Grades

  • A few students submitted code that had syntax errors and therefore failed all tests: the TAs are authorized to allow you to fix a few simple syntax errors in the code you submitted and rerun/regrade the code (but, I will deduct some points for not submitting executable code). Also see Announcement #5 below.

  • A few students submitted code that didn't finish executing in some part and therefore failed all that part's tests: the TAs are authorized to allow you to replace any method body with pass and rerun/regrade the code (but I will deduct some points for submitting code with an infinite loop).

  • A few students submitted code that (a) incorrectly named partners -wrong format or wrong UCInetID, or (b) had students listed a partners of multiple submitters, or (c) had both students submitting and listed as partners of submitters. The TAs are authorized to try to understand these problems and help me correct them (but, I will deduct some points for dealing with these problems).

This assignment was designed to illustrate the richness of ways to solve programming problems: writing a program that automatically writes a class, given the required information to specify it (class name and fields). It also provided an opportunity to improve your string-processing abilities. As with all assignments, you should examine my solution.


#15: 2/19/18
Midterm Graded
The TAs and I have graded and recorded the scores for the midterm exam. The TAs will distribute the graded midterms in their labs this week. If you do not pick up your exam then, you will have to come to my office hours to retrieve it (and I would prefer not to have hundreds of exams stockpiled in my office). See the assignment grades and Grades(zipped .xlsm file) files.

The class average was about 66% and the median was 68% (last Fall they were 65% and 66%). Because the average was below 75%, about 11 normalization points (9%) will be added when computing the average of all graded instruments on the spreadsheet. The grades recorded in the spreadsheet (both in Columns R and S) are the actual exam grades (without normalization points; see cell R8, highlighted in yellow, for the number of normalization points that will boost your score). After normalizing the scores on the midterm, overall there were 22% As, 23% Bs, 22% Cs, 14% Ds, and 19% Fs (last Fall there were 22% As, 23% Bs, 18% Cs, 19% Ds, and 18% Fs; that is a pretty close match). I will show some more detailed information about the exam in lecture on Monday.

Now is a good time to look at course grades as well, as we have graded nearly half of the total number of testing instruments (450 of 1,000 points). Now is the first time that recorded grades are truly meaningful, because they include testing instruments in all the major categories: quizzes, programs, in-lab exams, and written exams. The approximate distribution of course grades (for those students who submitted a midterm exam) is 51% As, 21% Bs, 13% Cs, and 15% Ds and Fs: these numbers are better than my original prediction of of 25% in each of these four categories (e.g., we have 72% As and Bs instead of 50% As and Bs).

The different problems, with the indicated averages, were graded by the following staff.

  • Problem 1: 67% Functions on Data Structures (Rich)
  • Problem 2: 64% Regular Expressions (James)
  • Problem 3: 81% Operator Overloading 1 (Seyyed)
  • Problem 4: 63% Operator Overloading 2 (Brian(ab), Radu(c)-Readers: see Rich)
  • Problem 5: 51% Iterators/Generators (Radu-Reader: see Rich)
  • Problem 6: 63% Recursion/Functional Programming (Nishanth(a), Tiancheng(b))
  • Problem 7: 45% Attributes, Operators and FEEOP (Nicholas(a), Rich(b))
  • Problem 8: 42% Short Answer (Samia)
I would like to thank the TAs/Readers for their efforts over the weekend (each spent about 16 hours preparing to grade, grading their problems on about 500 exams, and then entering the grades for two labs of students).

If you have any issues with how any exam problem was graded, talk to the staff member who graded it, and they can discuss the rubric with you and resolve any issues. But first, please examine my solution and understand the differences between it and your answer. Students should examine their graded work immediately and get any regrade issues settled as soon as possible (within a week of when the grade is assigned). Note: Because we examined code (unlike for the In-Lab exam) sometimes points were deducted not for correctness issues, but for stylistic issues: e.g., using extra data structures/loops, not using unpacking appropriately,

Imporant: As with the In-Lab Exams, if a student performs better on the Final Exam (since it is cumulative), I will replace their Midterm Exam score with their Final Exam score.


#14: 2/9/18
Quiz #4 Graded
I have run the automatic batch self-check tests for Quiz #4 and the grades are now recorded. See the assignment grades and Grades(zipped .xlsm file) files, whose details are discussed below, in Announcement #7. The class average was about 88% and the median was 100%, meaning that most students correctly solved most problems, and over half (77%) of the class correctly solved all the problems (or had minor deductions). Overall there were 77% As, 6% Bs, 3% Cs, and 14% Ds and Fs. About 29% of the students submitted early, and these early submitters scored much better (100% average) than students submitting on the due day (84%); I am assuming that some students ran out of time before they finished all the problems, and will plan to get started earlier on later quizzes.

In the assignment spreadsheet, Column A contains the Hashed IDs of all students (in sorted order) and Column B contains an X if we believe the student submitted work on time. Row 1 for Columns C-I shows how many points the problems were worth. Row 2 shows the number of tests performed for each problem. Row 3 shows the part of the problems in more detail.

Rows 4 and beyond show the number of failed tests for each student (a blank indicates no failed tests: equivalent to 0 failed tests). To compute the number of points for a problem/in a column, compute the percentage of successful tests and multiply it by the number of points the problem is worth. So for example, if a student missed 5 of 20 tests on a 4 point problem, he/she would receive 15/20*4 = 3 points. Columns J-K show the cumulative score for each Problem. Columns L-N show each student's cumulative Score, the score Rounded to an integer (what integer is entered in the Grades spreadsheet) and Percent, based on the number of points the assginment is worth (here 25).

