cpt project

[ellierozen]

name	key commits	video	individual ticket
Ellie	cdec8b4a984e569af315f42d98ebe0f07a146ee0 (https://github.com/ellierozen/csp2/commit/b60fe4006eee636f82283221f1793d20aa7d5194)	Video	Ticket
Katelyn	27b9e413e987125a96b653a89323b71ce448791b bf5bc511d2bf54e2a0fabf3a3f087ac394b53490	Video	Ticket
Ishraq	cb339c37fc05e93fbc36886ce3f005af920ad723	Video From 0:00-0:25 and 2:11-3:51	Ticket
Taj	cb339c37fc05e93fbc36886ce3f005af920ad723	Video	Ticket

[Ishraqh1]

Group Review Ticket:

2.1 Binary Video Notes:

• Binary is a number system that uses two digits
  • 1. On
  • 0. Off
• Bit: Represents the smallest data in computing
• Byte: Group of 8 bits
• Abstraction reduces complexity and allows us to focus on the main issue
• Analog allows us to represent data by a continuous physical variable
• Overflow Error: Calculation error if the number is larger than what it’s allowed to store
• The computer’s available memory can be ideal where the range of numbers allowed is limited by the available memory

I took these notes before our team began their project. These notes were from the AP College Board Video which went over information about binary that was important for us to learn for the AP Exam. We went over information about Over flow error which was important for our understanding of the ranges which we used in our project.

Katelyn and Ellie Commit:

We focused on the js code for our second feature. Using the performBinaryAddition function this code takes two binary numbers and converts them to decimal, adds them up, and then converts them back to binary for the output. The code specifies that the input should be treated as a binary number.

Ishraq and Taj Commit:

This was one of our main commits. This commit creates a table at the top of the website that shows a +/- that shows how far each value is from the actual answer. It actually bolds the text when it is right and when it's wrong.

What our groups can do better for next time:

Taj and I had some problems with communication. Sometimes, we would commit things while working on the file at the same time which we couldn't do. Next time, we need to be clearer about working on the same pace and working off each other in terms of just working separately. For Katelyn and Ellie, we could have made our feature more visually appealing. Maybe next time we could add more images. A problem we had with the logic gate feature was finding images for the light bulb that looked similar. When the light turned on it didn't look very cohesive.

[nikkihekmat]

Individual Review "Nikki Hekmat" grading "Ellie Rozenkrants"

• [x] Individual should show that they were key contributor and example to team. This includes their participation in ideas, plans, creating individual issues, providing code commits to project, crossover grading participation, being on task and positive example in the classroom.

Individuals Video, Issue(s), Commits(s)

• [x] Video in CPT caption style , includes Web demo of key contribution to project, 1 minute
• [x] Issue(s) that show plans/progress to team objectives
• [x] Highlights of key commit(s) in Issues, summarizes code contributions

• [x] Review GitHub analytics for key commits in each weeks during the project, shows consistent participation for 3 weeks

  Per check.
  0.9 above and beyond.

  Freeform comment.

• strong role in project evident
• significant code developed
• captions explained content well
• demoed part in project well; nothing was unclear
• project very well developed overall, showed multiple elements of binary logic; went above and beyond to make it presentable
• in the future it might have looked better for the images of the lightbulbs to have matched, or for there to have been a feature for the lightbulb to turn on and off rather than using images to show the change

[Taj-L-M]

Taj Masum Reveiw ticket

+/- 2

+/- 4

+/- 6

+/- 8

Loading...

Enter your guess (a binary number): Check Number

I mostly made a lot of functions for our project mainly key/side features to better our program

SOME KEY FEATURES I MADE: 3 attempts feature Number range Small bits of styling How close or how far you are if you are right or wrong Tells you what the correct number is Binary logic ETC

Overall we could improve and add even more features to this. My partner did his part and everything we wanted to do but ik we can add more. There is always room for improvement.

Per check. 0.55 not attempted/no check 0.7 attempted, incomplete, but some runtime 0.8 mastery and runtime 0.9 above and beyond.

Freeform comment. Provide positivies and growth summary. Justify or comment on final score. Be sure to provide extra details on anything below 0.7 average or above 0.8.

[eunseolim123]

Individual Review Eunseo Lim grading Katelyn Chen

• [x] Individual should show that they were key contributor and example to team. This includes their participation in ideas, plans, creating individual issues, providing code commits to project, crossover grading participation, being on task and positive example in the classroom.

