Performance Task Scoring

• Submission 1
• Submission 2

Submission 1

Reporting Category	Student Score	College Board Score	Comments	College Board Comments
Program Purpose and Function	1	0	I gave them a one because they used input, output, and showed program functionality when they tested their code. in their written response, they specifically state the purpose of the code is to provide information about a triangle based on the input side lengths.	College board states that the written response did not meet the criteria because the written response describes the function and not the program purpose.
Data Abstraction	1	1	The data in the program is used from user input when the code finds the angles of each side of the triangle using sin, cosine, and tangent. The variables are listed as the sides of the triangle: A, B, and C. The data from user input is representing the side lengths of the triangle. Their written response contains two completely distinguishable code segments with descriptions on both code segments of what each list does.	College board says that they named their list, provided their two code segments, and had a good written response all which meet College Board criteria.
Managing Complexity	1	0	The student shows managing complexity because they include a list that organizes their code and sets it up into a nice form. However, I'm not sure if this list really is beneficial to the code although the purpose says to get information on the triangle based on inputted sidelengths and if the list sideIndex is classifying the different types of triangles then I believe it helps manage complexity.	The student deserved a 0 because despite their 4 classifications, the written response was innacurate. As well as, the student states a line that would actually make their code more difficult to manage without a list.
Procedural Abstraction	1	1	I gave the student a one because they show both a student-developed procedure and a parameter that shows the functionality of the procedure. Additionally, the student shows where the procedure is being called and throughly describes the procedure as well as describing how it contributes to the overall functionality of the program.	College Board gave this student a one for their student-developed procedure: ratioCalculate, code fragment that class ratioCalculate, the students description of functionality, and because the students states how the procedure contributes to the overall program.
Algorithm Implentation	1	1	I gave the student a one because they show sequencing, selection, and iteration in their code. As well as, explaining in detailed steps how the algorithm works enough that someone could recreate it.	College board gave this student a one because they show sequencing, selection, and iteration in their code through the function ratioCalculate. Next, college board also gave the student a one because of the way they described the algorithm functionality enough so it could be recreated.
Testing	1	1	I gave the student a one because in 3c the student shows 2 calls to the selected procedure, each different to produce a different segment of code to execute. The student also describes the conditions being called to each procedure, and all in all the student also shows the result of each call in their video.	College board gave the student a one because they describe two different call procedures: ratioCalculate(3.0,4.0,5.0) and ratioCalculate(1.2, 2.3, 3.4). The students response describes the conditions being tested in the procedure calls and identifies the results of each call.

Submission 2

Reporting Category	Student Score	College Board Score	Comments	College Board Comments
Program Purpose and Function	1	1	The video demonstrates user input, program functionality, and output. In the written response, the student discusses the overall purpose of the program, the functionality of the program, and describes both input and output of the program.	The video demonstrates he running of the program: input comes from user placing tiles on the grid, output comes from display of the simulation. And shows user pause, editing, and replaying simulation. Written response specifies program purpose, describes the functionality, and descrines input and output.
Data Abstraction	1	1	Shows how data has been stored in the list and shows how data in the list is being used. Identifies the names of the variables of each list and thoroughly describes the data that is stored in the list.	The written reponse provided two different code segments, one showing data being stored and another showing it being accessed. The name of the list is identified as startGrid, however the other lists are not considered inside the scoring. And the code identifies what is stored in the list.
Managing Complexity	1	1	The written response shows the a list being used to manage complexity and explains how the list manages complexity and writes how the code could not be written without the list.	College Board gave the student a 1 becuase they stated the list manages complexity through accessing and storing the status (1 or 0) f 10,800 items. As well as, explaining how the code couldn't be written without a list.
Procedural Abstraction	1	1	The student shows a student-develoeped procedure that has one parameter that affects the functionality of the procedure and the student shows where the procedure is being called. The student also describes the identified procedures and describes how it contributes to the overall functionality.	The response contais a student-developed procedure: replaceList. And two parameters: current and replacement. And the student creates a call to the procedure. The response also describes the functionalit of the procedure.
Algorithm Implentation	1	1	The student includes a photo of the develoepd algorithm that included sequencing, selection, and iteration. Algorithm is detailed enough that someone could recreate it.	The student had a student-developed algorithm within procedure: replaceList. Which included sequencing, selection, and iteration. And the response explains in detail how he algorithm in the procedure works. Explained thoroughly to the point of it being able to be recreated.
Testing	1	1	The student describes two calls to the selected procedure that causes a different segment of code to execute with thorough explanation from the student. They also describe the conditions being tested by each call to the procedure. And they identify the result to the call fo each procedure.	Response describes 2 different calls to the specific procedure and describes the condition being tested. And describes the result of the two calls as well as they both lead to 2 different results.