Practice 1
Submission 1
| Reporting Category |
My Scoring |
Collegeboard Score + Explanation |
| Program Purpose and Function |
1 |
0, Does not have distinguished program purpose, instead, it is too broad and just described the functionality. Everything was good except the written response. |
| Data Abstraction |
1 |
1, 2 segments of code are provided, one with a named list. The written response is great and the code segments are distinguished |
| Managing Complexity |
0 |
0, The list does not manage complexity. The explanation of how the program could be written differently without lists and how lists were helpful is inaccurate. |
| Procedural Abstraction |
1 |
1, there is a developed and named procedure with 3 parameters used and referenced later on in the code. The output response includes code that calls the procedure again. The student describes how the procedure functions and it is essential to the program overall. |
| Algorithm Implementation |
0 |
1, the student incorporated their own algorithm within their procedure. They used selection (if), sequencing, and iteration (for in range loop). The written response is detailed explaining how the algorithm functions in the procedure, so it could be remade. |
| Testing |
1 |
1, The written response describes two different calls to the procedure with different parameters. For each call, the student describes the conditions that are being tested. Lastly, the results of both of the calls are described. |
Submission 2
| Reporting Category |
My Score + Explanation |
Collegeboard Score + Explanation |
| Program Purpose and Function |
1 |
1, The response specifies the program’s purpose as entertainment. It describes how it functions, the input of “placing and removing tiles” and the output of patterns. |
| Data Abstraction |
1 |
1, 2 code segments are provided. One of the multiple list’s name is startGrid. The response says what is being stored in the list, which is the possible tiles on the screen. |
| Managing Complexity |
0, does not include the procedure name in the list. |
1, The response includes code that uses a list to manage complexity. It explains how the code could not be written without using a list. |
| Procedural Abstraction |
1 |
1, The response includes a created procedure, “replaceList”, with 2 parameters, current and replacement. The response also includes a description of the functionality and a call to this procedure. The response describes the functionality of the procedure. |
| Algorithm Implementation |
1 |
1, The created algorithm in the procedure, replaceList, includes sequencing, selection and iteration. The response explains how the algorithm functions can be recreated in another way. |
| Testing |
1 |
1, The response describes 2 different calls to the procedure which results in different code being ran through. The response states that the second call is “parameter inputs of 2, 1, being the current and replacement parameters respectively.” The response describes both of the conditions being tested. |
Practice 2
Submission 1
| Reporting Category | My Score + Explanation | Collegeboard Score + Explanation |
|-|-|-|
| Program Purpose and Function | 0 | 0, The video demonstrates the running of the program, displaying icons of animals and questions, inputting the text of the guesses, and displaying the final result. The response states that the program’s purpose is “The purpose of this code is for you to see all the animals and to identify them when you’re asked later” This states the function of the program but not its intended purpose. This statement does not state the problem being solved or creative interest being pursued through the program. The response does not describe the functionality demonstrated in the video. The response states, “Challenge the users memory to remember the animals shown on the screen.” This
response does not describe the functionality shown in the video. The response describes the input and the output; however, the response switches the input with the output and vice versa. |
| Data Abstraction | 0 | 0, 2 different code segments are provided: one shows storage of data in a list named animalImages; however, the second code segment shows another list named
animalList. The response identifies animalList, but animalList is not being used in either code segment. |
| Managing Complexity | 0 | 0, The response does not include a program code segment that uses a list to manage complexity. Both code segments show data being stored in a list, but neither contain code using a list. The code is not complex. The response does not explain how the list manages complexity. The response does not explain how it would be written differently without the list, and the code does not manage or even involve complexity.|
| Procedural Abstraction | 0 | 0, The response includes a student-developed procedure, evaluateGuess, with one explicit parameter, guess, and a call to this procedure in a second code segment using the argument guess. The response describes the functionality of the procedure as it states that it contributes to “determining if the user’s guess was right or wrong.” The response does not describe how this procedure contributes to the overall functionality. |
| Algorithm Implementation | 0 | 0, The student-developed algorithm within procedure, evaluateGuess, includes sequencing, and iteration (a for loop), and selection (an if statement). The response includes a minimal description, but it does not explain how the algorithm works in enough detail that someone else could recreate it. |