Individuals Video, Issue(s), Commits(s)

• [x] Video in CPT caption style , includes Web demo of key contribution to project, 1 minute
• [x] Issue(s) that show plans/progress to team objectives
• [x] Highlights of key commit(s) in Issues, summarizes code contributions

• [x] Review GitHub analytics for key commits in each weeks during the project, shows consistent participation for 3 weeks

  Per check.
  0.55 not attempted/no check 0.7 attempted, incomplete, but some runtime 0.8 mastery and runtime 0.9 above and beyond.

FINAL SCORE: 0.9

Freeform comment.
Clear usage of binary and logic gates, great demonstration of project. I liked that there were multiple aspects that compiled into the final product and the teamwork between members was very apparent. Knowledge was demonstrated on script code for binary addition, contribution was clear. Something that could be improved is the visual aspect - making the product more visually appealing.

[dino596]

Team Review Arthur grading Katelyn

• [x] The team should have a Web Pages that teach: Binary, Data, Data Structures, Data Abstraction.

Team Review ticket containing key Team and individual contributions

• [x] Growth/Accomplishments in work is according to historical Team Plan, or they show revisions to plan according to work
• [x] Short falls/Improvement that could be made in Work or Team Plan, team highlights next steps or improvements that could be made
• [x] Showing key accomplishments according to requirement in Frontend such as Binary Math, ASCII, Unicode, Color Codes, Logic Gates, etc.

• [x] Showing key user interaction and learning(s). For instance how you visualized Algorithms, Data, Data Structures. Or, how you provided response and Feedback to user on their success in learning.

  Per check.
  0.55 not attempted/no check 0.7 attempted, incoomplete, but some runtime 0.8 mastery and runtime 0.9 above and beyond.

  Freeform comment.
  Provide positivies and growth summary.
  Justify or comment on final score.
  Be sure to provide extra details on anything below 0.7 average or above 0.8.

Provided three different pages. They had a number guesser in binary, which demonstrated their understanding of binary. Also included a program that would take two inputs and give an output based on the selected logic gate. The program had many choices for logic gates, including AND, OR, NOR, XOR, NAND, XNOR. This showed that they had understanding of how logic gates work. They also incorporated an addition program that takes two binary numbers and gives the sum of the two provided values, showing their ability to incorporate binary by applying math. All of the programs are not only functional, but have well-thought-out styling that matches the purpose of their programs. This demonstrates their understanding of styling with CSS and not just the scripting with Javascript. The team showed that they could work together cohesively to achieve the requirements.

Final Score: 0.9

[Arushi-maker]

Individual Review Arushi Pandey grading Ellie Rozenkrants

Individual should show that they were key contributor and example to team. This includes their participation in ideas, plans, creating individual issues, providing code commits to project, crossover grading participation, being on task and positive example in the classroom. Individuals Video, Issue(s), Commits(s)

Video in CPT caption style , includes Web demo of key contribution to project, 1 minute Issue(s) that show plans/progress to team objectives Highlights of key commit(s) in Issues, summarizes code contributions Review GitHub analytics for key commits in each weeks during the project, shows consistent participation for 3 weeks Per check. 0.55 not attempted/no check 0.7 attempted, incomplete, but some runtime 0.8 mastery and runtime 0.9 above and beyond.

FINAL SCORE: 0.9

Freeform comment.

Good video that showed Ellie's contribution to the logic gate. Made the logic gate use lightbulbs; on light shows when output is 1 and off is when output is 0. Did that same process for 6 different logic gates. One of her main commits was calculating output function.

[sumedhaKl]

Individual Review Sumedha grading Ishraq

Individual should show that they were key contributor and example to team. This includes their participation in ideas, plans, creating individual issues, providing code commits to project, crossover grading participation, being on task and positive example in the classroom. Individuals Issue(s), Commits(s)

Issue(s) that show plans/progress to team objectives Highlights of key commit(s) in Issues, summarizes code contributions Review GitHub analytics for key commits in each weeks during the project, shows consistent participation for 3 weeks Per check. 0.9 above and beyond.

I gave Ishraq a 0.9. He showed all of his code and explained it well enough to show how to modify and use information from AP College Board Video and created the +/- technology that was interesting.

[PatrickHastings2]

Individual Review "Patrick " grading "Ishraq"

• [x] Individual should show that they were key contributor and example to team. This includes their participation in ideas, plans, creating individual issues, providing code commits to project, crossover grading participation, being on task and positive example in the classroom.

Individuals Video, Issue(s), Commits(s)

• [x] Video in CPT caption style , includes Web demo of key contribution to project, 1 minute
• [x] Issue(s) that show plans/progress to team objectives
• [x] Highlights of key commit(s) in Issues, summarizes code contributions

• [x] Review GitHub analytics for key commits in each weeks during the project, shows consistent participation for 3 weeks

  Per check.
  0.55 not attempted/no check 0.7 attempted, incoomplete, but some runtime 0.8 mastery and runtime 0.9 above and beyond.

