search

alvinzhengq / AP-CSA-T1

AP CSA Tri-1 Project Repository
1 stars 1 forks source link

Week 9 Video Review #33

Closed nolanplatt closed 3 years ago

nolanplatt commented 3 years ago

Video Links and Scores

Grades and feedback below

alvinzhengq commented 3 years ago

@Akshay-Rohatgi

  1. Great explanation of the ASCII Lab and how it utilizes 2D Arrays.
  2. Very thorough tour of your Algorithms Lab code, easy to understand.
  3. Like how you showed what the runtime of the code actually looks like.
  4. Maybe talk a bit more about why the pixels of an RGB image relates to a 2D Array.
alvinzhengq commented 3 years ago

@PrishaMaiti

  1. Liked how you used a Google Slides presentation to present your topics.
  2. Very in depth explanations of Collgeboard unit topics, shows deep understanding.
  3. Great connection between topics and PBL.
  4. Maybe a more in depth tour of the PBL code might help viewers understand exactly what is going on in the PBL code snippets you show.
SamiDeshatty commented 3 years ago

@Akshay-Rohatgi

-The code explanation was very indepth and easy to understand and you implemented the college board 2d arrays in your explanation well

SamiDeshatty commented 3 years ago

@PrishaMaiti

SamiDeshatty commented 3 years ago

@alvinzhengq

Points: 0.75 for CB to PBL relation 1.2 for Tour of Code, I would actually suggest extra credit on this part because the explanation was very well done for both topics and requires more than a 1.0 .70 for Aesthetics. I only saw the backend code I believe including more like a presentation or CB connection would be really nice and add a pop to the presentation.

Overall 7.1/8

Akshay-Rohatgi commented 3 years ago

@alvinzhengq

  1. Great explanation on the implementation of topics from Unit 4 and Unit 10 in the tour of code for the Algorithm Extend Lab
  2. Modeling and complex data relationships illustrated well by a tour of code yet again.
  3. Good job mentioning the specific units that correspond with your PBL and minilab work.
  4. Well prepared, ready for conversation
  5. Attempt to be a little bit more energetic or show actual runtime of code. -0.1 7.9/8
Akshay-Rohatgi commented 3 years ago

@PrishaMaiti

  1. Very good explanation of the content covered in the Collegeboard examples. Then showing very specific examples that corresponded with that previously explained topic.
  2. Was very professional, very unique to do the video presentation using a slides presentation.
  3. Some aspects of tour of code when explaining parts of code that corresponded with CB topics.
  4. Maybe show runtime or connection to PBL. -0.25

7.75/8

nolanplatt commented 3 years ago

@Akshay-Rohatgi

  1. Very energetic, very well prepared. You seemed genuinely interested in the topic and it helped communicate your code and help the audience understand the tangible code. During 1:00 -> 1:10, I enjoyed how you were highlighting blocks/lines of code as you explained the code in descending order, which helps the viewer understand and comprehend the code, rather than just explaining technical terms that the audience might not understand. Very helpful.
  2. During 2:00 -> 2:10 in your video, I liked how you created a connection to the College Board units by pointing out each individual section and explaining how it connects/corresponds to the code you wrote (both Unit 5 and Unit 9). Akshay also points out how both units connect to his Geometric Algorithm minilab, which visualizes the true connection he was able to make with the College Board units, emphasizing understanding of the respective College Board units.
  3. I really enjoyed the runtime look at grayscaling the image at approximately timestamp 1:45 in the video. Along with his tour of the code, Akshay's ability to show a successful runtime of the project displays his understanding of not only the respective College Board units, but outside knowledge in APIs and frontend web development. Very impressive.
  4. One improvement that I think could be added is showing some quiz questions from the respective College Board units. Although you provided a rundown of the College Board units in correlation to your projects, I think it would really emphasize your extensive knowledge by pointing out and explaining quiz questions (as explained in the Canvas assignment). But, this add-on was not necessary, hence I do not think taking points off is needed - just merely a suggestion.