Students should talk to the TA for their Lab first, if they do not understand why they received the marks they did or dispute any of these marks. The best time to talk with your TA about grades is during one of your Labs, when both student and TA are physically present to examine the submission and the grade, possibly running the solution on a computer they can share.

Students should examine their graded work immediately and get any regrade issues settled as soon as possible (within a week of when the grade is assigned).

IMPORTANT Information about Student Grades

  • A few students submitted code that had syntax errors and therefore failed all tests: the TAs are authorized to allow you to fix a few simple syntax errors in the code you submitted and rerun/regrade the code (but, I will deduct some points for not submitting executable code). Also see Announcement #5 below.

  • A few students submitted code that didn't finish executing in at least one of their functions and therefore failed all its tests: the TAs are authorized to allow you to replace any method body with pass and rerun/regrade the code (but, I will deduct some points for submitting code with an infinite loop).

This assignment was designed to provide you with a good grounding in the use of iterators and generators (which can be used to implement iterators), and how to write code that uses iter and next directly (using while loop instead of for loop). All these topics will be tested again on the Midterm and In-Lab Exam #2. As with all assignments, you should examine my solutions.

#13: 27/18
Program #2 Graded
I have run the automatic batch self-check tests for Program #2 and the grades are now recorded. See the assignment grades and Grades(zipped .xlsm file) files, whose details are discussed below, in Announcement #7. The class average was about 95% and the median was 100%, meaning that most students correctly solved most problems, and over half (85%) of the class correctly solved all the problems (or had minor deductions). Overall there were 85% As, 4% Bs, 4% Cs, and 7% Ds and Fs. About 49% of the students submitted early, and these early submitters scored much better (102% average) than students submitting on the due day (92% average); I am assuming that some students ran out of time before they finished all the problems, and will plan to get started earlier on later programs.

In the assignment spreadsheet, Column A contains the Hashed IDs of all students (in sorted order); Column B contains an X if we believe the student submitted work on time (for pairs, only the submitting student will show an X, not their partner); Column C shows the extra credit points for early submissions.

Row 2 for Columns D-AE shows how many points the problems were worth. Row 3 shows the number of tests performed for each problem: all were batch-self check tests. Row 4 shows further information about the tests performed in each column.

Rows 5 and beyond show the number of failed tests for each student (a blank indicates no failed tests: equivalent to 0 failed tests). To compute the number of points for a problem/in a column, compute the percentage of successful tests and multiply it by the number of points the problem is worth. So for example, if a student missed 1 of 4 tests on a 4 point problem, he/she would receive 3/4*4 = 3 points. Columns AF-AG show each student's cumulative score, for all the tests in each of the two problems in this assignment. Columns AH-AJ show each student's cumulative Score, the score Rounded to an integer (what integer is entered in the Grades spreadsheet) and Percent, based on the number of points the assginment is worth (here 50). Note that these columns are filled in both for submitters and their partners (these are the only columns filled in for partners): a partner should see his/her submitter's line for details.

Students should talk to the TA for their Lab first, if they do not understand why they received the marks they did or dispute any of these marks. The best time to talk with your TA about grades is during one of your Labs, when both student and TA are physically present to examine the submission and the grade, possibly running the solution on a computer they can share.

Students should examine their graded work immediately and get any regrade issues settled as soon as possible (within a week of when the grade is assigned).

IMPORTANT Information about Student Grades

  • A few students submitted code that had syntax errors and therefore failed all tests: the TAs are authorized to allow you to fix a few simple syntax errors in the code you submitted and rerun/regrade the code (but, I will deduct some points for not submitting executable code). Also see Announcement #5 below.

  • A few students submitted code that didn't finish executing in some part and therefore failed all that part's tests: the TAs are authorized to allow you to replace any method body with pass and rerun/regrade the code (but, I will deduct some points for submitting code with an infinite loop).

  • A few students submitted code that (a) incorrectly named partners -wrong format or wrong UCInetID, or (b) had students listed a partners of multiple submitters, or (c) had both students submitting and listed as partners of submitters. The TAs are authorized to try to understand these problems and help me correct them (but, I will deduct some points for dealing with these problems).

This assignment was designed to provide you with a good grounding in the use of classes and the practice of overloading operators in classes. Quiz #4 covers decorators for iterators using generators. All these topics will be tested again on the Midterm and In-Lab Exam #2. As with all assignments, you should examine my solutions.


#12: 2/4/18
Quiz #3 Graded
I have run the automatic batch self-check tests for Quiz #3 and the grades are now recorded. See the assignment grades and Grades(zipped .xlsm file) files, whose details are discussed below, in Announcement #7. The class average was about 90% and the median was 100%, meaning that most students correctly solved most problems, and over half (67%) of the class correctly solved all the problems (or had minor deductions). Overall there were 67% As, 18% Bs, 5% Cs, and 10% Ds and Fs. About 32% of the students submitted early, and these early submitters scored much better (97% average) than students submitting on the due day (87% average); I am assuming that some students ran out of time before they finished all the problems, and will plan to get started earlier on later quizzes.

There were only one student whose code timed-out when I graded it; I let the grading program run everyone's code for 10 seconds. If you code timed-out, talk to your TA about replacing the body of any offending code by just pass, so that it won't time-out, allowing all the other code to be graded.

In the assignment spreadsheet, Column A contains the Hashed IDs of all students (in sorted order) and Column B contains an X if we believe the student submitted work on time. Row 1 for Columns C-N shows how many points the problems were worth. Row 2 shows the number of tests performed for each problem.

