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