Grade: .9

Freeform comment.
Provide positives and growth summary.
Justify or comment on final score.
Be sure to provide extra details on anything below 0.7 average or above 0.8.

It was clear that this student was main contributor to project. Displayed large amount of substantial commits, and explained contribution and role in the project development. Focused on the main algorithms for determining if the player was hot or cold to 1-16 for the number guessing game.

[AnanyaAsudani]

Individual Review Ananya Asudani grading Taj Masum Reveiw ticket

Individual should show that they were key contributor and example to team. This includes their participation in ideas, plans, creating individual issues, providing code commits to project, crossover grading participation, being on task and positive example in the classroom. Individuals Video, Issue(s), Commits(s)

Video in CPT caption style , includes Web demo of key contribution to project, 1 minute Issue(s) that show plans/progress to team objectives Highlights of key commit(s) in Issues, summarizes code contributions Review GitHub analytics for key commits in each weeks during the project, shows consistent participation for 3 weeks Per check. 0.55 not attempted/no check 0.7 attempted, incomplete, but some runtime 0.8 mastery and runtime 0.9 above and beyond.

FINAL SCORE: 0.9

Freeform comment.

Good and thorough code explains binary well.

[sumedhaKl]

Individual Review "Sumedha" grading "Katelyn"

Individual should show that they were key contributor and example to team. This includes their participation in ideas, plans, creating individual issues, providing code commits to project, crossover grading participation, being on task and positive example in the classroom. Individuals Issue(s), Commits(s)

Issue(s) that show plans/progress to team objectives Highlights of key commit(s) in Issues, summarizes code contributions Review GitHub analytics for key commits in each weeks during the project, shows consistent participation for 3 weeks Per check. 0.9 above and beyond.

Freeform comment. I gave Katelyn a 0.9. She was able to explain the code very well as she explained how she converted binary to decimal, added them up, and vice versa. She worked on conversions and also turned lights on in logic gates. I like how she was able to incorporate addition in binary as a hack and clearly write out all the code to turn the lights on in logic gates using switches.

[Priya0726]

Team Review "Scrum Master A" grading "Scrum Master B"

• [+] The team should have a Web Pages that teach: Binary, Data, Data Structures, Data Abstraction.

Team Review ticket containing key Team and individual contributions

• [+] Growth/Accomplishments in work is according to historical Team Plan, or they show revisions to plan according to work
• [+] Short falls/Improvement that could be made in Work or Team Plan, team highlights next steps or improvements that could be made
• [+] Showing key accomplishments according to requirement in Frontend such as Binary Math, ASCII, Unicode, Color Codes, Logic Gates, etc.

• [+] Showing key user interaction and learning(s). For instance how you visualized Algorithms, Data, Data Structures. Or, how you provided response and Feedback to user on their success in learning.

  Per check.
  0.55 not attempted/no check 0.7 attempted, incomplete, but some runtime 0.8 mastery and runtime 0.9 above and beyond.

  Freeform comment: 0.9 Nice execution of features, shows a lot of effort put into the final result. Gave a nice explanation of the code used, showing understanding of the project. Also gave examples of how they wanted to make the project better, for the final grade, through improvisations to the binary features they are so far.

[dino596]

Individual Review Arthur grading Taj

• [x] Individual should show that they were key contributor and example to team. This includes their participation in ideas, plans, creating individual issues, providing code commits to project, crossover grading participation, being on task and positive example in the classroom.

Individuals Video, Issue(s), Commits(s)

• [x] Video in CPT caption style , includes Web demo of key contribution to project, 1 minute
• [x] Issue(s) that show plans/progress to team objectives
• [x] Highlights of key commit(s) in Issues, summarizes code contributions

• [x] Review GitHub analytics for key commits in each weeks during the project, shows consistent participation for 3 weeks

  Per check.
  0.55 not attempted/no check 0.7 attempted, incoomplete, but some runtime 0.8 mastery and runtime 0.9 above and beyond.

  Freeform comment.
  Provide positivies and growth summary.
  Justify or comment on final score.
  Be sure to provide extra details on anything below 0.7 average or above 0.8.

Showed that they had passion for their project and had a clear direction of where to go next to further expand on their project. Demostrated understanding of binary and conditional statements by making a guessing game in binary. Also showed good teamwork with partner, because they helped each other.

Final Score: 0.9