In code walks, your assignment mark is determined using a rubric. Each assignment has its own specialized rubric, but they are all derived from the skeleton rubric described here, and will look rather similar. Depending on the assingment and whether it is a code-walk on distinction-level content or not, both parts of the rubric and their weights may change.
Skeleton Rubric
COMP1110/6710, S1 2025
Time on Task Q1 ______ Q2 _____ Q3 ______ Q4 ______
Student Name: _____________________________________
Student UID: ________________
Points: ___/8 Style +
___/17 Design +
___/15 Presentation =
___/40 Code Walk
--------------------------------
___/20 Tests +
___/40 Code Walk +
___/40 Tests * Code Walk / 20 -
___/50 Form Penalties =
___/100 * (1 if SoO correctly submitted, signed, 0 if not) =
___/100 Total
This percentage will be multiplied with the value of the assignment,
which may depend on whether the code walk was for distinction-level
content or not.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Section I: STYLE [___/8 points, subtractive, min 0]
================
Deductions for:
[-2] Messy indentation
[-1] Other non-idiomatic formatting
[-2] Function names changed from assignment
[-1] Non-descriptive variable or function names ("lame names",
repeatable, max 3)
[-1] Tests without explanations (can use comments or error message)
[-1] Messy comments (contracts, data definitions, etc.)
[-1] Magic constants
[-2] Using BigBang or Start when not needed/required for the problem
[-1] Anything especially weird
Section II: DESIGN [___/17 points, min 0]
==============================================
The interviewer says:
"Please explain how you designed the function [function-name-here].
Follow the design recipe."
II.A Data Definitions/Templates [__/6 points, subtractive, min 0]
Deductions for:
[-2] Each missing necessary data definition
[-2] Each poorly designed data definition
(captures just enough information; all combinations are meaningful
or else documented by an invariant; easy to understand and
distinguish cases)
[-1] Each field missing an interpretation that the grader judges to
be necessary
[-2] Each missing or wildly incorrect template
[-1] Each flawed template
II.B Functions Follow the Recipe ("Free Fire Zone")
[__/6 points, subtractive, min -5]
Start with the function to be codewalked, and check any related
functions that you see.
Functions must have purpose statement, signature, examples,
strategy, implementations, and tests.
Purpose must be clear, correct, and add at least some information
beyond the signature. Function must match template/strategy, produce
correct answer if its helpers do. Functions that could be written as
simple instances of map, fold, filter are written that way, where
allowed.
Deductions (all these repeatable for each occurrence)
[-1] Missing or incorrect signature, purpose statement, examples,
strategy, or no tests (repeatable for each missing element)
[-1] Inadequate purpose statement
[-2] Function does not match template/strategy
[-1] Excessively complex or repeated code that should have been put
in a helper function
[-2] Design that the grader judges to be overly complex.
Criterion: the grader can't follow the logic based on the
purpose statements
[-2] Function could be replaced by map, foldr, filter or some easy
combination, where allowed (repeatable).
II.C Quality of Tests [___/5 points max]
[A list of required aspects of your tests with associated marks]
Make sure the students know how their test shows what it's
supposed to show. If there is a test but the student doesn't
know it, take off points under presentation
Section III: PRESENTATION [__/15 points, min 0]
==================================================
Presentation score includes all aspects of the presentation, not just
answering the given questions. Issues such as not being able to
explain code, find tests, give a concise answer or speak at an
understandable volume are all fair game. A code walk should go
through about 3-5 "major" components of an assignment. This number
is question-dependent.
- Design recipe [___/2 points, subtractive, min -1]
[-1] needs prompting to follow design recipe (repeatable)
- Answering small questions [___/8 points, subtractive, min 0]
[-1] for each question not answered satisfactorily (repeatable)
[-2/-3] for each "major" component that was not covered due to
taking too long to answer questions (repeatable)
- Answering a question about course content [___/5 points]
[5] fully correct and concise answer
[4] slightly flawed answer
[3] flawed but largely correct answer
[2] answer contains a correct statement related to question
[1] answer contains a correct word related to question
We generally expect that a student will be asked lots (not just 8)
of smaller questions during a code walk. Satisfactory answers are
concise and to the point. Wasting time incurs progress penalties.
Section IV: FORM PENALTIES [____/50 points]
============================================
[20] Code did not compile, but was fixed (no guarantee)
[15] Test interface mismatch (also in addition to code did not
compile if problems remain after fix)
[10] Incorrect file names; must be: notebook.yml and as described
in assignment
[15] Insufficient git commits/pushes (must have at least one git
commit+push per hour of work logged in notebook, at least one
per work session, and at least one per assignment question)
[25] Missing/severely broken notebook
[15] Minor issues with notebook formatting
[15] Notebook inconsistent with git push log
[ 5] Use of disallowed Java feature (repeatable per feature,
according to assignment specifications)
[ 5] Uninformative commit message or notebook entry
(repeatable, max 15)
[ 1] Absent from part of code walk (repeatable per minute, max 50)