| Testing | 0 | 1, The response describes two different calls to the specific procedure to result in different code being executed. The response describes the conditions being tested. The response states the other condition being tested is “when evalulateGuess is not equal to one of the animals in animalList.” The response describes the results of the two calls, leading to two different results.|
Submission 2
| Reporting Category | My Score + Explanation | Collegeboard Score + Explanation |
|-|-|-|
| Program Purpose and Function | 1 | 1, The video demonstrates the running of the program, showing input into the program through keyboard typing. Output includes the prompts for the word input and the poems being displayed. The response specifies the program’s purpose as creative expression, “to explore the user’s creativity through the expression of poetry using their words and images as well as preferences of formatting in order to generate some unique poems.” The response describes the functionality demonstrated in the video. The response describes the input and the output. |
| Data Abstraction | 1 | 1, Two distinct code segments are provided, the first showing data being stored in the identified list and the second showing the data being accessed from the identified list under a new name since it is passed as a parameter. The name of the list is identified as nounList, although it is also referred to as wordList when it is passed into the selectWord procedure. The response identifies what is stored in the list. |
| Managing Complexity | 1 | 1, The response includes code that uses lists of words to manage complexity when generating poetry. The response explains how the code would be written differently without the list. |
| Procedural Abstraction | 0 | 1, The response includes a student-developed procedure, createPoems, with four parameters that are used in the procedure. The response describes the functionality of the procedure as it states that it is “putting together the final selection of poems.” The response describes how the procedure contributes to the overall program by stating that it is used in conjunction with the user inputs. |
| Algorithm Implementation | 1 | 1, The student-developed algorithm within procedure, createPoems, includes sequencing, selection (if statement), and iteration (while loop). The response explains in detail how the algorithm in the procedure works so it can be recreated. |
| Testing | 1 | 1, The response describes two calls to the specific procedure to result in different code being executed, varying the argument for the last parameter. The first call is
createPoems(nounList, verbList, adverbList, 1), and the second call is createPoems(nounList, verbList, adverbList, 0). The response states that the last parameter represents “differing settings for articlePreference.” The response describes the condition being tested. The response specifies the different results of the two procedure calls. The response states in the first case that “the final output poems will have “The” and “And” in the content.” The responses states in the second case that “the final output poems will not have “The” and “And” in the content.” |
Submission 3
| Reporting Category |
My Score + Explanation |
Collegeboard Score + Explanation |
| Program Purpose and Function |
1 |
0, The video satisfies the first three criteria for the video. But the response describes the function of the program but not its purpose, it describes the functionality demonstrated in the video. The response describes the input and the output. |
| Data Abstraction |
1 |
1, Two code segments are provided. The first segment shows data being stored in “firstCharacterList”, and a second segment shows data being accessed from the list in a loop via a parameter that is set to the identified list. |
| Managing Complexity |
1 |
1, The response includes a list that combines six rankings and an image URL for a single character into one collection to pass to the function that determines a winner, managing complexity in the program code. The response provides an accurate explanation about what would happen if the list were not used. |
| Procedural Abstraction |
1 |
1, The response includes a made-up procedure, findWinner, with two parameters that are used in the procedure. The response also includes another code segment that illustrates a call to the findWinner procedure. The response describes the function of the procedure. |
| Algorithm Implementation |
1 |
1, The findWinner includes sequencing, selection (if statement), and iteration (for loop). The response explains in detail how the algorithm in the procedure works so it can be recreated. |
| Testing |
1 |
1, The response describes two calls to the procedure with different arguments that lead to different results from the procedure. The first call uses the arguments Vision and Bishop. The second call uses the arguments Carnage and Venom. The response describes the conditions being tested for the two procedure calls. |
Submission 4
| Reporting Category |
My Score + Explanation |
Collegeboard Score + Explanation |
| Program Purpose and Function |
1 |
1, The video demonstrates the running of the program, collecting input using a text entry field and displaying output results on the screen showing letters that matched. The response states that the program’s purpose is “to test critical thinking skills.” The response describes the functionality demonstrated in the video. The response describes the input and the output. |
| Data Abstraction |
0 |
0, Two distinct code segments are provided. The first segment shows storage of data in a list named guesses. However, in the second code segment, data stored in the list is not being used; only the length of the list is accessed. So the response does not meet this criteria. |
| Managing Complexity |
0 |
