11

They need to make a decision. They need to own it, right? Like, I selected the stack. You didn't tell me to use the stack. I selected the stack. And therefore, it's also my fault. Also my triumph, right, if it works great. If it doesn't work, you know, I need to take into account what I could do to improve the whole thing.

The openness of the assignment matches the openness of the outcomes.

Because I want to make my life difficult, sometimes, I feel.

And it gives clarity. [...] You give consistent instructions and you expect the TAs to actually follow the instructions consistently. To apply them consistently.

I had the TAs actually telling me that this actually helped them a lot. And they wish they had the they had it in more courses.

If you can handle 80% of the cases with this, right, then you only have to deal with the 20% that are the complex ones. That's fine, right?

The implementation selects the appropriate design patterns and rationalizes their adoption.

The project description explains what criteria are being used and explains based on what they are being assessed. And it leaves out the specific levels that these criteria are basically delineated in the rubric.

[Sharing the full rubric] will enable the box ticking behaviour without really promoting the positive aspect of engaging with the assignment, understanding what is being asked, what is necessary for it. [...] It will make it easier, but not necessarily as well done, as rich a work.

We basically use the rubric [...] as a way of guiding the grading of the assignment.

For each one of the criteria [...] you're asked to be providing a grade from 1 to 5 and then this formula calculates a grade taking into account the different constraints of the assignment.

The feedback tends to end up being more about requirements rather than criteria we have in the rubric.