Mr. Schlytter

Teacher Email:  eschlytt@rentonschools.us

Office Hours:  Tuesdays 2:03pm - 2:35pm

Appointment Link

 

Log in to Code.org:  Joining Your Section (one-time only)

If a student has not yet joined your section, please ask them to perform the following steps. Note that they only need to do this once. By joining your section, students will be able see the course assigned to them and you will be able to track the progress of the work they complete while they are signed in.

1. Create a Code.org account if they haven’t already done so. They can do this at https://studio.code.org/users/sign_up. Note that they can either sign up with an email address and password, or sign up through Google, Facebook, or Microsoft by clicking on one of these buttons:
   
2. Sign in to their Code.org account.
3. Navigate to https://studio.code.org/join and type in their section code: SBYBHK.
4. Once they press the "Go" button, they should be added to your section.

 

 

Resetting Student Passwords

 

 

Internal Assessment (IA) Component

Internal Assessment component (IA) is due by February 27, 2023.

Purpose of the Internal Assessment component (IA): 

Internal assessment is an integral part of the course and is compulsory for both SL and HL students. It enables students to demonstrate the application of their skills and knowledge, and to pursue their personal interests, without the time limitations and other constraints that are associated with written examinations. The internal assessment should, as far as possible, be woven into normal classroom teaching over a period of time and not be a short, intensive activity in the course or after the course has been taught.

The internal assessment requirements at SL and at HL are the same. However, it contributes to a different percentage of the overall mark. Students are required to produce an internal assessment (solution) that consists of a cover page, the product and the documentation. The focus of the computer science solution is on providing either an original solution or modifying an existing one for a client.

The internal assessment component, as well as being interesting, practical and productive, forms an important part of the assessment of the computer science course. It is imperative, therefore, that the teacher provides appropriate guidance to students.

Summary of the internal assessment task
30 hours of class time
Individual collaboration with specified client/adviser
Individual documentation
2,000 words (maximum)
Marked by the teacher
Externally moderated
30% of total marks for SL; 20% of total marks for HL

 

Guidance for the development of the internal assessment:

There are required forms in the "forms.zip" file under the section called, "Framework of the solution":  Guidance for the development of the internal assessment.docx

Students are required to use the following forms in the development of their solutions.  These forms are located in the Forms.zip file in the Guidance link above:

1.  Cover page

2.  Record of tasks for Criterion B

 

Internal Assessment criteria:

Rationale

General overview

The computer science internal assessment focuses on the balance between the level of algorithmic thinking and problem-solving required to develop a product within the framework of the design cycle.

The assessment criteria

Criteria A, B and E are process-orientated and examine how the internal assessment task was carried out and allow common assessment criteria to be applied to different types of product from the different options. Criterion C is a holistic assessment of the final product and assesses the student’s understanding of the concepts involved in its development. Criterion D is a holistic assessment of the functionality and future extensibility of the product.

Criterion A: Planning (6 marks)

The success criteria identified in criterion A will be used in criterion D to evaluate the effectiveness of the product.

Marks	Description
0	The response does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1–2	An appropriate scenario for investigation for an identified client is stated. The rationale for choosing the proposed product is identified. The criteria for evaluating the success of the product are generally inappropriate.
3–4	An appropriate scenario for investigation for an identified client, providing evidence of consultation, is stated. The rationale for choosing the proposed product is partially explained and includes some appropriate criteria for evaluating the success of the product.
5–6	An appropriate scenario for investigation for an identified client, providing evidence of consultation, is described. The rationale for choosing the proposed product is justified and includes a range of appropriate criteria for evaluating the success of the product.

 

Criterion B: Solution overview (6 marks)

• The student must provide a record of tasks and a design overview that includes an outline test plan.
• The Record of tasks form must be used.
• The record of tasks and design overview must refer to the product proposed in criterion A.

Marks	Description
0	The response does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1–2	The record of tasks and the design overview, including an outline test plan, are limited. From this information it is difficult to see how the product was developed.
3–4	The record of tasks and the design overview, including an outline test plan, are partially complete. They provide a basic understanding of how the product was developed.
5–6	The record of tasks and the design overview, including an outline test plan, are detailed and complete. From this information it is clear how the product was developed.