0, The response includes a program code segment that uses a list, but the list is not used to manage complexity. The use of the list is merely to act as a counter, so it can be replaced with a single counter variable. The response does not explain how the list manages complexity. The response refers to the list wordList, which is not identified, so this part of the response is irrelevant. This is implausible since the program could just use a counter. |
| Procedural Abstraction |
0 |
1, The response includes a student-developed procedure, isitcorrect, with one explicit parameter, checkanswer, and a call to this procedure in a second code segment using the argument, answer. The response describes the functionality of the procedure although it misnames the procedure. It also describes how it contributes to the overall program. |
| Algorithm Implementation |
1 |
1, The student-developed algorithm within procedure isitcorrect includes sequencing, selection (an if statement), and iteration (a repeat loop). The response explains how the algorithm works in detail. |
| Testing |
0 |
0, The response gives the conditions being tested rather than two different arguments that cause a different segment of code to execute. Arguments should be specific values used in the call to the procedure. The response describes the conditions being tested for the cases. The response describes what would result in each condition. |
Practice 3
Submission 1
| Reporting Category |
My Score + Explanation |
Collegeboard Score + Explanation |
| Program Purpose and Function |
1 |
1, The video demonstrates the running of the program, showing input into the program using the keyboard for the option entry and the yes/no answer, and output including the prompts and the result of the match on the display. This satisfies the first three criteria for the video. The response specifies the program’s purpose. The response states that it can be “used to make a decision.” The response describes the functionality demonstrated in the video. The response describes the input and the output. |
| Data Abstraction |
0 |
0, Two code segments are provided. The first segment shows data being stored in the identified list, but the second segment does not show data being accessed from the list. The name of the list is identified as RPS. The response identifies what is stored in the list. |
| Managing Complexity |
0 |
0, The response includes a list, but this list does not manage complexity in the program. This program can be written equivalently without the list using an if statement to set cpuPlay variable based on a random number. The response provides an explanation of how the program could be written differently without lists. But this |
| results in a program that is just as easy to develop or maintain as the one with lists. |
|
|
| Procedural Abstraction |
0 |
0, The response includes a student-developed procedure, rpsGame, with one parameter that is used in the procedure. The response also includes another code fragment that calls the procedure rpsGame. The response describes the functionality of the procedure. The response does not specify how the procedure contributes to the overall program, only stating that it “allows for the program to execute smoothly.” |
| Algorithm Implementation |
0 |
1, The student-developed algorithm within procedure, rpsGame, includes sequencing, selection (if statement), and iteration through use of recursion to call rpsGame again to execute. The response explains how the algorithm in the procedure works so it can be recreated. |
| Testing |
0 |
1, The response describes two calls to the procedure with different arguments, leading to different results. For the first call, “yourPlay had the value of “Rock”” and “The computer input was “Paper”.” For the second call, “yourPlay had the value of “Paper”” and “The computer input was “Rock”.” The response describes the conditions being tested for the two procedure calls. In the first case, the “computer checked to see if the user’s input was equal to “Rock” and if the computer’s input was “Paper”.” |
Submission 2
| Reporting Category |
My Score + Explanation |
Collegeboard Score + Explanation |
| Program Purpose and Function |
1 |
1, The video demonstrates the running of the program, showing input into the program through a text field to enter letters for the puzzle. Output includes the display of letters or the number of lives reducing for wrong guesses, along with the final screen to show if the player wins or |
| not. This satisfies the first three criteria for the video. The response specifies the program’s purpose is to “help you recognize new words and expand your vocabulary.” The response describes the functionality demonstrated in the video. The response describes the input and the output. |
|
|
| Data Abstraction |
1 |
1, Two distinct code segments are provided. The first segment shows data being stored in the identified list, and the second segment shows data being accessed from the identified list in a for loop. The name of the list is identified as letOfGuessWord. The response identifies what is stored in the list. |
| Managing Complexity |
1 |
1, The response includes code that uses a list to manage complexity by storing the letters of the word to be guessed. The code scans the list based on its length so a longer word could be implemented. The response explains how the code would be written differently without the list. |
| Procedural Abstraction |
1 |
1, The response includes a student-developed procedure, guessWords, with a parameter that is used in the procedure. The response also includes a call to this procedure. The response describes the functionality of the procedure. The response describes how this procedure contributes to the overall functionality of the program. |
