CPSC 233 Programming Assignment Rubric

Assignment 5 Game: Frogger

Brief problem statement:

Write a program that will implement the old arcade game, Frogger.

Rubric Part One (Style) Marks:	/15	Rubric Part Two (Design) Marks	/35
Bonus & Challenge Points:		Total Marks this Assignment:	/50
		X Group Work Offset _____ =	/50
		Any amount > 50/50 gets added to Bonus / Challenge points

RUBRIC PART ONE : STYLE
Attribute	Unacceptable	Meets Requirements	Exemplary		Points
Presentation
Information	Missing Information	[0.5] Properly prepared for submission; includes all student names; TA; Lab section; Assignment number; Statement of Originality	N/A
Files	Missing files	[0.5] All included: required source, documentation, script, instruction (readme) files	N/A
Demo: [worth triple]	Major Problems: Program won't run or crashes unexpectedly. Submitted code seems different from that demonstrated. Programmers seemed confused by the program they were demonstrating. Only one group member participated (out of three).	[1.5] Minor Problems: Program runs reasonably well. Knew what they were doing. Submitted code matches demo. One group member did not participate.	[3.0] Good! Demo went well; major features shown and explained. Demonstrators clearly understood their work. All group members participated.	*
Presentation Total					/3
Documentation
Overall Impression	Misleading; confusing; too much or too little	[0.5] A few missing, redundant, or irrelevant parts	[1.0] Accurate; reasonable; easy to read;
Identifier Names	Meaningless or misleading names	[0.5] Some poor choices. Most identifiers were explained where appropriate.	[1.0] Meaningful identifier names [some single letter names are OK, such as i,j for indices]. Explanations of identifiers where appropriate.
Indentation; White Space	Misleading indentation; too much or too little white space	[0.5] Some inconsistencies; some inadequate or wasted space	[1.0] Consistent indentation; good use of white space
External Documentation	No external documentation when some is needed. External documentation not useful, confusing, out of date, or misleading	[0.5] Adequate external documentation [javadoc or reasonable facsimile]. The key point is that someone else could work with this program with a little help from the original programmer(s).	[1.0] External doc. as appropriate; [javadoc or reasonable facsimile]. The key point is that someone else could work with this program based on code and documentation alone.	*
Classes & Logical Blocks	Few or no logical blocks documented	[1.0] Most MAJOR logical blocks documented	[2.0] Documentation for each function and MAJOR loop and MAJOR logical block (possible use of Pre & Post Conditions for functions / blocks)	*
Classes:	Missing class diagrams	[0.5] Reasonable attempt at class diagrams: some sort of picture that shows the classes defined and their relationships to each other.	[1.0] Includes some readable form of class diagram – includes public interface; organized pictures	*
Documentation Total					/7
Style
Implemented what was asked.	Hardly followed specs; no explanations for deviations	[1.0] Some deviations; mostly OK	[2.0] Followed specs (deviations well justified – marker was convinced this approach was reasonable)	*
Style & Efficiency Program Subdivisions (classes and functions) & Flow	Poor choices of code; too many awkward structures Too many or too few subdivisions: piles of one-liners or almost everything's in one function.  Rule-of-thumb: functions/methods shouldn't be much more than one printed page long. Confusing; hard to follow	[1.0] Mostly well thought out; most parts reasonably efficient; a few remaining awkward parts Mostly reasonable with a few poor choices **************************  Mostly Logical, justifiable structure	[2.0] Well thought out; reasonably efficient (code & data structures) Reasonable subdivisions (classes/ functions – tasks; roles; behaviours & responsibilities make sense);	*
Constants; Magic Numbers, Globals	Magic numbers; hard-coded values Inappropriate use of globals.	[0.5] Appropriate use of constants Most globals properly justified.	N/A	*
Initialization & Clean-up	Insufficient: Uninitialized values; no clean-up	[0.5] Good! Reasonable initialization and clean-up	N/A	*
Design Total					/5
[Rubric One] Style Total:					/15

RUBRIC PART TWO: FUNCTION & DESIGN
Attribute	0.0	Attempt	Meets Requirements "C Version"		Exceeds Requirements  "B Version"	Exemplary  "A Version"	Points
Program Specifications							35
Inheritance	Unable to assess.	[2.0] Minimal Some kind of inheritance.	[3.0] OK, uses Thing class, at least two classes derived from it.		[5.0] Good Reasonable classes, relationships.	[7.0] NICE Well thought out. Some interesting ideas.
Frog	Unable to assess.	[2.0] Frog, sort of moves	[3.0] Frog, moves left, right, forward under player's control		N/A	N/A
Homes	Unable to assess.	N/A	[3.0] 1 (ONE) home		[4.0] 3 (Three) Homes	[5.0] 5 (FIVE) Homes
Vehicles	Unable to assess.	[2.0] Some kind of vehicle, sort of moves.	[3.0] 2 (two) Rows of Different Vehicles going in opposite directions		[4.0] 5 (five) rows of vehicles going in different directions.	N/A
Boulevard	Unable to assess.	N/A	N/A		[4.0] Boulevard, but no timer	[5.0] Boulevard, With Timer
Critters	Unable to assess.	[2.0]	[3.0]		[4.0] Alligator (closed mouth) & Small Log	[5.0] Turtles & Long Log, 5 (five) rows altogether
Debugging Aids (tracing)	Unable to assess.	[0.0] No evidence of debugging aids	[1.0] Some evidence of built-in debugging aids; a few output statements in key locations. "in function X"; "got to here"		[2.0] Reasonable use of DEBUG flags or reasonable alternative, program tracing and other debugging aids; considerable number of output traces in various locations which give useful information; "in function X: value of counter is: ---"; easy to turn on and off	N/A
Output	Unable to assess.	[1.0] Display works.	[2.0] Recognizably distinct things on the screen.		[3.0] Can tell what is what, some different vehicles & critters.	[4.0] Good! All there.
[Rubric Two] Design Total:							/35
BONUS:
1.	[up to 6 points]			Make a girl frog.
2.	[up to 6 points]			Make the aligator's mouth open.
3.	[up to 10 points]			Include the snakes.
4.	[up to 10 points]			Multiple (5) frogs per game. [homes can be occupied by only one frog]
5.	[2-3 points]			Detect "Game Over": when Frog dead; or when Frog gets across.
6.	[2 points]			Keep score.
7.	[2-5 points, per level]			Allow different levels of difficulty (different #'s of things, different ranges, etc.)
8.	[2 points]			Set up "key bindings" so player can use the arrow keys, etc.
9.	[4-? points]			Make it Interrupt Driven
Challenge:
1.	[4-? points]			Add sound.
2.	[4-? points]			Create a full GUI
3.	[5-? points]			Do it in colour
4.	[5-? points]			3-D