From:   GORDON::BARNES       31-AUG-2000 10:42:09.79
To:     COCKCROFT
CC:     BARNES
Subj:   Feed Back on Assignment No.4

Dear Jeremy,
Martin Attfield and I have now compared our markings of the assignment No.4.
Generally my my marks were higher than his but the trends were very similar.
We realised that one of the reasons for the absolute shift was the middle
part of the assignment where a lot of work (i.e. searching through the
given files for a potential solution) is done with not too much to show for
it in the way of written text in the answer.  So they inevitably get quite
a few marks for the correct solution which effectively subsumes the work that
hides behind that solution.  This is of course one of the problems of an
assignment like this, as we have discussed, but its such an important
assignment given that they cannot be effectively examined in the written
examination on these aspects (giving them lists of files etc. would be
terribly involved and distracting as we know from Birkbeck experience) and
it is an important use in practice worldwide of PD.  I list below the
individual original marks we gave and the final set agreed after our discussion.

S.C.Davies:
PB gave 4.5 + 8 + 8 + 2.5 = 23
MA gave 4.5 + 7 + 7 + 3   = 21.5
        4.5 +7.5+ 7 + 3   = 22 are the final marks

S.F.Parker
PB gave 4.5 + 8.5 + 9 + 5 = 27
MA gave 4.5 +  8  + 9 + 4 = 25.5
        4.5 + 8.5 + 9 + 4 = 26 are the final marks

S.Prokic:
PB gave 2.5 + 7 + 7 + 2.5 = 19
MA gave 2   + 4 + 4 + 2   = 12
        2   +5.5+5.5+ 2   = 15 are the final marks

K.O.Miller:
PB gave 4 + 8 + 10 + 3 = 25
MA gave 3 + 6 + 7 +  3 = 19
       3.5 +7 +8.5 + 3 = 22 are the final marks.

Cheers, Paul

ACTION

The marking of this assignment is slightly subjective: final marks were obtained in a short discussion meeting afterwards.

No other action required.

Back