| Algorithm Implementation |
1 |
1, The student-developed algorithm within procedure, guessWords, includes sequencing, selection (if statement), and iteration (for loop). The response explains in detail how the algorithm in the procedure works so it can be recreated. |
| Testing |
1 |
1, The response describes two different calls to the specific procedure to result in different code being executed. The response states that “the user inputs the number “1” and inputs the letter “h” when the word to be guessed is “hello”. The response uses the word “inputs” to indicate the setting of the parameter, letter The response describes the conditions being tested. The response describes the results of the two calls, leading to two different results. |
Submission 3
| Reporting Category |
My Score + Explanation |
Collegeboard Score + Explanation |
| Program Purpose and Function |
0 |
1, The video demonstrates the running of the program, showing input into the program using a drop-down list of state names and displaying output results on the screen as a picture of a state flag and other data related to a state such as area and population. This satisfies the first three criteria for the video. The response specifies the program’s purpose. The response describes the functionality demonstrated in the video. The response describes the input and the output. |
| Data Abstraction |
0 |
0, Two distinct code segments are provided, but only the second code segment shows data being stored in the identified list. No code is shown to illustrate data being used from the list. The name of the list is identified as stateList. However, based on the code fragment, the description is inaccurate as the identified list stateList |
| appears to represent only the state name. |
|
|
| Managing Complexity |
0 |
0, The response includes code that uses lists to manage complexity; however, the response does not explain how the specific code cannot be written without a list or would be written in a more complex manner. This response is overly general and does not give specific insight into the student-written response. |
| Procedural Abstraction |
0 |
0, The response includes a student-developed procedure, updateScreen, but it does not have any parameter. In addition, the second code segment does not show any call to the procedure updateScreen. The response inaccurately describes the functionality of the procedure. The procedure only sets an index and does not update the state screen. The response does not describe how this procedure contributes to the overall functionality. |
| Algorithm Implementation |
0 |
0, The student-developed algorithm within procedure updateScreen includes sequencing, and selection (if/else), but it does not include iteration. The response partially explains how the algorithm in updateScreen works. The response does not state that the index value is set based on the match and what value is set for each U.S. state. |
| Testing |
1 |
0, The response describes two calls from the specified procedure, rather than two calls to the specified procedure. In addition, this function does not have an implicit parameter for state. Instead, this is set after the call to the procedure. An implicit parameter is one that is assigned in anticipation of a procedure call, not after the call is made The response describes the two separate operations being performed by the user, not conditions being tested by the given parameter. The response does not specify the result of two calls to the given procedure. Instead, it describes the result that appears on the screen. |
Submission 4
| Reporting Category |
My Score + Explanation |
Collegeboard Score + Explanation |
| Program Purpose and Function |
1 |
1, The video demonstrates the running of the program, showing input into the program through movement of the boat as the user presses keys. Output includes movement of the boat and the score. The response specifies the program’s purpose is to “lessen boredom.” The response describes the functionality demonstrated in the video. The response describes the input and the output. |
| Data Abstraction |
1 |
1, Two distinct code segments are provided. The first segment shows data being stored in the identified list, and the second segment shows data being accessed from the identified list in a for loop. The name of the list is identified as fishtypes. The response identifies what is stored in the list. |
| Managing Complexity |
1 |
1, The response includes code that uses a list of lists to manage complexity. The main list represents fish, where each list element is also a list that stores the type of fish and the number of that type of fish that are caught. The response explains how the code can be written without using lists in a plausible manner. The changes needed for the program are minimal if another fish is added to the list. |
| Procedural Abstraction |
1 |
1, The response includes a student-developed procedure, clone+movement+range, with five parameters that are used in the procedure. The response also includes a call to this procedure. The response describes the functionality of the procedure. |
| Algorithm Implementation |
1 |
1, The student-developed algorithm within procedure, clone+movement+range, includes sequencing, selection (if/else statement), and iteration (for loop).The response explains in detail how the algorithm in the procedure works so it can be recreated. |
| Testing |
1 |
0, The response does not describe specific arguments that are passed through the parameters. Rather the response explains the alternate coding segments if they were used. The response describes the conditions being tested. The response describes the code segments rather than the result of the call. |