Rows 4 and beyond show the number of failed tests for each student (a blank indicates no failed tests: equivalent to 0 failed tests). To compute the number of points for a problem/in a column, compute the percentage of successful tests and multiply it by the number of points the problem is worth. So for example, if a student missed 5 of 20 tests on a 4 point problem, he/she would receive 15/20*4 = 3 points. Columns O-P show the cumulative score for each Problem. Columns Q-S show each student's cumulative Score, the score Rounded to an integer (what integer is entered in the Grades spreadsheet) and Percent, based on the number of points the assginment is worth (here 25).

Students should talk to the TA for their Lab first, if they do not understand why they received the marks they did or dispute any of these marks. The best time to talk with your TA about grades is during one of your Labs, when both student and TA are physically present to examine the submission and the grade, possibly running the solution on a computer they can share.

Students should examine their graded work immediately and get any regrade issues settled as soon as possible (within a week of when the grade is assigned).

IMPORTANT Information about Student Grades

  • A few students submitted code that had syntax errors and therefore failed all tests: the TAs are authorized to allow you to fix a few simple syntax errors in the code you submitted and rerun/regrade the code (but, I will deduct some points for not submitting executable code). Also see Announcement #5 below.

  • A few students submitted code that didn't finish executing in at least one of their functions and therefore failed all its tests: the TAs are authorized to allow you to replace any method body with pass and rerun/regrade the code (but, I will deduct some points for submitting code with an infinite loop or just code that took too long).

This assignment was designed to provide you with a good grounding in the use of operator overloading in classes: this includes both standard arithmetic and relational operators, as well as other methods that Python writing calls automatically (e.g., __repr__, __str__, __getitem__, etc). All these topics will be tested again on the Midterm and In-Lab Exam #2. As with all assignments, you should examine my solutions.

In the Fraction class, some students wrote operators that returned strings instead of Fraction objects; a few bsc.txt tests fail in such cases. In the Private class, some students wrote __getattr__ using an incomplete if structure: not doing anything under certain circumstances; others wrote code that worked only for the methods/attributes in the download (not classes in general). I added a few new bsc.txt test to fail in such cases.


#11: 2/2/18
In-Lab Programming Exam #1 Graded
I have run the automatic batch self-check tests for In-Lab Exam #1 and the grades are now recorded. See the assignment grades and Grades(zipped .xlsm file) files, whose details are discussed below, in Announcement #7.

You can find your solutions (by your Hashed ID), my solutions, and the actual bsc.txt files I used to compute grades for this assignment, in the EEE dropbox for this class (see the name pattis_ilestudentsolutions.zip); when you test your code with the bsc.txt, you will have to replace its script by importing driver and calling driver.driver(). See the script in my solutions for this code. For Labs 1-9 use bscile1W18.txt and for Labs 10-15 use bscile2W18.txt.

I believe the In-Lab Exams are the best indicator, of all testing instruments, of your ability to program: read specifications and transform them into working code (writing code and debugging what you wrote). As I'll say in class, Tolstoy is often quoted (from Anna Karenina) as writing,

"Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way."
My adaptation of this quote is
"High-scoring students are all alike (knowing how to program well); every low-scoring student did poorly in his/her own way: e.g., lack of programming or debugging ability, freezing on the exam, misreading or misunderstanding some problem statements, spending too much time debugging one problem, being ill when taking the exam, arriving late, etc."
So, I understand that there are many possible reasons that students don't do well on In-Lab Exams. If you did poorly, think about why; don't fool yourself.

The spreadsheet computes grades the standard way: the percentage of tests passed for each function multiplied by 20 (each problem was worth 20 points), with all the points added up. Column I computes this number, which is also the same as the rounded value (Column J) and the percentage (Column K)

The result was the class average was about 93% and the median was about 101%. The large skew between these statistics shows that although the majority of students solved all the problems correctly, there were other students who did very poorly, dragging down the average much more than the median. At the extremes, 61% of the students submitted code in which all six functions passed all batch self-check tests; another submitted code in which five functions passed all batch self-check tests; 6% submitted code in which 2 or fewer functions passed all batch self-check tests; everyone solved the first problem correctly.

The approximate distribution of grades on this In-Lab exam is 82% As, 6% Bs, 0% Cs, 6% Ds, and 6% Fs. There were actually two different exams given. Although they both used Stock Portfolios, 4 of 6 questions were different (but similar in how they were solved). FYI, the averages for the different exams was 92% for students in Labs 1-9 and 93% for students in Labs 10-15. This exam was very similar in the kinds of problems it asked as the practice exam I distributed, so I expected students to do well.

Students should talk to the TA for their Lab first, if they do not understand why they received the marks they did or dispute any of these marks. The best time to talk with your TA about grades is during one of your Labs, when both student and TA are physically present to examine the submission and the grade, possibly running the solution on a computer they can share.

Students should examine their graded work immediately and get any regrade issues settled as soon as possible (within a week of when the grade is assigned).

IMPORTANT Information about Student Grades

  • If you submitted code that had syntax errors and therefore failed all tests: the TAs are authorized to allow you to fix a few simple syntax errors in the code you submitted and rerun/regrade the code (but, I will deduct some points for not submitting executable code). Also see Announcement #5 below.

  • If you submitted code that didn't finish executing in at least one of their functions and therefore failed all its tests: the TAs are authorized to allow you to replace any method body with pass and rerun/regrade the code (but, I will deduct some points for submitting code with an infinite loop).
The actual batch self-check tests I used for grading were similar to the tests in the script of the exam; but, all produce differents results, so students could not "hard-code" any answers into their functions, hoping to get some correctness points. Often I just changed the names a bit (e.g., Barb to Barbi) which leads to different but equivalent output.

