Rubric for Computational Essay Final Project#
Your computational essay will be evaluated based on the following criteria:
\(P\), Physics Content (40%):
Clear explanation of the physical problem being addressed.
Appropriate use of computational methods to analyze the problem.
Correctness and accuracy of the results and conclusions drawn from the analysis.
\(C\), Computational Implementation (30%):
Code is well-organized, readable, and follows best practices (e.g., comments, variable names).
The computational approach is appropriate for the problem and effectively implemented.
Code runs without errors and produces the expected output.
\(W\), Writing and Presentation (20%):
The essay is well-structured with a logical flow of ideas.
Visualizations (if any) are clear, relevant, and enhance the understanding of the content.
Proper formatting and adherence to any specified guidelines (e.g., length, citation style).
\(R\), Reflection and Discussion (10%):
Thoughtful reflection on the computational approach and its limitations.
Discussion of the implications of the results and how they relate to the original problem.
Consideration of potential future work or extensions to the analysis.
Rubric Breakdown#
Criteria |
Excellent (4.0) |
Great (3.5) |
Good (3.0) |
Fair (2.5) |
Poor (2.0) |
Missing (0) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
\(P\), Physics Content (40%) |
The essay provides a clear and comprehensive explanation of the research question, the physical problem, and the approaches being used to address it. The background is sufficient for a peer to understand the context of the essay. The results are accurate for the model employed and the conclusions are well-supported by the analysis. |
The essay provides a clear explanation of the research question and physical problem but may lack some depth in background information or minor inaccuracies in results/conclusions. The analysis is generally sound but may not cover all aspects of the problem. The results are mostly accurate but may contain minor errors or omissions. |
The essay provides a basic explanation of the research question and physical problem but lacks depth in background information or has some inaccuracies in results/conclusions. The analysis is somewhat sound but may miss key aspects of the problem. |
The essay provides a vague explanation of the research question and physical problem, with insufficient background information. The results are inaccurate or conclusions drawn are not well-supported by the analysis. |
The essay does not clearly explain the research question or physical problem, lacks necessary background information, and contains significant inaccuracies in results/conclusions. |
Missing |
\(C\), Computational Implementation (30%) |
Code is well-organized, readable, and follows best practices. The algorithm or computational method used is appropriate for the problem and effectively implemented. The code runs without errors and produces the expected output. The approach is efficient and demonstrates a thoughtful implementation of computational methods. |
Code is generally well-organized and readable, with minor issues in organization or best practices. The computational method is appropriate but may have some inefficiencies or minor errors. The code runs without major errors and produces the expected output. |
Code is somewhat organized but lacks readability in places. The computational method used is somewhat appropriate but may not be the best choice for the problem. The code runs but may produce unexpected results or errors that need to be addressed. |
Code is poorly organized and difficult to read, with significant issues in following best practices. The computational method used is not appropriate for the problem, leading to incorrect results or frequent errors. |
Code does not run or produces incorrect results consistently, indicating a lack of understanding of the computational methods used. |
Missing |
\(W\), Writing and Presentation (20%) |
The essay is well-structured with a logical flow of ideas. Visualizations are clear, relevant, and enhance the understanding of the content. Proper formatting and adherence to specified guidelines are evident throughout the essay. |
The essay is structured logically but may have minor issues with flow or clarity. Visualizations are present but may not be fully optimized for clarity or relevance. Formatting is mostly correct but may contain minor inconsistencies. |
The essay has some structure but lacks logical flow in places. Visualizations are included but may not add significant value to the content. Formatting has several inconsistencies or errors. |
The essay lacks structure and logical flow, making it difficult to follow. Visualizations are unclear or irrelevant. Formatting is poor and does not adhere to specified guidelines. |
The essay is poorly presented with no clear structure, making it unreadable. No visualizations are included or they do not contribute to the understanding of the content. |
Missing |
\(R\), Reflection and Discussion (10%) |
Thoughtful reflection on the computational approach and its limitations. The discussion of implications and future work is insightful and demonstrates a deep understanding of the topic. |
Good reflection on the computational approach with some limitations discussed. The implications of the results are clear, but future work could be more detailed. |
Basic reflection on the computational approach with limited discussion of limitations or implications. Future work is mentioned but lacks detail. |
Minimal reflection on the computational approach with little to no discussion of limitations or implications. Future work is not considered. |
No reflection or discussion provided, indicating a lack of engagement with the computational process or its outcomes. |
Missing |
Your grade will be computed based on the weighted average of the above criteria. Each section (\(P\), \(C\), \(W\), and \(R\)) will be scored on a 4.0 scale as indicated above. Your final score (on a 100 scale) will be calculated as follows:
Additional Notes#
In addition to the above criteria, please ensure that your essay adheres to the following:
Posing a Clear Research Question: Your essay should clearly state the research question or hypothesis you are addressing. Explorative essays are acceptable, but they should still have a clear focus or objective.
Background Literature: Provide sufficient background information to contextualize your research question, including relevant theory, results, or previous work in the area. Any equations, figures, or tables used to support your background should be properly referenced and explained.
Citing Sources: If you reference any literature, code, or data, ensure that you provide proper citations. If you are using code from our class, please reference the specific lecture or assignment where it was introduced. For any external sources, use a consistent citation style (e.g., APA, MLA).
Ethical Considerations: Ensure that your computational work adheres to ethical guidelines, including disclosing the use of any generative AI tools for the developing, planning, or writing of your computational essay. If you used any AI tools to assist in the writing or coding process, please include how and where you used them in your essay.
Collaboration Policy#
Every person working together will receive the same grade unless otherwise discussed with Danny.
If you have any questions about the rubric or how your essay will be evaluated, please reach out to Danny for clarification.
As we discussed in class, generative AI tools (like ChatGPT, Bard, etc.) can be used to assist in the writing or coding process. However, you must disclose their use in your essay. Not disclosing the use of these tools will be considered a violation of academic integrity.
Academic Integrity#
Academic integrity is a core value of our course. By submitting your computational essay, you affirm that the work is your own and that you have not plagiarized or misrepresented the work of others.