Computational Thinking Exam Info

This document uses the terms MUST, MUST NOT, SHOULD, SHOULD NOT and MAY as defined in RFC 2119.

Deliverable

Everyone hands in their own document. Your document will cover three aspects:

• A solution to the given problem.
• A reflection on the path taken to solve the problem and arrive at the solution.
• An evaluation of the solution with respect to its properties and the context of the problem.

The problem description will be posted on Friday morning, 18th October. We will reserve a good chunk of Friday for you to work on the exam problem. Hand in your document by Monday, 21st October 2024, 08:00 CET.

• You MUST submit your solution via email to frank.schimmel@th-koeln.de).
• You MUST send your email from your TH Köln Student Email Account (...​@​smail.th-koeln.de)
• Your document MUST contain your name and your student ID number (Matrikelnummer).
• The format of your document MUST be either PDF or markdown.
• The filename MUST contain your name.

Your Task

1. Read the problem description & ask clarifying questions.
2. What is your first idea/thought how to solve this problem?
3. Which principles of computational thinking have you used in this first idea? Where? How?
4. Work out a solution to the given problem, i.e. write clear step-by-step instructions.
5. Describe the path you took to arrive at this solution. Which principles of computational thinking have you used on the way? Where? How?
6. What does your solution do well? What not so much? Under which circumstances? How would you change your instructions under different circumstances?

Grading Criteria

Criterion		🤩	😀	😭
Solution (40%)	Correctness	Algorithm works as advertised, no logic errors, no implied steps gaps or missing parts.	Algorithm mostly works, minor logic errors only, single implied but unmentioned steps.	Algorithm does not work at all, contains multiple logic errors, essential parts missing (e.g. termination).
	Efficiency	Algorithm performs well, uses only necessary resources, has no unnecessary steps/actions.	Algorithm performance is OK but not optimal, needs more resources than strictly necessary, has some unnecessary steps/actions.	Algorithm performance is unacceptable, resources required are way out of proportion, contains many unnecessary steps/actions.
	Clarity	Algorithm can be executed without guessing, all steps are clear and unambiguous.	Algorithm can be mostly executed without guessing, single steps are unclear or ambiguous.	Algorithm cannot be executed without guessing, most steps are unclear or ambiguous or there are no clear steps.
Reflection (30%)	Path	Approach/path towards a solution described comprehensibly & clearly.	Approach/path towards a solution discernible & mostly comprehensible.	Illegible, chaotic, incomprehensible or unclear approach/path.
	Principles	Several CT principles are mentioned and their application is clear.	Some CT principles are mentioned and their application is mostly clear.	No CT principles mentioned or their application is unclear or random.
Evaluation (20%)		Several technical, human and social aspects of the proposed solution discussed. No outrageous claims about the properties of the solution are made.	Some technical, human and social aspects of the proposed solution discussed.	Illegible, chaotic, rambling or incomprehensible.
Terms (10%)	CT Principles	Terms used appropriately and correctly (almost) always.	Uses terms correctly most of the time. Can tell CT principles apart from other concepts.	Terms used incorrectly more often than not.
	Other Concepts	Terms used appropriately and correctly (almost) always.	Terms used appropriately and correctly most of the time.	No other concepts mentioned by name or terms used incorrectly more often than not.