Finally, if students score a higher percentage on their In-Lab Exam #2 (which involves material from the first, as well as Classes, Operator Overloading, and writing Iterators), I will score their In-Lab Exam #1 higher (in the past I have often made the first exam score equal to the second; thereby erasing the first score; other times I have averaged the two). Therefore, even a terrible grade on this exam can have a minimal effect on your final grade if you perform much better on In-Lab Exam #2.


#10: 1/26/18
Quiz #2 Graded
I have run the automatic batch self-check tests for Quiz #2 and the grades are now recorded. See the assignment grades and Grades(zipped .xlsm file) files, whose details are discussed below, in Announcement #7. The class average was about 83% and the median was 88%, meaning that most students correctly solved most problems; almost half (46%) of the class correctly solved all the problems (or had minor deductions). Overall there were 44% As, 28% Bs, 13% Cs, and 13% Ds and Fs. Problem #3 turned out to be harder for students than I predicted: only 117 students(23%) solved it correctly; check my solution. Look at my solution to 1c: besides including my solution,it includes a way to use a bunch of smaller named rules and re_expand to solve the problem. About 18% of the students submitted early, and these early submitters scored much better (93% average) than students submitting on the due day (81% average); I am assuming that some students ran out of time before they finished all the problems, and will plan to get started earlier on later quizzes.

In the assignment spreadsheet, Column A contains the Hashed IDs of all students (in sorted order) and Column B contains an X if we believe the student submitted work on time. Row 1 for Columns C-K shows how many points the problems were worth. Row 2 shows the number of tests performed for each problem.

Rows 4 and beyond show the number of failed tests for each student (a blank indicates no failed tests: equivalent to 0 failed tests). To compute the number of points for a problem/in a column, compute the percentage of successful tests and multiply it by the number of points the problem is worth. So for example, if a student missed 5 of 20 tests on a 4 point problem, he/she would receive (20-5)/20*4 = 15/20*4 = 3 points. Columns L-N show each student's cumulative Score, the score Rounded to an integer (what integer is entered in the Grades spreadsheet) and Percent, based on the number of points the assginment is worth (here 25).

Students should talk to the TA for their Lab first, if they do not understand why they received the marks they did or dispute any of these marks. The best time to talk with your TA about grades is during one of your Labs, when both student and TA are physically present to examine the submission and the grade, possibly running the solution on a computer they can share.

Students should examine their graded work immediately and get any regrade issues settled as soon as possible (within a week of when the grade is assigned).

IMPORTANT Information about Student Grades

  • A few students submitted code that had syntax errors and therefore failed all tests: the TAs are authorized to allow you to fix a few simple syntax errors in the code you submitted and rerun/regrade the code (but, I will deduct some points for not submitting executable code). Also see Announcement #5 below.

  • A few students submitted code that didn't finish executing in at least one of their functions and therefore failed all its tests: the TAs are authorized to allow you to replace any method body with pass and rerun/regrade the code (but, I will deduct some points for submitting code with an infinite loop).

This assignment was designed to provide you with a good grounding in the use of writing regular expressions and using the re module to write code that processes text using regular expression. All these topics will be tested again on the Midterm. As with all assignments, you should examine my solutions.

#9: 1/24/18
Program #1 Graded
I have run the automatic batch self-check tests for Program #1 and the grades are now recorded. See the assignment grades and Grades(zipped .xlsm file) files, whose details are discussed below, in Announcement #7.

The class average was about 87% and the median was 100%, meaning that most students correctly solved most problems, and over half (66%) of the class correctly solved all the problems (or had minor deductions). Overall there were 66% As, 10% Bs, 7% Cs, and 17% Ds and Fs. FYI, last quarter, there were 63% As, 9% Bs, 11% Cs, and 17% Ds and Fs. About 35% of the students submitted early, and these early submitters scored much better (102% average) than students submitting on the due day (93% average). I am assuming that some students ran out of time before they finished all the problems, and will plan to get started earlier on later programs.

In the assignment spreadsheet, Column A contains the Hashed IDs of all students (in sorted order); Column B contains an X if we believe the student submitted work on time (for pairs, only the submitting student will show an X, not their partner); Column C shows the extra credit points for early submissions or deductions if too many parts were submitted on the last two days: although the exact algorithm is a bit more complex, students submitting multiple programs on the due date lost 3 points for all but one; students submitting multiple programs on the day before the due date lost 2 points for all but one, but I did grade all the submitted programs. Recall the published rubric said that I would not grade multiple programs submitted on these days, so the rubric I used was less severe. About 20% of the submissions received some kind of penalty: the average penalty was about 7 points. Columns AI-AK show how many submissions were early, were on the day before the due date, and were on the due date respectively.

Row 2 for Columns D-Y shows how many points the problems were worth. Row 3 shows the number of tests performed for each problem: all were batch-self check tests. Rows 4-5 show further information about the tests performed in each column.

Rows 6 and beyond show the number of failed tests for each submission (a blank indicates no failed tests: equivalent to 0 failed tests). To compute the number of points for a problem/in a column, compute the percentage of successful tests and multiply it by the number of points the problem is worth. So for example, if a student failed 1 of 4 tests on a 5 point problem, he/she would receive (4-1)/4*5 = 3/4*5 = 3.75 points. Columns Z-AD show each student's cumulative score, for all the tests in each of the problems in this assignment. Columns AE-AG show each student's cumulative Score, the score Rounded to an integer (what integer is entered in the Grades spreadsheet) and Percent, based on the number of points the assginment is worth (parts 1-2 24; parts 3-5 26). Note that these columns are filled in both for submitters and their partners (these are the only columns filled in for partners): a partner should refer to his/her submitter's line for details.