Overall, great job. I strongly suggest full credit (8/8), as explained in my thorough notes (three improvements, one suggestion) concerning Akshay's Individual Final 1 video.

nolanplatt commented 3 years ago

@SamiDeshatty

No submission, but communicated that she had internet issues. Will update three improvements + one suggestion once video is provided.

  1. N/A (awaiting video)
  2. N/A (awaiting video)
  3. N/A (awaiting video)
  4. N/A (awaiting video)
nolanplatt commented 3 years ago

@PrishaMaiti

  1. Displayed extremely high levels of organization. Very sophisticated. Clearly, high levels of detail went into presentation. Prisha utilized tangible links and clickable text in her presentation in order to show the code in real time and an easy fashion, creating zero distraction for the audience and really engaging them as well. For example, at timestamp 1:30 Prisha included both a snippet of the corresponding code and a tangible link for reference, which she clicked on and scrolled down to show a fetch method of the Spotify API. This was very impressive, great job in making it very easy for the audience to understand not only the code but the connection to the College Board topics.
  2. Very strong emphasis on College Board units. Prisha obviously put a lot of effort into deeply researching and studying the corresponding College Board units. This was made extremely clear to the audience and her efforts are hard to doubt. To illustrate, from timestamp 0:16 all the way until timestamp 0:46, Prisha gave a quick rundown/summary of College Board units five and nine, covering the respective content in a short period of time whilst still being very informative.
  3. I really liked how Prisha communicated and the level of professionalism she maintained throughout the entirety of the video. It really emphasized her devotion as well as the nature of the project. Not only did it help me retain focus all throughout the video, but it really made me interested in the topics she was covering and the code that she wrote, respectively. This can be seen all throughout the video (timestamp 0:00 to the end, timestamp 3:20).
  4. As you can see, Prisha has very few flaws. The only thing I would suggest is actually showing College Board's units on the website itself, along with showing quiz questions and showing the tangible units. This would really help out the audience understand the content. Moreover, I suggest focusing a little bit more time on runtime. The lack of runtime can cause the audience to fail to understand how the code functions in realtime, rather than them just seeing the code on the GitHub page. Due to this, I recommend taking off 0.25 points (in accordance with Mr. Mortensen's rubric).

All in all, I believe Prisha did a fantastic job, with the only recommendation being focusing more on runtime, showing units on College Board on its website, and showing quiz questions. Due to this, I recommend a score of 7.75/8 (-0.25).

nolanplatt commented 3 years ago

@alvinzhengq

  1. Very high level of detail on the tangible code. Alvin showed a very good understanding of the code infrastructure, structure, and how it works in general. It was extremely obvious that he not only wrote the code efficiently, but he understood it completely and fluently. He did not skip a single thing or leave something up in the air. If the code was there, he explained it. I honestly think I have a complete understanding of all the code he brought up because of the extreme detail. Regardless, this was very helpful in ensuring the audience, regardless of technological background, had a fluent and complete understanding of the code. Very well done.
  2. During the time period surrounding the timestamp of 1:33 all the way up until the end of the video, timestamp 3:29, Alvin explained his RGB minilab. By highlighting different methods and explaining how different classes, methods, and objects correlate to each other, Alvin was able to directly explain the code in a highly professional, understanding, and complete manner. This was very helpful to not only myself, but I am sure that it was helpful to my group members and anyone else who views it.
  3. Moreover, Alvin mentioned the College Board units/chapters that corresponded and related to the actual tangible code in his two mentioned projects. This was very helpful in understanding the relevancy of the code and how it correlated to the College Board units. Specifically, Alvin mentioned that his project correlated to Units 5 and 9 of the AP curriculum units at roughly (~) timestamp 1:49. This was helpful as Alvin appealed directly to the core curriculum of AP Computer Science A, ensuring the audience knows that Alvin has an understanding of not only College Board topics but extensive knowledge in Java/HTML as well. Very impressive.
  4. After I watched the video, I think that one improvement could be showing the runtime of the two projects and also showing tangible objects from College Board's core curriculum as well, such as (but not limited to) quiz questions, unit videos, etc. That would help make sure the viewer understands the connection between the code and the College Board curriculum. Also, I think showing the runtime (e.g. code in action) would assist in actually showing what the code is doing, rather than how it looks like in an IDE. Regardless, great job overall.

