CSP Final, N@tM Retrospective | Torin Wolff | Period 2

[TDWolff]

My Writen review consists of my

• blog of CPT project, plans and completion of work here
  • [X] design, an article that contains preparation of key features prior to coding
  • [X] correlation to CPT, an article that show how your feature maps to College Board requirements
  • [X] pull request(s), an issue containing link to your pull requests from fork or branch to main
  • [X] code commits, the comments & deltas in GitHub that prove your work
• [x] one minute video, prepared in CPT style to highlight your feature with the project Video

[jm1021]

Write up is good summary of project, shows key code commits. It is missing correlation to CPT. Article has broken links.

[jm1021]

The video is really well done. I like the use of captions in out of the way place, they are short and very descriptive. Here are some suggestions.

1. My suggestion is to have an ending page/slide for your video, this could recap the things you shared (captions list). Currently, what remains on screen at the end is a browser alert. At the end of the video we have free retina time, perhaps they stare at this 10-20 seconds after the 1 minute video; I do.

2. I am not sure inspect box should be open all the time. But definitely during the admin login sequence.

3. The stock screen with graph is impressive. But, you spent precious / unnecessary time with mouse wiggle of graph.

[ak146]

Now has correlation to the CPT collegeboard requirements. Torin lists all the collegeboard requirements and explains how he implemented them into his feature. His feature was interesting and featured an API call to a Stock API. The feature he showed was functional. He has key commits listed at the bottom with explanations as to why they are important. He also included issues that described their debugging journey with issues such as CORs. I would add more screenshots of the code to better show his examples. 1.05/1.1 He went above and beyond showing everything properly but should have more code segments to display his understanding.

Video: 4.5/5 1 minute long Shows functionality of the program Should show more backend in the future.

[jm1021]

Now has correlation to the CPT collegeboard requirements. Torin lists all the collegeboard requirements and explains how he implemented them into his feature. His feature was interesting and featured an API call to a Stock API. The feature he showed was functional. He has key commits listed at the bottom with explanations as to why they are important. He also included issues that described their debugging journey with issues such as CORs. I would add more screenshots of the code to better show his examples. 1.05/1.1 He went above and beyond showing everything properly but should have more code segments to display his understanding.

Video: 4.5/5 1 minute long Shows functionality of the program Should show more backend in the future.

Andrew K provides a very strong evaluation. I can tell he looked at things and has strong representations for improvements that I agree with "better examples" on writeup and "more backend" on video. We want to make sure writeup and video work together. The video is almost a preview to writeup and the video should start with "Purpose" and "Input" related captions. Notice how Andrew calls out Stock API. Andrew also calls out debugging journey, Torin added a bunch of stuff to show command of subject.