Students should talk to the TA for their Lab first, if they do not understand why they received the marks they did or dispute any of these marks. The best time to talk with your TA about grades is during one of your Labs, when both student and TA are physically present to examine the submission and the grade, possibly running the solution on a computer they can share.

Students should examine their graded work immediately and get any regrade issues settled as soon as possible (within a week of when the grade is assigned).

IMPORTANT Information about Student Grades

  • A few students submitted code that had syntax errors and therefore failed all tests for that part: the TAs are authorized to allow you to fix a few simple syntax errors in the code you submitted and rerun/regrade the code (but, I will deduct some points for not submitting executable code). Also see Announcement #5 below.

  • A few students submitted code that didn't finish executing in their influencer (sometimes other) solutions and therefore failed all its tests: the TAs are authorized to allow you to replace any method body with pass and rerun/regrade the code. But, I will deduct some points for submitting code with an infinite loop: in the future, replace any method body with pass if it causes an infinite loop.

  • A few students submitted code that (a) incorrectly named partners -wrong format or wrong UCInetID, or (b) had students listed a partners of multiple submitters, or (c) had both students submitting and listed as partners of submitters. The TAs are authorized to try to understand these problems and help me correct them (but, I will deduct some points for having to deal with these problems). As always, see the TA first.

This assignment was designed to provide you with a good grounding in the use of the standard data structures in Python: list, tuple, set, and dict (and the defaultdict variant). It also included practice iterating overs such structures, writing comprehensions, use of the sorted function and lambda, and other useful/important Python functions. Unlike Quiz #1, the problems were bigger, requiring more interesting algorithms to solve, but still all expressible with a small number of Python language features. All these topics will be tested again on the Midterm and In-Lab Exam #1. As with all assignments, you should examine my solutions.


#8: 1/22/18
Quiz #1 Graded
I have run the automatic batch self-check tests for Quiz #1 (checking correctness) and the Readers/TAs have examined problem 1 and the code (checking requirements: e.g., statements/solution) and the grades are now recorded and posted. See the assignment grades and Grades(zipped .xlsm file) files, whose details are discussed below, in Announcement #7. The class average was about 78% and the median was 88%, meaning that most students correctly solved most problems (40% As), and 11% of the class correctly solved all the problems. Overall there were 40% As, 24% Bs, 11% Cs, and 25% Ds and Fs for those students who submitted work; most of the students who scored near 0 submitted code that we could not run (see the paragraphs below for possible regrading by your TA). FYI, the Fall quarter grades for this quiz were 43% As, 17% Bs, 13% Cs, and 27% Ds and Fs for those students who submitted work.

About 20% of the students submitted early (although there are no extra credit points on quizzes for doing so), and these early submitters scored much better than students submitting on the due day (89% compared to 75%): a difference of 1.5 full grades (students submitting 2 days early had an average of 91%). I am assuming that some students ran out of time before they finished all the problems, and will plan to get started earlier on later quizzes.

In the assignment grades spreadsheet, Column A contains the ID Hashed of all students (in sorted order) and Column B contains an X if we believe the student submitted work on time. Column C shows deductions for

  • computer work submitted late
  • written work submitted late (written work is due at the start of class)
  • not printing a copy of quiz page on which you wrote your answer
Row 1 for Columns D-N shows how many points the problems were worth. Some problems show points in two columns: e.g., Problem #3 has 1 point in Column F (3a/C: produced correct answers according to the batch self-checks) and 1 point in Column G (3a/R: the requirement of 1 return statement, according to the TAs). Any /C column relates to correctness; any /R relates to requirements. Row 2 shows the number of batch self-check tests performed for each problem (for those checked automatically; for the other columns it is just the number of points the problem is worth).

Rows 4 and beyond show the number of failed tests for each student (a blank indicates no failed tests: equivalent to 0 failed tests). To compute the number of points you scored for a problem/in a column, compute the percentage of successful tests and multiply it by the number of points the problem is worth. So for example, if a student missed 2 of 6 tests on a 5 point problem, he/she would receive (6-2)/6 * 5 = 3.3 (actually, 3.333...) points. Columns P-R show each student's cumulative Score, the score Rounded to an integer (that integer is the score entered in the Grades spreadsheet) and Percent, based on the number of points the assginment is worth (here 25).

Readers graded problem 1 for all students and the TAs graded the function requirements for all students in their labs. The TAS will distribute these pages in labs this week only; after that, the papers will be archived in my office. The rubric for this problem was as follows: each part was worth .5 pt.

  1. ALL names (a, b, c) are written inside the module object/oval
  2. ALL names have SQUARE boxes written underneath them
  3. ALL arrows point from "namey things" to "objecty things" and the TAIL of ALL arrows are INSIDE the square box.
  4. ALL "objecty things" appear as ovals
  5. ALL "object things" are correctly labelled: int or list
  6. one a points to int(1)
  7. BOTH a (either its name or square boxy thing) and its line is crossed out, but NOT the int(1) object
  8. BOTH one b points to int(2) AND one c points to a listy thing
  9. some listy thing points from index 0 to int(1) and index 1 to int(2)
  10. index 0 of one listy thing's arrow to int(1)is crossed out (but not the int(1) object itself), replaced by the arrow to the listy thing itself, and that arrow to itself is crossed out (but not the listy thing)
  11. one "listy thing" finally shows index 0 pointing to int(3)
  12. no crossing arrows
If you lost any points on this problem (most students did) I suggest that you start by comparing your solution to mine.