After taking a deep analysis at Alvin's Individual Final 1, I believe that he deserves full credit (8/8). Now, I understand that Alvin excluded a runtime look and/or a deep explanation of the related College Board topics, but I think that his extreme explanations of the code and ensuring the audience understands it shows superior understanding of the corresponding topics.

Akshay-Rohatgi commented 3 years ago

@nolanplatt

  1. Very well-done video, shows a solid understanding of what was to be learned during the trimester.
  2. Explained units in a unique way, embedding sample questions into an already sophisticated presentation.
  3. Code at runtime was also shown, allowing the viewer to visually see the progress Nolan has made and the things he's built with knowledge from the CB units.
  4. The video could have been slightly shorter to fit the guidelines, however, the longer video was still fully relevant in every way. 8/8
PrishaMaiti commented 3 years ago

@alvinzhengq

  1. Very detailed PBL explanation of the first topic. I like how you used the example of the Algorithm Extend Lab to demonstrate how you applied loops and recursion (Units 4 and 10).
  2. I like how you used the backend of the RGB Lab as an example of how you implemented knowledge of Units 5 and 9.
  3. You used a firm and tone throughout the presentation which made the presentation very professional
  4. You could have used something like your journal or a Google Slides presentation to support all the work you have shown on IntelliJ Based on this, I would recommend giving Alvin a score of 7.75/8 as he did a great job on explaining everything and was very well prepared, but he could have had more energy when presenting as well as the whole video more user-friendly with something like his journal or a Google Slides presentation
PrishaMaiti commented 3 years ago

@Akshay-Rohatgi

  1. I love that you gave a quick recap of each of the units, so that you could give yourself more time to focus on the PBL portion of the topic.
  2. Very detailed explanation of the code for ASCII.java
  3. Great job showing the runtime of all the code that you used in the video
  4. Only thing I would suggest is using quiz questions for Units 5 and 9 to make the topic more understandable for the audience Overall, I think Akshay did a great job and I would give him an 8/8.
PrishaMaiti commented 3 years ago

@nolanplatt

  1. I love that you used a Google Slides presentation to back up the content of your video and that at the beginning of the presentation, you put a reflection of what you have learned throughout the trimester
  2. Great PBL examples of each topic. The custom 2D Array generator with model viewer in particular shows originality and creativity.
  3. I like that you used quiz questions from College Board for each topic to demonstrate a proficient understanding of the units.
  4. Maybe try to cut down on some information, as you went over a minute longer than the maximum video duration given in the instructions of the final Nolan did an amazing job bringing in all requirements of the presentation and had proper energy when presenting. Even though he went way overtime, I recommend giving him a full 8/8
jm1021 commented 3 years ago

@nolanplatt

Glows. Introduction and purpose is very powerful. I fully understand where you are going. Also, you highlighted key things you will incorporate in demo. Mapping of items and even to specific questions is amazing. Grows. Demo is high quality, should of hit on some of the “clean” points a bit more. Video is much longer than requirement -.2. Second demo description run and purpose was a little confusing.

alvinzhengq commented 3 years ago

@nolanplatt

  1. Nice job pulling test questions from past MCs to demonstrate your topics.
  2. Liked how you showed the runtime of the minilabs/code you were talking about, really helps viewers understand what you are describing.
  3. Great explanation of your code, easy to understand.
  4. Video length is longer than the 3:15 minute limit, maybe work on faster and more concise explanations.
Akshay-Rohatgi commented 3 years ago

