It's UWAweek 5

help2002

This forum is provided to promote discussion amongst students enrolled in CITS2002 Systems Programming.
Please consider offering answers and suggestions to help other students! And if you fix a problem by following a suggestion here, it would be great if other interested students could see a short "Great, fixed it!"  followup message.

 Posts from 2022 will be available until after the Deferred and Supplementary Exams
Displaying selected announcement
Showing 1 of 919 articles.
Currently 10 other people reading this forum.


SVG not supported

Login to reply
2:52pm Thu 24th Nov, Christopher M.

Marks and feedback for our 2nd project are now available via csmarks, and the overall marks for the unit (including the final exam) should be released by the Exams' Office this evening. The unit finished with 372 students enrolled. 31 students have Deferred Exams and up to 33 others may be offered Supplementarry Assessment (which will also be another exam). The averages of our 3 components are: 1st project 32.9/50 (30.1/50 in 2021) 2nd project 27.2/50 (31.7/50 in 2021) final exam 28.1/50 (28.2/50 in 2021) Congratulations to the 22 students receiving 40 or higher (/50) for the 2nd project, and to the 32 students receiving 40 or higher (/50) for the final exam, and congratulations to the 3 students receiving 90% or higher overall. The final reported average that you see in csmarks, and the average of interest to the Board of Examiners, are rather different. The average in csmarks (48.5%) is the average for all enrolled students who completed at least one item of assessment. There's about 45 students who completed only the 1st project, and then choose not to disenrol, 72 students who didn't submit a 2nd project; their final mark is thus only out of 75%. Another considered average is that of (the 180) students who attempted at least 50% of the assessment (marks). That average is 54.3%, and includes students who submitted only one project and the exam, just the projects, and 3 students who only attempted the exam(!). Finally, 247 students attempted all three items of assessment (full engagement with the unit), and their average is 58.4%, and this will rise after deferred and supplementary exams, and after academic misconduct cases are resolved, likely back to our typical average of 65%. ____ The marking of the 2nd project has taken far longer than expected, primarily due to the nature of the project and how marks could be awarded for incomplete projects. For example, one of the first tests was simply that a trove-file was created, but if a file was not created, it's impossible to award marks when testing the searching for a word, etc. So marks were awarded for some simple things like terminating with the correct exit-status even when the command-line arguments were correct, giving partial marks (/3) instead of just 0 or 3. As for the 1st project, you may download and run the marking script: [CITS2002] There are several projects that receive different marks when the marking script is run multiple times; most likely evidence of uninitilised variables, dynamic memory still being used after being free()d, and projects which terminate with a status of 11 (segmentation violation). The script will report these. As can be seen from the breakdown of marks for each test, the earlier, easier, tests were passed by most, but success dropped of as the tests got harder, and required multiple invocations of the trove executable: 4 test0 - Successful (0 / 3) 18 test0 - Successful (1 / 3) 152 test0 - Successful (3 / 3) 122 test1 - Successful (2 / 2) 1 test1 - TIMEOUT (after 5sec) (0 / 2) 16 test1 - Unsuccessful (0 / 2) 35 test1 - Unsuccessful (1 / 2) 149 test2 - Successful (2 / 2) 2 test2 - TIMEOUT (after 5sec) (0 / 2) 4 test2 - Unsuccessful (0 / 2) 19 test2 - Unsuccessful (1 / 2) 112 test3 - Successful (2 / 2) 5 test3 - TIMEOUT (after 5sec) (0 / 2) 10 test3 - Unsuccessful (0 / 2) 47 test3 - Unsuccessful (1 / 2) 64 test4 - Successful (2 / 2) 13 test4 - TIMEOUT (after 5sec) (0 / 2) 38 test4 - Unsuccessful (0 / 2) 59 test4 - Unsuccessful (1 / 2) 72 test5 - Successful (2 / 2) 13 test5 - TIMEOUT (after 5sec) (0 / 2) 33 test5 - Unsuccessful (0 / 2) 56 test5 - Unsuccessful (1 / 2) 62 test6 - Successful (2 / 2) 18 test6 - TIMEOUT (after 5sec) (0 / 2) 37 test6 - Unsuccessful (0 / 2) 57 test6 - Unsuccessful (1 / 2) 28 test7 - Successful (2 / 2) 15 test7 - TIMEOUT (after 5sec) (0 / 2) 131 test7 - Unsuccessful (0 / 2) 20 test8 - Successful (2 / 2) 23 test8 - TIMEOUT (after 5sec) (0 / 2) 131 test8 - Unsuccessful (0 / 2) 6 test9 - Successful (2 / 2) 16 test9 - TIMEOUT (after 5sec) (0 / 2) 152 test9 - Unsuccessful (0 / 2) 16 testA - Successful (2 / 2) 16 testA - TIMEOUT (after 5sec) (0 / 2) 142 testA - Unsuccessful (0 / 2) 29 testB - Successful (2 / 2) 14 testB - TIMEOUT (after 5sec) (0 / 2) 131 testB - Unsuccessful (0 / 2) Unfortunately I've also identified 19 cases of Academic Misconduct (either excessive collaboration or, simply, theft) and have referred these to the School's Academic Integrity Officer, so their overall marks will be withheld until resolved. In most cases, it appears that some students have placed their projects on GitHub, and left the permissions 'open' for the world to see (and copy).

The University of Western Australia

Computer Science and Software Engineering

CRICOS Code: 00126G
Written by [email protected]
Powered by history
Feedback always welcome - it makes our software better!
Last modified  2:26AM Jan 17 2023
Privacy policy