Students should talk to the TA for their Lab first, if they do not understand why they received the marks they did or dispute any of these marks. The best time to talk with your TA about grades is during one of your Labs, when both student and TA are physically present to examine the submission and the grade, possibly running the solution on a computer they can share.

Students should examine their graded work immediately and get any regrade issues settled as soon as possible (within a week of when the grade is assigned). Show up to lab and settle these issues immediately.

IMPORTANT Information about Student Grades

  • A few students submitted code that extraneous imports or had syntax errors and therefore failed all tests: the TAs are authorized to allow you to fix a few simple syntax errors in the code you submitted and rerun/regrade the code (but, I will deduct some points for submitting unexecutable code). Also see Announcement #5 below.

  • If you submitted an assignment, but the X in column B has the comment TIMEOUT it means that one of your functions contained an infinite loop, and therefore failed all tests: the TAs are authorized to allow you to replace the body of any function by pass and rerun/regrade the code (but, I will deduct some points for not submitting gradable code). Also see Announcement #5 below.
This assignment was designed to provide you with a good grounding in the use of the standard data structures in Python: list, tuple, set, and dict (and the defaultdict variant). It also included practice iterating over such structures, writing comprehensions, and use of the sorted function and lambdas. All these topics will be tested again on the Midterm and In-Lab Exam #1 (along with appearing in Programming Assignment #1 as well). As with all assignments, you should examine my solutions.

#7: 1/15/18
Programming Assignment #0 Graded
The TAs have graded (and I have recorded the grades for) Programming Assignment #0. As with most assignments, there are two files that you should download, unzip, and examine to understand your performance on this assignment, and your cumulative performance in this class.

Both of these files are sorted by Hashed IDs (which are computed from the 8-digit UCI IDs of all the students in the class). To determine your Hashed ID, see Message #6 below.

  • The first file to examine stores the assignment grades, a zipped Excel file that details how each student was graded on this instrument: what marks were given and why. It is sorted by Hashed IDs (column A). Column B contains an X if the student submitted work (later, if you work in pairs, the X will appear only on the Submitter's cell, not in the Partner's cell, although both will receive the same grade). Column C (for Programming Assignments only) shows extra credit points for early submission: 1 point for submitting 24 hours early; 2 points for submitting 48 hours (or more) early; a blank here means no extra credit/early submission points.

    Columns D and beyond show marks for the various parts of the assignment. The last three columns show your Score, the score Rounded to an integer (see the discussion below) and your Percent, based on the number of points the assginment is worth. If a cell contains a comment (those cells with a red-triangle in their upper-right hand corner) you can hover over the cell and you will see the comment that explains why the marks were given: sometimes you must edit the comment and enlarge its bounding box to see the full comment.

    Students should talk to the TA who graded a question, if they do not understand why they received the marks they did or to dispute any of these marks. For Programming Assignment #0, the grading was as follows

    Nicholas : Part A All Labs:1-15
    Ali      : Part B All Labs:1-15
    Nishanth : Part C Labs 1-8
    Samia    : Part C Labs 9-15
    James    : Part D Labs 1-8
    Tiancheng: Part D Labs 9-15
    

    The best time to talk with your TA about grades is during one of your Labs, when both student and TA are physically present to examine the submission and the grade, possibly running the solution on a computer they can share. The same goes for talking to other TAs. All TAs can download your work from Checkmate.

  • The second file to examine stores the cumulative Grades(zipped .xlsm file) -also available as a link on course web- unzip it, and then click the tab labeled Winter 2018. This tab records all the grades for all the testing instruments that you submit during the quarter. It is also sorted by Hashed IDs (column A). You will notice that in this spreadsheet all recorded grades are rounded up to integers: so receiving a 27.5 on the first spreadsheet will translate into a 28 recorded on the second one. We will use this same "round-up" process for recording all grades during the quarter.

    On this spreadsheet, columns B-T contain your scores: for the Quizzes (B-I), Programming Assignments (J-O), In-Lab Programming Exams (P-Q), and Written Exams (R and T: I'll discuss S after the Midterm). Columns U-X contain the sums for all these testing instruments. Column Y contains special extra credit points (for example, submitting the faculty/course evaluation at the end of the quarter; more on this then. In fact, because this quareter virtually all students submitted correctly and on time in Checkmate, anyone submitting an assignment received one extra credit point, which is listed here). Column Z-AD contains your cumulative points (Z), your average (AA), your rank in class (AB: 1 means highest-scoring student), and your current grade (AC is the letter, AD is +/- if appropriate).

    You should check this spreadsheet after every assignment is graded to ensure that your score was recorded correctly. Again, students should talk to the TA for their Lab first, if this spreadsheet contains any errors.

IMPORTANT: Scores wil revert to 0, if I do not receive a signed Academic Integrity Contract from you (we are tabulating them this week). Please come by during my office hours as soon as possible if you need to fix this problem.

This assignment was designed to test you on whether you have mastered the basics of using Python in Eclipse, the Eclipse Debugger perspective, and batch-self-check files in the driver.py module (in courselib). It was also designed to see if you could follow instructions and ask questions: more on that below.

The class average was 28 (or about 95%) and the median was 30 (or about 100%). For those students submtting work, there were 84% As, 9% Bs, 2% Cs, and 5% Ds and Fs.

The assignment was not meant to be hard, but it was not trivial either, and there were many opportunities to lose points (and learn from your mistakes). Your work in the Eclipse/Python Integrated Developement Environment (IDE) throughout the quarter will leverage off the understanding and skills that you acquired in this assignment.

