CSA Team Teach Grading

[jm1021]

Have a Team Meeting. Review instruction in canvas. Leave comment below with information as follows.

P1: SASS Team

Self Evaluation John Doe 0.9, Jan Doe 0.95, Arnold Schwarzenegger 0.7

• John did lesson intro and reviewed and tested remainder of lesson, main speaker
• Jane did all the SASS coding, came up with lesson body, came up with hacks
• Arnold participated in grading only

Student Grades <link to hacks/scores>

[vardaansinha]

P1: SASS

Self Evaluation

Nikhil 0.9, Vishnu A 0.9, Vardaan S 0.9, Anthony B 0.9, Raunak M 0.9, Ryan M 0.9

• Vishnu worked on the introduction to SASS and the responsive design with SASS (flexbox and grid integration), included sufficient code examples for the lesson and knew the content really well. Vishnu also helped with grading students.

• Nikhil worked on advanced SASS mechanisms (extending and inheritance) and responsive design with SASS in terms of mixins, custom breakpoint mixins, and image and media handling. Nikhil did a good job creating demos especially for the responsive design part of the lesson. He also helped grade students.

• Vardaan worked on the introduction to SASS section in terms of discussing the role of SASS in design, and he also worked on customizing styles with SASS with partials and modular styling. He also introduced variables in SASS. He did a good job coming up with a lot of code snippets to help explain the concepts. He also helped with grading and organization of the team, along with coming up with overall hacks.

• Anthony worked on explaining SASS scripting and advanced functions as well as customizing styles with SASS using nesting techniques. Anthony worked a lot on the lesson and made sure to have code demonstrations to supplement the blogs. He also helped with grading and evolving team plans, along with coming up with overall hacks.

• Raunak worked on SASS scripting and advanced functions with Anthony and helped Nikhil with the extending and inheritance part of the lesson. He also helped organize the team to help finish grade all the students on time and helped grade hacks.

• Ryan worked on error handling and debugging in SASS and helped come up with popcorn hacks + overall hacks for his part of the lesson. He helped grade an equal amount as everyone else and was a good team member.

STUDENT GRADING SPREADSHEET: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1D30yQbwJ26zZMWFqf16rssnjfFjk__jx1-WZ1rn6-OM/edit#gid=0

[drewreed2005]

P1: SQL, HashMaps Team

Self Evaluation Drew Reed 1.0, AJ Ruiz 0.8, Haseeb Beg 0.9, Ekam Kaire 0.9, Tirth Thakkar 0.95, Sreeja Gangapuram 0.85

• Drew made the whole SQL section of the lesson, including the modified backend repository used for demonstration, and presented on the second half of that section that covered Many-to-Many and JSONB. Drew graded 5 students and reached out to students who hadn't submitted.
• Haseeb and AJ worked together on the Collections section. Haseeb made the popcorn hacks in the section. Haseeb ended up presenting on the first part of the SQL section because it ended up being a longer section. He graded four students.
• AJ contributed to and presented on the Collections section, which Haseeb also worked on. AJ graded four students and reached out to clarify hack details and errors in lessons.
• Ekam created and presented on the HashMaps section of the lesson. She graded three students and also played a role in reaching out to students who hadn't submitted in time.
• Tirth made the whole HashSets section, including the popcorn hacks related to it. He also presented on this section. Tirth graded four people and played an active role in reaching out to people who hadn't submitted their blogs in time.
• Sreeja wrote a few popcorn hacks for sections throughout the blog. Some did not make it into the final lesson because of build errors in her commits. She presented for the HashSets section. Sreeja graded four people and reached out to non-submissions.

Student Grades

[vivianknee]

P1: JWT Team

Self Evaluation

Vivian Ni 0.95, Aliya Tang 0.95, Grace Wang 0.95, Emma Shen 0.95, Kevin Du 0.75, Isabelle G 0.70

• Vivian created the lesson structure and spoke for the postman testing portion of the lesson. Created diagrams on the JWT and API process and explained the process during the lesson. She also came up with one hack.

• Aliya contributed a lot to the lesson plan. She wrote and spoke about JWT implementation security and different types of keys (public, private, asymmetric, symmetric). She created some popcorn hacks for her section.

• Grace contributed a lot to the lesson plan. She spoke and wrote the portion on the structure of a JWT token. She also created some popcorn hacks throughout the lesson.

