Team Review Ticket: Retrospective Grading, CSA Mini Project

[vardaansinha]

TEAM CROSSOVER TABLE:

Crossover Score	Runtime	Plan	GitHub	Analytics	Team Video
0.85	https://vardaansinha.github.io/miniprojectfrontend/	https://vishnuaravind12.github.io/vishnu/2023/11/15/Ideation.html, https://github.com/users/vardaansinha/projects/6	https://github.com/raunak2007/analysis-backend, https://github.com/vardaansinha/miniprojectfrontend	https://github.com/raunak2007/analysis-backend/graphs/contributors, https://github.com/vardaansinha/miniprojectfrontend/graphs/contributors	https://drive.google.com/file/d/14Zani0iqAKB8wIYTEiD0eX70gs3z9S8i/view?usp=sharing

Team Video

INDIVIDUALS CROSSOVER TABLE:

Name	Team + Indi + Teacher	Runtime	Issues	Key Commits	Analytics	Video
Vardaan Sinha	0.85 + 0.86 + ?	Link	Issue 3, Issue 2	Commit 1, Commit 2	https://github.com/raunak2007/analysis-backend/issues/5	Video

FULL INDIVIDUAL REVIEW TICKET FOR REFERENCE: https://github.com/raunak2007/analysis-backend/issues/5

Name	Team + Indi + Teacher	Runtime	Issues	Key Commits	Video
Vishnu Aravind	0.85 + 0.84 + ?	Link	Issue 3	Commit 1, Commit 2, Commit 3	Vishnu's Video

FULL INDIVIDUAL REVIEW TICKET FOR REFERENCE: https://github.com/raunak2007/analysis-backend/issues/6

Name	Team+Indi+Teacher	Runtime	Issues	Key Commit(s)	Analytics	Video
Raunak M	0.85 + 0.87 + ?	Memoization	Coding: Java & Backend Review Ticket	Memoization,API Controller	Commits, Profile	Video

Raunak Retrospective: https://github.com/raunak2007/analysis-backend/issues/9 Vishnu Retrospective: https://github.com/raunak2007/analysis-backend/issues/7

1. Web Page Explaining Fibonacci, Algorithm, etc.

https://vardaansinha.github.io/miniprojectfrontend/fibo

2. Web Page Explaining Sorts

https://vardaansinha.github.io/miniprojectfrontend/sorts

Team & Individual Contributions:

1. Growth & Accomplishments

Original Team Plan: https://vishnuaravind12.github.io/vishnu/2023/11/15/Ideation.html

As part of the original team plan, we did utilize the exact framework was planned upon. We used JFreeChart in the backend to generate graphs for the sorting algorithm times and fibonacci algorithm execution times based on the number of terms inputted from the user.

Furthermore, as part of the original team plan, we included educational content as we planned upon for each of the different types of sorts and their time complexity, along with each of the different fibonacci algorithms and how they work.

Revisions to Plans:

• Scrapping the original side-by-side animation idea (not enough time to complete this while getting all KEY functional elements to work)

2. Short Falls & Improvements

• One component we fell short on was our faulty connection between frontend and backend. We should have tried to get this to work a lot earlier (and should have been more highly prioritized on our team plan).

We can improve upon our ideation by coming up with more concrete ideas at the start and ensuring that our plans encompass a REALISTIC project that can be finished within the timeframe with the resources that we have.

Throughout the week, we will work to continue trying to make our project fully functional, and hopefully we will have a finished product.

3. Java Backend Accomplishments

• Inheritance through Sorting Class Extenders

• Usage of "API" via a Mock Data Generator which generates a sample dataset with a customizable number of terms based on a user input

• Fibonacci Algorithms

4. Key User Interaction & Learnings

• Visualizing Sorting Algorithms via JFreeChart

• Encapsulating Big O via Explanations of each Sort

[DavidVasilev1]

Individual Review David Vasilev grading Vishnu Aravind

• [x] 0.9 - 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] 0.9 - Video, includes Web demo of key contribution to project, 1 minute
• [x] 0.8 - Issue(s) that show plans/progress to team objectives
• [x] 0.9 - Highlights of key commit(s) in Issues, summarizes code contributions
• [x] 0.7 - Review GitHub analytics for key commits in each weeks during the project, shows consistent participation for 3 weeks

Total: (0.9 + 0.9 + 0.8 + 0.9 + 0.7)/5 = 0.84

Freeform comment.
Vishnu shows good code structure, has all aspects of the project well done. Shows the graph comparisons of the sorts and has good visualizations, Could have implemented animations if there was more time. The video is made well and describes everything he worked on with good vocabulary.`

[YLu-1258]

Individual Review Alexander Lu grading Vardaan

• [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. (0.8)

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

• [x] Video, includes Web demo of key contribution to project, 1 minute (0.8)
• [x] Issue(s) that show plans/progress to team objectives (0.9)
• [x] Highlights of key commit(s) in Issues, summarizes code contributions (0.9)

• [x] Review GitHub analytics for key commits in each weeks during the project, shows consistent participation for 3 weeks (0.9)

  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.

Score: 0.86

Freeform comment.
Overall, good contributions to the project Well explained with all features of the project, except just some minor aspects of the projects aren't functional

[YLu-1258]

Team Review "Scrum Master Alexander Lu" grading "Scrum Master Vardaan Sinha"

• [x] The team should have a Web Page(s) that teach/explain: Fibonacci, Algorithm, etc.: 0.8
• [x] The team should have a Web Page(s) that teach/explain: Sorting, Timing, Compares Swaps, etc.: 0.8

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: 0.9
• [x] Shortfalls/Improvements that could be made in Work or Team Plan, team highlights next steps or improvements that could be made: 0.8
• [x] Showing key accomplishments according to requirement in Java Backend such as API, Abstract Class(es), Inheritance, Polymorphic behavior, Sorting Algorithms, etc. In Sorting, there should NOT be static classes or static methods.: 0.9
• [x] Showing key user interaction and learning(s). For instance how you visualized Sorting Algorithm: Bubble, Insertion, Selection, Merge... how you captured Big O, analytical data, usage of Data Structures... And/or, how you provided response and Feedback to user on their success in learning or experiencing your interface.: 0.9 AVERAGE: 0.85

FREEFORM COMMENT: Overall, the project covers most aspects of the requirements. There were not many extra functions other than what was specified, but that could be added in before the teacher review. Projects seemed well planned, but just some final features and such didn't appear to be working perfectly. Overall, a decent job on the project.

[dolphinalt]

Individual Review Ethan Zhao grading Raunak Mondal

• [x] Individual shows how well they worked with the rest of the team, showed great commits in his key commits creating the fibo controller as well as the fetching from a remote site. There could have been a bit more to do with the actual inheritance and abstraction classes. [0.85]

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

• [x] Good demo of the backend and front end as well as the code that drives the whole thing. [0.95]
• [x] Video is good, but a bit unclear about when each person goes at, would have liked completely separate videos [0.85]
• [x] Refer to comment for first bullet [0.95]
• [x] Not consistent over 3 weeks, but at least there were sporadic commits over this period. A lot of the work looks rushed towards the end [0.75]

Really good video with details about learning from working on the project. Good key commits, but would like to see more frontend contributions though. Full deployment wasn't working, likely due to the server error. 0.87 overall due to having a really interesting project with great individual key commits, but still some room for improvement!

(0.85 + 0.95 + 0.85 + 0.95 + 0.75) / 5 = 0.87