Let me talk about what will probably be the most contentious single point of the 1,000 points that this course is worth (thus .1% of the grade) I took off 1 point if you corrected the misspelling Inteprxter (and took off 2 points if you didn't have either spelling: in this second case you obvious failed to meet the specifications because you did not print what was required). When some students hear about this point deduction, their heads explode and they cannot believe that I am taking off a point for correcting what you thought was my mistake. But... I am trying to foster an atmosphere where nothing is taken for granted in the instructions that I give: if anything seems confusing or plain wrong, I should be questioned about it -preferably in public, on a MessageBoard forum- so others can learn if there really is a problem, and if so the correction.

  • Some students did ask me outside of class if they should correct the misspelling, and I told them "no"; some students asked me by email if they should correct the misspelling, and I told them "no"; one student asked on a MessageBoard forum whether they should have corrected the misspelling, and I posted a reply saying that they shouldn't, for all students in the class to see. It is critical for programmers to be sure they know the specifications of the problem they are being asked to solve, otherwise they will solve, test, debug document, etc. the problem incorrectly, and another cycle of development will be needed to fix the misconceptions. The overview lecture included a graph that showed that the later in development a problem is found, the harder/more expensive it is to fix. So if we can find problems at the time we are reading the specification of the problem to solve, that can save us a lot of work/money later.

  • The bottom line is that you are responsible for reading the instructions carefully and reporting any confusion so that I can clear it up (best reported on the MessageBoard forum for Programming Assignments). Of course, you can freely talk to anyone about the problem specifications, just not the code that you write for your solutions. If you make any assumptions (like the node names in Programming Assignment #1 always being one letter long -that is not part of the specification), they might come back later to haunt you (gradewise). When working with a partner, you'll have two pairs of eyes reading the specifications. I am willing to deduct this one painful point at the start of the quarter, from many students, to get across this perspective, and save everyone grading grief during the quarter. I hope you submitted early so the extra credit erased this point loss.

  • I will not intentionally do anything like this on subsequent assignments; but I can certainly be unclear about the specifications (which have lots of details) or even contradict myself from one spot to the next. It it up to you to clear up the confusion, and best to do it on the MessageBoard forums, so I can clear up the problem once for all students.

We deducted 1 point on the demo.py program if your # Submitter line did not perfectly match what was required, including using correct spacing, punctuation, lower-/upper-case letters, etc. Many students lost a point here; ensure that you know what you did wrong so you won't lose points in subsequent submissions.

Also, some students did not carefully read the instructions in the Debugger Perspective document for the quiz part, which required them to change a line in the craps script before running it with the debugger to gather the required information. With this change in your program, we can check your answers for correctness; without it, we cannot check you answers for correctness.

Finally, about 54% of the students submitted the program 2 or more days early; about 19 submitted the program 1 day early. So, about 73% of the students submitted this assignment early. Keep up the good work: you can earn 12 extra points if you turn in every Programming Assignment 2 or more days early (upping your grade by 1.2%): for some students, this boost will be enough to raise their final grade. Over the course of a two week assignment, it will be to everyone's benefit -students and staff alike- if students try to finish and submit early.

IMPORTANT If you believe that we graded your work correct, please examine the files mentioned above first, then contact the TA who graded it, to discuss the issues with him/her. Such a discussion can have only positive outcomes: either he/she will agree with you that you deserve more credit (and, we do want you to receive all the credit that you are due), or you will come to understand the question, program, or solution better and realize why you lost points. This is certainly a win-win situation. Please read my solution and the assignment grades spreadsheet carefully before contacting your TA; ensure that you understand what is the correct answer and what points were deducted from your assignment and why. If there is a problem, your TA will email me a revised summary about your program, and cc a copy to you. I will update the grades spreadsheet as appropriate (it might take a bit of time for all these events to cumulate in a changed grade) and email you.

If you feel there is still an unresolved problem after talking to your TA, please contact me (but always contact your TA first). Also, because of the size of this class, if you have a grading issue, we will consider it only if you bring it to your TAs attention within a week of when I return the materials. This policy is in place to avoid an avanlance of work because of "grade-grubbing" late in the quarter.


#6: 1/8/18
Hashed ID
When we grade assignments, we often distribute/update various spreadsheets with the relevant grading information. These spreadsheets are indexed and sorted by each student's Hashed ID. The course web-page has a Find ID Hashed (grade key) link, right below the Grades(zipped .xlsm file) link, which you can use to retrieve your Hashed ID (or click Find ID Hashed). Use the result it shows when examining any spreadsheets of grades; I suggest that you find this number once, and write it down for future reference.

#5: 1/8/18
Important:
Submitting Code
without Losing Points
ICS-33 uses software that automatically grades most quizzes and programming assignments; it uses (self-checking) testing cases that we supply with the testing instruments that we distribute. You will learn about these tools in Programming Assignment #0. Here are a few hints to ensure that you will understand the grading process better and minimize your point loss.
  1. Ensure that you submit the code you wrote, not empty files, nor the original files that you downloaded. Be very careful and double-check what you submit to avoid this mistake: if you are not sure that you submitted the correct code, resubmit it.

  2. If you are submitting with a partner, ensure that the Submitter and Partner lines of the program are correctly specified. The names must appear in the exact format required, with no misspellings nor punctuation errors. The student listed as Submitter must be the one who actually submits the code. See the Programming Assignments web page for the exact form required (and you must follow that exact form, with no misspelling nor punctuation errors).