@SamiDeshatty

alvinzhengq commented 3 years ago

@SamiDeshatty

  1. Very aesthetic presentation, helps keep attention on your presentation.
  2. Great job pulling code examples from the project to explain your topics.
  3. Great explanations of your code, shows full understanding of the topic.
  4. I don't think your recording software recorded the runtime of the code, so perhaps look over your video after recording to ensure everything got captured.
SamiDeshatty commented 3 years ago

@nolanplatt

Points: 1.0 for CB to PBL connection, very well versed in topic .75 for Tour of Code I think showing more of the runtime/backend code would be nice .9 for aesthetics. Your presentation and overview in the introduction was very well done and caught the attention of the watcher very well -0.1 for overtime

Overall 7.2/8

PrishaMaiti commented 3 years ago

@SamiDeshatty

  1. I like how you used a presentation along with screenshots of the different code segments to go along with it as your PBL examples.
  2. Your explanation of the Iteration Recap was very clear and I was able to understand it as if I didn't know anything about iteration
  3. At time 2:29 in the video, I like how you used captions for each of the code screenshots to label each of the different types of iterations
  4. Maybe in order to not go overtime, you could have given the unit recaps and simultaneously shown the PBL code, while also providing the runtimes Overall, I think Sami did a great job but could have shown the runtime to show that the code works as intended as well as found an innovative way to not go way over the maximum duration in the requirements of 3:15 minutes. I would give her a 7.75/8
VarnitGupta24 commented 3 years ago

@alvinzhengq

  1. After reviewing Alvin's video, it was clear that his understanding of the code was very high, and he is very experienced in this field. It was great how he used tangibles from his code to further prove his understanding of the code. To be specific, he was very comfortable speaking on his code and he had a lot of confidence which showed his understanding was great.

  2. Alvin's explanation and walkthrough for his RGB Minilab. His explanations were very thorough and detailed, and he highlighted multiple methods, variables and concepts in the code. It was a great explanation and I learned a lot from just watching Alvin's video.

  3. Alvin then went to relate his code to 2 college board topics, Unit 5 and 9. He used 2 tangibles to help provide evidence and visual learning to the explanation. It was a great explanation and the relation to his learning was great.

Overall + improvements

In all honesty, Alvin's video was great and the explanations were thorough, and his tangibles provided great support to his explanations of code. He had great confidence, and was not stuttering throughout the video. I honestly do not have any improvements because this video gave me the impression that Alvin has a very high level of understanding of code, both backend and frontend, and I can see him having a bright future in Computer Science.

grade - 6/6

jm1021 commented 3 years ago

@alvinzhengq

great CLASS modeling example (3 levels in RGB), using ALGO lab template for, while, recursion

jm1021 commented 3 years ago

@Akshay-Rohatgi

  1. Discussed lab of creating ASCII art. Algorithm looked more efficient than most as he was doing thing in less steps (less for loops). Demo looked great. Two things to improve on a.) a better introduction b.) more discussion of Control and VIew and just hit on high points of code. Too much mouse highlights and scrolling. 2.) Discussed Geometric sequence using Classes. Nothing really stood out here, like 1st example. Highlighted some reuse of attributes from parent. Shared runtime.

In both situations, it seemed like we jumped into code. Since this is formal presentation you should be looking for "Hook" or "Engagement", this was not provided.

5.25/6

Comments are just OK. not real passion or energy that I could detect.

1.75/2

jm1021 commented 3 years ago

@SamiDeshatty

Strong preparation and association with CB units as requested. I saw simple examples and mini lab examples. All of this was very clear and educational. I have been giving 5.5/6 for this type of presentation.

Improvements for me would be to see team PBL vs just mini Lab usage. Also, in this presentation an example of association seen in CB might have been a little better than examples provided. Though, this is very good work.

Regarding comments, not super strong probably would award 1.75/2, but I am taking another .25 as I believe this came in late and one of the comments above indicated such.