Weekly Assignment (30%)
Each week, I will select a few questions for you to work on and submit for grading.
- All solutions must be handwritten, except for coding questions, which must be submitted via Colab on Google Classroom (You will have already received an invitation to join).
- You may write either on paper or on a digital device. If you choose paper, please submit a scanned copy of your work.
- You are responsible to ensure that your writing is clear and legible to the graders.
- All coding snippets must be in a runnable state so that the grader can execute them without modification.
- Please submit your digital solution to the relevant Google Classroom Assignment.
| Criteria (Weight) | Needs Improvement | Satisfactory | Good | Accomplished | Distinguished |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conceptual Understanding (30%) | ■ Limited understanding ■ Major misconceptions ■ Rarely uses terminology ■ Explanations confusing/absent ■ Work illegible |
■ Basic understanding ■ Some gaps or uneven clarity ■ Limited terminology use ■ Somewhat understandable ■ Legibility uneven |
■ Mostly accurate grasp ■ Minor gaps only ■ Minor terminology slips ■ Generally clear ■ Mostly legible |
■ Accurate and clear explanations ■ Explanations generally strong ■ Terminology consistently correct ■ Well-structured and clear |
■ Thorough and precise grasp of all concepts ■ Explanations insightful and well-connected ■ Terminology used with precision ■ Elegant, insightful explanations |
| Reasoning and Logic (40%) | ■ Weak or fragmented reasoning ■ Poor or absent structure ■ Justification missing ■ Unsupported assertions ■ Work illegible |
■ Some logical flow ■ Inconsistent arguments ■ Limited justification ■ Surface-level reasoning ■ Legibility uneven |
■ Mostly sound reasoning ■ Structure mostly clear ■ Most claims justified ■ Some evidence of deeper thought ■ Mostly legible |
■ Clear, coherent structure ■ Well-structured flow ■ All claims well-justified ■ Thoughtful and reflective |
■ Sophisticated, coherent reasoning ■ Structure enhances insight ■ Deep, insightful justification ■ Exceptional depth of insight |
| Accuracy & Completeness (30%) | ■ Significant parts missing ■ Frequent inaccuracies ■ Presentation messy/unclear ■ Work illegible |
■ Tasks attempted with errors ■ Several omissions ■ Sometimes unclear ■ Legibility uneven |
■ Most tasks complete ■ Only minor errors ■ Presentation clear ■ Mostly legible |
■ All tasks complete, minor errors ■ Accurate and reliable results ■ Well-presented answers |
■ All tasks fully correct ■ Accurate and precise results ■ Elegant and professional presentation |