  3. Ensure that you submit your code on time. We can, and mostly do, ignore any work submitted after the deadline (even by a few minutes). It is a fairness issue for other students who do submit on time. The best strategy is to finish the work and submit it well before the deadline (and get extra credit points): you will learn more too, if you aren't rushing to meet a deadline. To ensure that we will grade something, submit partially complete code ahead of the deadline; then, if you miss the deadline, we will still grade the partially complete code. Be warned: Checkmate can get bogged down if many students all try to submit a few minutes before the due time, so do not wait until the last minute to submit your code.

  4. Ensure that you test your code using the self-checks that we provide and use for grading. By using these self-checks, you will know when your code contains errors that will result in point deductions when we grade it. The actual tests that we will use for grading might be different, but will be similar in form and content: so, think a bit about testing your code beyond the self-checks that we supply. No finite amount of testing can show that code is correct for all inputs.

  5. Ensure that your files...
    1. ...contain no syntax errors.
    2. ...contain only appropriate import statements: typically just the ones provided in the download file(s).
    3. ...contain only functions that execute quickly (typically under a few seconds)

    Any syntax errors, inappropriate import statements, or excessive execution time may cause all self-check tests to fail during automatic grading. For functions that take excessive time, it is best to comment out their bodies, replacing their code with pass, resulting in the function immediately returning None: it will be counted wrong, but doing so will allow other functions to be run and graded for correctness.

    To avoid inappropriate imports and losing points, ensure that in Python have selected Window | Preferences | PyDev | Editor | Auto Imports and unchecked all boxes (illustrated below) and then clicked Apply following by OK.

After an assignment is graded automatically, the Announcement for it will contain a link to an Excel file that you can examine for detailed information about how your score was computed.

If this information does not match your expectations from running the assignment's self-checks while developing your code, contact your TA. It is best to meet with your TA during lab hours: he/she can talk to you about your code and run it while you are present, to help resolve the difference. But, if we have to modify your code to grade it properly (see the typical source of problems above), then we will deduct points. I hope that by students carefully writing/submitting their code, these grading anomalies and point deductions will be minimized during the quarter.


#4: 1/8/18
Communication
There are many ways to communicate with me (and other staff and students). Here is a quick overview.
  1. Email: If you send me email, please do it through your UCI email address. Include a well-thought Subject line. Also, please include your full name and the course (ICS-33), and your Lab # (for questions related to grading). I teach many hundreds of students each quarter in multiple courses. Providing this information helps me quickly determine the context of your email, so I can better answer it. Finally, when I respond to your email, please do not send a "Thank you" acknowledgement. Such niceties are not necessary for work-related email. For me, it just increases the number of emails that I must read.

Note that for questions that are not specific to you -questions that are relevant to the entire class- it is best to ask them on the appropriate Message Board forum.

  1. Message Board Forum: Post on the forum most closely related to your question. Include a well-thought Title line that clearly identifies the issue you are asking about; doing so helps me and other students who are deciding whether to read your message and the response(s). If you discover the solution to your own question, revisit the Forum and explain (without supplying code) any useful information that you learned that might help other students with the same problem. Avoid a post that says just, "Never mind: I figured it out myself."

  2. Course Email (ics33-W18@classes.uci.edu): Mostly this is for me to use to communicate with all the students in the class. But, there are instances (very rarely) for students to use it: the best example is that if Checkmate appears to be down. Sending a Checkmate down email to this address tells me that it is down, and tells all the other students that (a) it is down and (b) I have been informed it is down. FYI, we rehosted Checkmate on a new computer a few quarters ago, and it is now much more reliable and rarely down.

#3: 1/8/18
First Lab
I expect students to attend all their scheduiled labs (unless they have already finished the current programming assignment). Programming Assignment #0 is assigned before the first lab of the quarter; so if you have not already finished it, I expect you to attend your first lab and work on it there.

Generally, you can get invaluable help in lab from the TAs and Tutors relating to

  • understaing the specifications of the assignment
  • understanding Python language features
  • understanding how to deubg your Python code
For debugging, don't expect the staff to debug your code for you. Instead expect, them to help you learn how to debug your own code in general, using your current problem/code as a concrete example.

#2: 1/8/18
Install Course Software
All students with computers should download and install the course Software: Java (to run Eclipse), Python, and Eclipse. All three products are available for free on the internet. Students can view instructions for downloading and installing this software by following the Course Software link. If you are using a Mac there are special instructions for you (e.g., Java is already installed)

If you have installed a version of Python prior to 3.6, you should install the current version of Python (and the most up-to-date version of Eclipse as well, which is currently "Oxygen").

Although students can work on their programming assignments on the computers in the UCI labs, I expect students with computers to download and install this software by the end of the first week of the quarter. If you are having difficulty with this task, the TAs and Lab Tutors will help you during the first Lab meeting (or beyond, if necessary: bring your computer to the lab). If you have successfully downloaded and installed this software, please help other students do so too. Finally, you can also use the class MessageBoard Forums to ask questions about installing this software and help other students install it.

I strongly suggest that you BACKUP YOUR WORK daily: computers can malfunction, break, or be stolen.


#1: 1/8/18
First Message
Welcome to ICS-33. I am going to post and archive important messages about the class in this announcements web page: each entry will be numbered, dated, and labeled. The entries will appear in reverse chronological order. Whenever you follow the link to this page, scan its top for new announcements; scan downward for older announcements. This message will always appear at the bottom of this file. I will never remove a message from this page

I have already posted some important messages before the start of the quarter. Expect a few new messages to be posted here each week, mostly regarding returned and graded work.

Check this Announcements page, along with your email and the MessageBoard Forums, daily.