 

Criterion C: Development (12 marks)

• The student must identify techniques used in developing the product.
• The student must explain the techniques, with screenshots, that were used to develop the product identified in criterion A, explaining why they have been used and why they are adequate for the task.

Marks	Description
0	The response does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1–4	The use of techniques demonstrates a low level of complexity and ingenuity or does not address the scenario identified in criterion A. It is characterized by limited use of existing tools. There is no explanation of why the techniques are used or how they are adequate for the task. Sources are used but are not identified.
5–8	The use of techniques demonstrates a moderate level of complexity and ingenuity in addressing the scenario identified in criterion A. It is characterized by some appropriate use of existing tools. There is some attempt to explain the techniques used and why they are adequate for the task. All sources are identified.
9–12	The use of techniques demonstrates a high level of complexity and ingenuity in addressing the scenario identified in criterion A. It is characterized by the appropriate use of existing tools. The techniques are adequate for the task and their use is explained. All sources are identified.

 

Criterion D: Functionality and extensibility of product (4 marks)

This criterion assesses the extent to which the product:

• functions, as evidenced in the video
• can be expanded and modified by future users as evidenced in the design and development documentation.

Marks	Description
0	The response does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1–2	The video shows that the product functions partially. Some expansion and modification of the product is possible but difficult.
3–4	The video shows that the product functions well. Some expansion and modifications of the product are straightforward.

 

Criterion E: Evaluation (6 marks)

• The student must evaluate the effectiveness of the product based on feedback from the client/adviser. This must include direct references to the success criteria identified in criterion A.
• The student must recommend proposals for the future improvement of the product.

Marks	Description
0	The response does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1–2	There is a limited attempt to evaluate the product against the success criteria identified in criterion A. There is limited evidence of feedback from the client/adviser and any recommendations for further improvement are trivial or unrealistic.
3–4	The product is partially evaluated against the success criteria identified in criterion A including feedback from the client/adviser. Recommendations for further improvement of the product are largely realistic.
5–6	The product is fully evaluated against the success criteria identified in criterion A including feedback from the client/adviser. Recommendations for further improvement of the product are realistic.

 

Internal Assessment examples with marks: 

Example 6 - Stock Control System

Criterion A, Planning:  Example 6 Crit_A_Planning.pdf

Criterion B, Record of tasks (use form):  Example 6 Crit_B_Record_of_tasks.pdf

Criterion B, Design:  Example 6 Crit_B_Design.pdf

Criterion C, Development:  Example 6 Crit_C_Development.pdf

Criterion D, Video of product:  

Criterion E, Evaluation:  Example 6 Crit_E_Evaluation.pdf

Appendix 1:  Example 6 Appendix_1.pdf

Appendix 2:  Example 6 Appendix_2.pdf

Appendix 3:  Example 6 Appendix_3.pdf

 

Example 7 - Game for children

Criterion A, Planning:  Example 7 Crit_A_Planning.pdf

Criterion B, Record of tasks (use form):  Example 7 Crit_B_Record_of_tasks.pdf

Criterion B, Design:  Example 7 Crit_B_Design.pdf

Criterion C, Development:  Example 7 Crit_C_Development.pdf

Criterion D, Video of product:  

Criterion E, Evaluation:  Example 7 Crit_E_Evaluation.pdf

Appendix:  Example 7 Appendix.pdf

 

Example 8 - Java program (Computer science for kids)

Criterion A, Planning:  Example 8 Crit_A_Planning.pdf

Criterion B, Record of tasks (use form):  Example 8 Crit_B_Record_of_tasks.pdf

Criterion B, Design:  Example 8 Crit_B_Design.pdf

Criterion C, Development:  Example 8 Crit_C_Development.pdf

Criterion D, Video of product:  

Criterion E, Evaluation:  Example 8 Crit_E_Evaluation.pdf

Appendix:  Example 8 Appendix.pdf

Appendix - code:  Example 8 Appendix-code.pdf