• Emma contributed a lot to the lesson plan, writing up the portion on JWT files. She gave a very detailed speech on her part of the lesson and came up with the MC hack

• Kevin participated in the majority of grading and some speaking

• Isabelle participated in grading and speaking only

Link to Student Grades

[Pitsco]

P1: Java Exploits and Cybersecurity

Self Evaluation

David Vasilev, Alexander Lu, Ethan Zhao, Jishnu Singiresu, Derrick Huang, Kaiden Do

• David Vasilev (0.95): Created the TLS/TCP handshake section with the ways that hackers can steal your information. Created the hacks and cooresponding popcorn hacks for the lesson with the help of others in the group. Used live demonstrations of the concepts, using prior nkowledge of network sniffing and cyber security.

• Alex (0.95): Alexander worked on all the code, analogies, and diagrams for the SQL injects lesson. He incorporated background knowledge from his prior competition expereinces to enhance the lesson as well. He was also a major presenter during the lesson with at least 10 minutes of lecturing. Finally, he also helped with the grading process.

• Ethan (0.95): Ethan contributed the fake phishing site as well as stuff on the dotenv. He also contributed to the rest of the group, educating and refining the lesson based off of prior experience in the field of cybersecurity. During presentation, he presented a large portion including dotenv and common cybersecurity attacks. As for grading, he graded 4 people diligently."

• Jishnu (0.95), Jishnu contributed to the CORS and Nginx section and used many good examples that we have worked with in class and even showed how to modify it, making his lesson a guide for future reference. As far as grading goes,he graded an equal number of people"

• Derrick (0.90): Derrick contributed to the XSS section of the overall lesson. His lesson was very detailed with multiple images to help comprehension of the topic, with popcorn hacks. He also had a equal contributino to speaking. He also graded an equal amount of people.

• Kaiden (0.9): Kaiden made the whole DotEnv lesson. Furthermore, he created hacks and popcorn hacks for the DotEnv lesson. Additionally, he equally contributed in the grading of the hacks.

Student Grades

[TayKimmy]

P1 JQuery and CRUD:

---

Self Evaluation:	Name	Grade	Reason
Finn	0.9	Created parts of the JQuery lesson and presented it. Graded 3 people.
Emaad	0.92	Combined all the different hacks into one notebook. Wrote the section for DOM and Event Handling, and did most of the speaking for those sections as well. Graded 5 people.
Ethan T.	0.9	Helped draft and write parts for the JQuery overview as well as popcorn hacks. Also presented those parts and Event Handling. Graded 5 people.
Theo	0.91	Made all the hacks for the lesson. Also created parts of the CRUD lesson about the user data and the table. Graded 6 people.
Justin	0.89	Created and presented the CRUD section. Made popcorn hacks for that part of the lesson and went over it as well. Only graded 1 person.
Tay	0.9	Contributed to the different hacks - fixing errors - and made the code for the movie API that showed using CRUD operations and JQuery. Graded 5 people.

Student Grades

[lunaiwa]

P3 JWT:

Self Evaluation:

Team Member	Grade	Explanation
Varaprasad	0.94	Varaprasad did thorough research that provided detail and sound information to our lesson, graded 4 hacks
Tanay	0.91	Without Tanay, we wouldn't have had sound information or a good presentation overall, spoke well. His work on presenting the pros and cons really helped tie a crucial part of our lesson together, graded 4 hacks
Rachit	0.93	Rachit's live demo was vital to our lesson, as it provided it with a hands-on real application of what we were teaching, making the lesson much better and more engaging, graded 7 hacks
Tanisha	0.92	Tanisha and Luna's work on the overall structure of the first half of the lesson really made the information and teaching of JWT so much better, made student notebook, graded 4 hacks
Luna	0.92	Tanisha and Luna's work on the overall structure of the first half of the lesson really made the information and teaching of JWT so much better, made student notebook, graded 4 hacks
Paaras	0.9	Created 'What happens when you aren't logged in' section in lesson, made hacks for said section, spoke throughly and helped students understand, graded 4 hacks

Student Grades:

[Krishiv111]

