Assessment
There may still be outstanding corrections - but this is converging to
correct - awm.
Attribution
Although you are encouraged to discuss ideas with others, your
programs are to be completed independently and must be your own,
original work, or the work of you and your partners. Whenever you obtain
significant outside help (from other students, the TAs, etc.) you should
acknowledge this in your program write-up, e.g. “The idea for how
to implement ARP decoding came from a discussion with Helen.” You
can never get in trouble for plagarism if the help is properly
credited.
The final thing we need to mention is that the Computer Laboratory
uses screening systems to compare student submissions. Such
systems are very sophisticated and highly effective, and we use it to
identify submissions that need to be scrutinized further by course
staff. Using systems of this type is common practice at many
universities, and it has proved to be an effective deterrent to improper
collaboration.
Programming is something you learn by doing. If you copy someone
else’s work, you can expect the following:
- You will not learn what the assignment was meant to teach you.
- Your copied work will be brought to the attention of the
relevant administration.
(This was blatantly plagiarised from the Stanford CS344 web page!)
Grading
The emphasis is on developing the required functionality and
achieving interoperability with other’s solutions. We will pay
careful attention to your writeup of who contributed what in each
team!
Weekly milestones: We will provide a feedback for each
weekly submission. Feedback will be one of “Satisfactory”,
“Satisfactory plus”, or “Unsatisfactory”,
together with a brief set of comments as appropriate. The purpose of the
weekly milestones is to ensure that you remain on-track throughout the
course.
Milestone delivery: If you are late for a milestone, then
you lose 2 points per day, up to 3 days late. After that you receive
zero for that milestone. Over the quarter each team has a
total of 3 free late days that you can use however you want for any
milestone - except the final 10-Jan-2010 deadline - without penalty.
Marks are awarded to an individual (I) or the team (T).
Points |
Item |
Description |
10 (I) |
Participation |
This will be a subjective judgement by us based on aspects such as
our interaction with you in regular meetings, your team’s final
write-up on who did what, and by watching the online discussions. |
10 (T) |
Interoperability |
Your router should interoperate correctly with the routers from
all other teams. We will conduct an interoperability test
session to verify interoperability.
6 points if your router interoperates in a
topology of our choosing with several instantiations of our reference
router. 2 additional points for each other team's router you
interoperate with (under the same conditions), to a maximum of two
teams (i.e. 4 points max). (This breakdown will change if there are a
significant number of teams.)}
|
60 (T) |
Functionality |
The code deliverables. |
20 (T) |
Documentation |
The documentation deliverables. |
10 (T) Bonus |
Presentation |
A presentation by each group covering the
architecture of their design (hardware and software), the problems
encountered, etc.
Marks for clarity, technical material (don’t tell us things we
already know such as how NetFPGA works!) and for providing insights into
the issues you encountered and how you overcame them (or
didn’t). Approximately 20 minutes per group.
|
|