Grading Policy
This page defines the course's grading policy. In essence, everything to do with grading, including ethical issues. See the course's about page for a description of the course itself.
The material on this page is organized as follows:
- Access to Grades
- Final Grades
- Letter Grades
- Late Homework Problems Policy
- Cheating and Plagiarism
- Discussion, Cooperation, and Collaboration
Access to Grades
You can access your grades through Webcourses@UCF.
Final Grades
Final grades for the course will be weighted as follows.
| Item | Percentage of Grade |
|---|---|
| Midterm exam | 23% |
| Final exam | 31% |
| Project (assignments) | 41% |
| Recitations | 5% |
Together the exams given will account for 54% of your grade. Each homework point counts equally, but some homeworks have more points than others.
The idea behind this grading scheme is that you should:
Do the homeworks to learn the material.
You will pass and do well if you make mistakes on your projects and learn from them. Don't think that the project grades are so important that you should cheat to get higher homework grades, as cheating is a serious offense, and it will most likely cause you to fail the tests.
Letter Grades
Your grade is independent of anyone else's grade in this class. That is, we do not grade on a curve, and everyone can get an A. Our purpose in grading is to uphold a standard of quality and to give you feedback: it is not to rank students.
Instead of using curve grading as a final defense against problems that are too hard, we use the following policy. If a problem on a homework or exam is so hard that most students do not "get it", then we will eliminate it from the exam or homework grading. If this problem was appropriate, then we will teach how to solve problems like it, and give a similar problem on another exam or homework. If it was not appropriate, then we will ignore it. If you detect such a problem on a homework, let us know about it as soon as possible, as it will save us all a lot of work.
Although we will not always make fine distinctions in points the nominal minimum standards are given by the following table.
| Percentage | Grade |
|---|---|
| 90% | A |
| 85% | A- |
| 80% | B+ |
| 75% | B |
| 70% | B- |
| 65% | C+ |
| 60% | C |
| 55% | C- |
| 50% | D+ |
| 45% | D |
| 40% | D- |
| less | F |
Late Homework Problems Policy
The late policy for homework problems is designed to encourage you to:
- hand in one "good" version,
- hand it in on-time if possible,
but to hand it in eventually in any case. To allow the TA to grade what you have handed as soon as possible, only one version of homework, the first you hand in, will be accepted.
Like all homework, late homework problems must turned in using webcourses. Email will not be accepted.
We do give partial credit for homework, so you will have to balance the gain from waiting to get a good version and the loss from handing in something late. In general, we encourage you to hand in a good version, but if you are late (and have been trying), consider that as a sign that you need help on the concepts, and get help from us!
Homework problems that are late receive points based on the following table.
| When Handed In | Percentage Penalty |
|---|---|
| by 24 hours after the time the homework problem is due | 5% |
| by 48 hours after the time the homework problem is due | 10% |
| by 72 hours (3 days) after the time the homework problem is due | 20% |
| by 96 hours (4 days) after the time the homework problem is due | 40% |
| later, or during last week of classes | 100% |
For example, if a homework is due on Monday at 11:59 PM but you turn it in by Tuesday at 11 PM, you will have 5% of what would have been your score subtracted; thus if the homework was 100 points, and you earned 90 of them, your score would be recorded as 85.5 points, due to the 5% penalty (which in this case is 4.5 points). If you turned the same thing in by Thursday at 11 PM, your penalty would be 10%, so your score would be recorded as 81 points.
Absolutely no credit for late homework problems will be given during the last calendar week of classes (or later!), or for homework problems turned in later than 4 days after the time the homework is due.
Cheating and Plagiarism
The simple rule of thumb is:
Never give or use someone else's code or written answers.
Such exchanges are definitely cheating and not cooperation. This includes taking answers from the web.
However, when you work in a team on a class project, sharing code and ideas among team members is not cheating.
If you use reference materials (other than the course texts) to solve a problem, you must give a citation. Furthermore, use of more than a few words from any source (including the course texts) must be properly set off with quotation marks ("...") or in an italicized block quote; furthermore, a proper citation must be given. This definitely includes material from the web. Not attributing material as described above is plagiarism, which is a form of cheating. This includes arranging sentences from other sources without proper use of quotation marks and citations for each quote. We take plagiarism quite seriously, so note this policy well.
If we catch you cheating on a test or exchanging code or written answers, you will get no credit for that test or homework, and you may be reported to the Director of the Office of Student Rights and Responsibilities. Read the section on academic dishonesty/cheating in the Golden Rule.
