Rubric

Assessment evaluation rubric.

Assessments are evaluated on four dimensions.

Behavior

Does the input and output functionality of the submission conform to the specification?

Exemplary: Exhibits correct behavior in all cases, including edge, corner, and error cases
Satisfactory: Exhibits correct behavior in all common cases; Throws expected exceptions in all cases
Not yet: Exhibits incorrect behavior in some common cases; Lacks some required functionality; Does not throw expected exceptions in some cases
Unassessable: Behavior does not resemble specification; Lacks significant portions of required functionality

Are data structures, methods, and classes chosen, designed, and implemented according to best practices?

Exemplary: Classes contain no redundant constructors; All methods are clear and concise and include no extraneous parameters; All methods include a proper access modifier; Classes contain only the most essential fields and all fields are initialized appropriately; All constants are declared correctly and used in all appropriate places; Most appropriate type, including interface types, used in all expected places
Satisfactory: No redundancy exists between methods; All methods are clear and concise; Classes contain no extraneous constructors; Classes contain reasonable fields; All constants are declared correctly; Reasonable types used in all places; All public methods are specified public
Not yet: Redundancy exists between methods; Some methods are overly long or complex; Classes contain redundant or extraneous constructors or public methods; Classes contain extraneous or unnecessary fields; Constants are declared incorrectly; Unreasonable or inappropriate types used in some places
Unassessable: Not enough code present to evaluate effectively; Required methods or constructors missing; No fields present

Are all language features and course concepts used appropriately, effectively, and efficiently?

Exemplary: Most appropriate variant of all control flow constructs used and properly factored and simplified; Recursive methods contain no extraneous cases or calls; No expensive operations are unnecessarily recomputed; Most appropriate data structure used in all cases; All assignment-specific requirements met
Satisfactory: Appropriate control flow constructs used; Recursive methods contain extraneous cases or calls; Does not create any unnecessary objects; Appropriate data structure used in all cases; Key assignment-specific requirements met
Not yet: Inappropriate control flow constructs used; Recursive methods contain redundant cases or calls; Creates unnecessary objects; Inappropriate data structure used in some cases; Some assignment-specific requirements not met
Unassessable: Not enough code present to evaluate effectively; Required language features or concepts not used; Banned or inappropriate language features or concepts used

Is the code well-written and well-documented, and does it conform to all code quality and other related guidelines?

Exemplary: Header comments on all classes and methods are well-written and contain all relevant information; All identifiers are meaningful and follow prescribed naming conventions; All code is indented and spaced consistently and cleanly; No lines longer than 100 characters; Code has no “magic numbers”; Exceptions thrown as soon as possible; Personal style choices are consistent and reasonable
Satisfactory: Header comments present on all classes and methods; Some identifier names are not meaningful or fail to follow prescribed conventions; No complete blocks are indented or spaced incorrectly; Some lines longer than 100 characters
Not yet: Header comments missing on some classes and/or methods; Entire code blocks are indented or spaced incorrectly
Unassessable: Not enough code present to evaluate effectively; Code shows little or no effort follow code quality guidelines; Code is extremely difficult to read and understand