Period 3 Thymeleaf

Name	Grade	Reason
Adi	0.95	Worked on the live presentation collaborating with team and organized workflow of the lesson and had many key contributions: Graded 4 People
Raymond	0.94	Key contributor on the backend collaborating with Adi in addition he also helped with organizing lesson and was a good collaborator. Graded 4 people.
Krishiv	0.9	Help integrate lesson with java and created the model class and taught the basics of thymleaf in collaboration with team Graded 5 people.
Parav	0.9	Began the lesson and talked about the implementation of Spring within HTML helped organization of grading. Graded 5 People
Rohin	0.9	Created thymeleaf syntaxing and helped create hacks graded 3 people and was a good collaborator
Akshat	0.9	Collaborated with Rohin on the spring boot auto configuration, graded 4 people

Link to Spreadsheet with Grades

[Toby-Leeder]

Name	Grade	Reason
Toby	0.93	Updated old hacks and created new hacks, added section about converting SASS to CSS, graded 4 people.
Aiden	0.9	Updated operators and conditional statements, graded 4 people.
Edwin	0.91	Fixed Jekyll errors/frontmatter, updated modular SCSS, graded 6 people.
Yuri	0.92	Found old lesson to base new lesson on, updated CSS/SCSS definitions and variables, graded 2 people.
Vinay	0.92	Created popcorn hacks, updated functions, graded 4 people.
Ishi	0.9	Updated mixins and inheritance, graded 4 people.

Lesson Grades

[STG-7]

Period 3: HashMap

Self Evaluation Shaurya - 0.97 Shivansh - 0.94 James - 0.90 Aaron Rubin - 0.8,
Haoxuan - 0.85 Quinn - 0.85

---

• Shaurya: I made the Hashmap part of the lesson with Shivansh. I created multiple popcorn HACKS including the quiz and HACKS. I compiled everyone's work together, led group meetings, and made the notebook. Despite, difficulties due to absencies within the group, I believe I did a good job keeping the group together and on track. Finally, I graded 8 people and managed the grading document as well.
• Shivansh: I made the Hashmap part of the lesson with Shaurya. I created the lessons and the popcorn HACKS for the Creating HashMap in Java, Methods in HashMap, and Traversing through HashMap. I also introduced a good interaction with the students as I gave an opportunity for a student to receive extra credit if they found out a different way to traverse through the HashMap than the way that I provided. Graded 4 people.
• James: I made the description of the basic collection type and talks about the sqlite ID and other types such as ManyToOne and OneToMany, but actually I was cut. Grade 3 people
• Aaron: I made the intro to java collections and SQL. Although I was a bit off-topic so I think I should be marked off for it. missed the actual presentation. Graded 3 people.
• Haoxuan: I made the explanation for the complex use of collections, although my. content wasn't exactly on point, but I did talk somewhat during the representation, although not that much. Graded 3 People
• Quinn: I made the explanation for the complex use of collections and didn't focus on the content specific to the lesson requirements. Although the content was not exactly what Mr. Mortensen wanted it was still on the topic and was good work and well planed. Regardless of the fact that our lesson was cut short, I did participate and spoke the majority of my part. Graded 3 People

---

Hashmap FINAL GRADING

[Soham360]

Name	Grade	Comment
Soham	0.92	For the student lesson, Soham worked on the Applying CRUD to Tables section and explained the 4 aspects crud in code form. He also created 2 functional examples that demonstrated all aspects of CRUD using jQuery.
Aniket	0.92	Aniket worked diligently with the rest of the team to help research their parts and make their lesson, and also did lots his own research for his topic (Applying jQuery with CRUD). Had lots of good examples and popcorn hacks and helped come up with the overarching final hack. He graded on time and provided students with proper feedback based on their submissions.
Mati	0.85	i worked with sherys on the ux. one thing that we could have done better is to comunicate more, since we did our parts individualy and glued our portion togather and called it a day, but one benefit from this was that we chose the strongest example that which got our point across to the people in the room while doing the lesson.
Colin	0.92	Colin dedicated himself to the latter half of the Jquery lesson, outlining how to make requests with jQuery, giving details on animations and most importantly JQuerys connection to PBL and the tables. In addition, Colin was a team player who contributed to the outline of the entire lesson. He also contributed to the grading of the hacks.
Orlando	0.95	For the student lesson I worked on the first jQuery part alongside Colin who worked on the second part, where I introduced the basics of jQuery and talked about aspects of jQuery such as animation and styling implications. After finishing, I waited for everyone else to finish their parts and combined the 3 notebooks into one notebook.
Shreyas	0.83	For the student lesson I worked on the UX second part along with Mati, who worked on the first part. In the lesson, I introduced the finer details of UX management and how UX has changed over time.

Link to Grades