If you honestly believe that certain homework assignments are too much busy work, then bring it to the instructor's attention.
Discussion, Cooperation, and Collaboration
You are encouraged to discuss homework, and other parts of the class with other students, even those in other teams. Such discussions about ideas are not cheating, whereas the exchange of finished, written answers is cheating. However, when you have more than casual discussions about homeworks with people outside your team, then you must cite the other people as described below.
When you cooperate on solution ideas or collaborate on producing final answers, you must cite the other people who are outside your team as follows. This must be done for each homework on which you cooperate or collaborate.
- If you discussed ideas jointly, but wrote up a final answer for the homework independently, then your team must include a note with that homework's solution such as "the following solution was developed jointly with Alyssia P. Hacker," or "the following idea is due to Ben Bittwiddle." Each person's final answer receives a grade independently of the other's; there is no bonus or penalty for such a citation.
- If you jointly worked on a final answer for a homework, you
should each hand in on webcourses an identical answer,
which must include prominently at the beginning of each answer
(in a comment for program files):
(i) a list of the names of each person who worked on the solution, and
(ii) an explicit certification of the form:
"Each person actively
contributed to and fully understands the solution."
In this case each member of the group receives the same grade for that problem.
If the certification is not true for everyone, then only those people for whom it is true may participate in the joint solution; the others should use the ideas and write up their own final answer for the problem, with a note as in the previous bullet point.
We may, of course, check to make sure that the statements in the certification are true.
Note that substantial collaboration on solutions which is not cited as described above is considered cheating. In particular, if your team cooperates with another team to jointly solve a homework, in a homework without each person understanding the entire solution, then this is just an exchange of finished answers--i.e., cheating. Such cheating will be dealt with as described above. It should be clear that you will learn less by such exchanges of finished answers.
Be careful, not to get involved in an unequal collaboration, where you are doing less work than someone else. Part of what you need to do to learn the material is to struggle with it; if you deny yourself that struggle, you will learn less and remember what you learned less. So beware of this trap.
Also, as a kindness to your classmates, you should terminate an unequal collaboration where you are doing more than the other person. The other person will learn the material better if you help them but don't collaborate so closely. In this case it's better to help them only by discussing problems with them, and not by jointly collaborating on solutions.
In discussions of ideas, you should also be careful to distinguish between helping and hurting other students. In brief, you can help the other students by teaching them, and you can hurt them by giving them answers that they should have worked out for themselves. (Remember, when you're being tested, you won't be able to help each other.) The same applies to tutoring and getting help from me or a TA.
Harmful discussions most commonly occur in "giving away" a key idea needed to solve a problem. For example, suppose you have studied a programming problem for an hour or so, and finally found that the key to the solution is to use a helping procedure you call "critical". Your friend, after working on the problem for 15 minutes, says "I just can't see how to do this" and you say "try using a helping procedure called 'critical'."
Although it takes more time, your friend will learn more if you say something like: "How are you approaching the problem, what's your plan?" (knowing that if your friend is not planning, no helping procedure will be found). If your friend hasn't planned, you should let them do it; if they have trouble planning, tell them to think about problems discussed in class that were similar, etc. If, after planning, your friend still hasn't found helping procedure 'critical', you should say something more direct like, "what helping procedures do you have?" or "how do these helping procedures help you get closer to the solution?" or "can you solve part of the problem?" The idea is to guide the other person's thinking process.
Perhaps a more common way to fall into the hurtful exchange of giving away the key idea is when you're talking over a problem that no one knows the answer to yet. Once one of you comes up with the key idea, it is tempting to blurt it out, impressing the others with your brilliance. If this happens, you should write "developed in cooperation with ..." on your solution. (Note that this disclaimer cannot be used to get away with cheating, but we're not discussing exchanging written code or answers.) It would be better for the one who comes up with the key idea say "I have it, but now I can't tell you what it is" and then try to guide the others to the solution as described above.
If you have questions about the details of cooperation vs. cheating, please see the professor.
Last modified Tuesday, January 3, 2023.
This web page is for COP 3402 at the University of Central Florida. The details of this course are subject to change as experience dictates. You will be informed of any changes. Please direct any comments or questions to Gary T. Leavens at Leavens@ucf.edu. Some of the policies and web pages for this course are quoted or adapted from other courses I have taught, in partciular, COP 4020.