3/11/25 Checks

[SanPranav]

3/11/25 Team Checks for PPR AND MCQ

---

• 1. Pranav's Check
• 2. Nikhil's Check
• 3. Vasanth's Check
• 4. Nathan's Check
• 5. Rohan's Check
• 6. Aarush's Check

[SanPranav]

Pranav's 3/11/25 Check

---

Pranav Santhosh

MCQ: Link to MCQ Blog PPR: Link to PPR Blog

Component	Score	Max Score
MCQ	0.9	0.9
PPR	0.9	0.9
Total	1.8	1.8

Feedback:

• MCQ Strengths: Blog demonstrates thorough understanding of mistakes with detailed explanations for incorrect answers. Analysis includes clear reasoning for errors and comprehensive improvement strategies. Simulated exam conditions to match AP test timing. Impressive score of 64/67 shows strong content mastery.
• MCQ Areas for Growth: Could provide more insights about how stress and anxiety management strategies for the actual exam environment.
• PPR Strengths: Well-structured blog aligned perfectly with CPT requirements, covering each requirement (1-6) systematically. Clear organization with red table providing concise overview at the top. Detailed sections with relevant code snippets and thorough explanations demonstrate deep understanding of requirements. Proper terminology used throughout.
• PPR Areas for Growth: None specified in the reviewer feedback, as the PPR received a perfect score.

Improvements:

1. Consider adding specific stress management techniques for the actual AP exam environment.
2. Continue maintaining the high-quality organization with overview tables followed by detailed explanations.
3. Share your effective blog structure approach with peers to help improve team performance.

---

⬆️Click to return to top

[SanPranav]

Nikhil Maturi

SeedBlog: Link to Seed Blog

Component	Score	Max Score
MCQ	0.9	1.0
PPR	0.9	1.0
Total	1.8	2.0

Feedback:

• MCQ Strengths: Shows understanding of the MCQ's that he did. Completed corrections with nice formatting, and has screenshots of what he got wrong. Includes, how he improved from the previous MCQ showing noting what areas he improve one and what he can improve on in future. Has clear reflection for each question.
• MCQ Areas for Growth: While has MCQ reflection for each question could be more specific on why the correct answer is right, rather just saying why his answer was wrong.
• PPR Strengths: Included the key PPR code segments with proper requirements, such as procedure, call to algorithm, list process, and list creation.
• PPR Areas for Growth: Analyzes the correct information however I do recommend using code blocks instead of screenshots.

Improvements:

1. Organize PPR blog to have a seperate section for each of the four requirement, and use code blocks with clear formatting.

2. Organize the PPR blog to have explanation for how it meets the college board requirements.

   ⬆️Click to return to top

[SanPranav]

Vasanth Rajasekaran Seed Peer Evaluation

• Seed Blog

Graded By: Nathan T.

Grading:

This issue serves as a template for displaying structured content with a table.

Table

Component	Grade
MCQ Blog	0.9
PPR & CPT Blog	0.9
Total	1.80

Feedback by Nathan T:

Really detailed explanation of the MCQ, you spent a lot of time explaining what questions you missed and why. I really liked your approach towards preparing for the AP exam, and I really liked the graph you created which allowed me to understand what areas you're improving on.

The CPT blog is really detailed, and I like how you connected it to the Big Ideas. I think some more practice would be a little better, so you can meet the time requirements. Some better organization would be better

[SanPranav]

Nathan Tejidor

MCQ: Link to MCQ Blog PPR: Link to PPR Blog

Component	Score	Max Score
MCQ	0.85	0.9
PPR	0.88	0.9
Total	1.73	1.8

Feedback:

• MCQ Strengths: His MCQ includes reasons for choosing the incorrect choices and reasons why the correct answers are correct.
• MCQ Areas for Growth: However it is lacking in images of the questions which could be hard to see what the context of the question was. Also more specific details about the MCQ could have been provided such as time to complete, personal reasons for getting the question wrong, and things that he could do to improve.
• PPR Strengths: His PPR goes over all 4 points divided into respective sections with code snippets with explanations.
• PPR Areas for Growth: He could go more in depth into his code, and also use more coding terminology/CPT language.

Improvements:

1. Improve your MCQ to have more specific and personal details of how you performed.

2. Use more CPT language in order to have more technical and clear explanations.

   ⬆️Click to return to top

[SanPranav]

Rohan Bojja

MCQ: [Link to MCQ Blog] PPR: [Link to PPR Blog]

Component	Score	Max Score
MCQ	0.9	0.9
PPR	0.88	0.9
Total	1.78	1.8

Feedback:

• MCQ Strengths: Demonstrated strong analytical skills in reviewing missed questions, showing clear improvement and thoughtful reflection on mistakes. Consideration of errors indicates a commitment to learning and growth.
• MCQ Areas for Growth: The overall multiple-choice score was lower than expected, suggesting that more focus on initial comprehension and recall of key concepts could help improve performance.
• PPR Strengths: The code and its presentation were detailed and well-structured, reflecting a strong grasp of programming concepts. Attention to detail in the implementation was evident, showcasing a methodical approach.
• PPR Areas for Growth: The PPR Blog could have been more elaborate, with a greater use of technical vocabulary to demonstrate a deeper understanding of the topics covered. The explanations, while structured, lacked the depth needed to fully showcase comprehension.

Improvements:

1. Focus on practicing MCQ strategies to improve initial response accuracy and reinforce key concepts.
2. Incorporate more subject-specific vocabulary in the PPR Blog to demonstrate a higher level of understanding.
3. Continue refining code presentation while also ensuring that written explanations are as thorough as the technical implementation.

---

⬆️Click to return to top

[SanPranav]

Aarush Gowda

MCQ: https://spirit0327.github.io/aarushg_2025/reflection PPR: https://spirit0327.github.io/aarushg_2025/ppr2

Component	Score	Max Score
MCQ	0.88	0.9
PPR	0.9	0.9
Total	1.78	1.8

Feedback:

• MCQ Strengths: Was able to complete a thorough evaluation on the different topics that were missed, and in comparison to the firs practice MCQ, was topics were improved on. Was able to achieve a higher score and in correlation to the AP exam, perform well. Was able to complete all corrections and clearly state why the right answer was relevant to the problem and topic discussed.
• MCQ Areas for Growth: Could do more specific analysis on big ideas that were mainly missed in incorrect questions. Could have given some example questions for highest difficulty and complexity. Could have had specific big idea names or topic names for most improved, done well, or new topics.
• PPR Strengths:PPR covered the majority of the CPT language as well as giving a good overview over the project feature. Terms such as selection, iteration, and sequencing were discussed, with thorough explanations.
• PPR Areas for Growth: The proportion of code snippets to explanation with text is too word heavy, and code snippets should be more self explantory. Some terms are not explicitly stated, which may take away from CPT language.

Improvements:

1. Doing more specfic analysis on Big Ideas for improved and new topics
2. Putting in more self explanatory code snippets for PPR, while also explicitly stating key terms, such as Database queries

3. Provide next steps of action for MCQ, to improve scores in later iterations.

   ⬆️Click to return to top