0x010088F6312065A70A44B630A6848498EAD80093CFEAFE161DC94D83C7C5C9A5A748B8

The course has run for the 3rd time and it continues to undergo active adjustments to improve the alignment between the content delivery, coursework for students, and the course objectives. Similar to 2022, there have been adjustments while running the course this year based on the previous year's feedback and based on the discussions with the students.<ul><li>More attention was given to self-study and self-work, including self-assessment and individual definitions of some of the coursework requirements. </li><li>The course introduced two obligatory tasks (obligs) that gave students the opportunity to experiment with their own study methods. The two obligs were based on the material from two books with a focus on selected chapters with specific material related to two new programming languages.</li><li>The course assignment structure has been adjusted to allow average and below-average students to complete the obligatory tasks with more ease, and to select non-compulsory assignments to suit students' learning styles and difficulty levels. The assignment structure was open-ended and allowed the better-performing students to pick non-compulsory coursework and tasks to their desired level of difficulty. </li><li>Similar to 2022, the material has been updated and streamlined to help the students with their study progression, and earlier bootstrapping tasks have been added to make the initial learning curve less steep.</li><li>The course included labs, that were relatively simple tasks (2-4 hours of work) done a few days before the lab day, to allow students to try and explore the lab before it has been discussed and demonstrated during the class. The feedback was that doing the labs in-the-class with the help of teaching staff instead of doing the lab at home alone would have been better, and more engaging. We run two out of 7 labs this way and it has been liked more by students participating. </li></ul> The course had a single teaching assistant, who was available and utilized by students for the assessment of the obligatory task. However, similar to 2022, the assistant has not been used by students much as a study aid. This needs further work in subsequent years when delivering the course. The quality measures involved direct communication with students during classes, feedback questions on the assignments and through the course wiki, as well as reflection and feedback questions during the final exam. There has also been an anonymous feedback form (requested by students) however it has only been used by two entries. Overall, the course successfully moved towards self-study and flexible composition of tasks for students subject to their own capabilities, interests, and motivation levels.

It is a 4th-semester course. The course consists of lectures, and labs (hands-on activities) that are conducted in the classroom as well as at home, as homework activities. The course requires students to read training material related to language theory (two books, but students can elect alternatives), conduct small programming tasks (labs0, as well as develop larger software artifacts with appropriate testing (assignments), documentation, and reflection reports. The course heavily utilizes self-assessment, self-reflection, and peer review. The peer review generally was welcome by students. The quality of peer-review varied between students but overall students' feedback was that they have learned both, by doing and by receiving feedback from their peers. Compared to the previous year, 2022, the learning outcomes in the course have been achieved by most of the students to a higher degree. Due to some of the course changes we were able to cover more material than in the previous year resulting in better learning outcome cover. Note, that the course has run for the third time and long-term comparisons of a specific cohort against course averages are not yet possible. The students' feedback on this year's course organization was mixed and polarised. The splitting of tasks into compulsory (easier) and non-compulsory (harder) structured the course better, alleviated some of the expectations and stress related to assignments, and generally worked better than in the 2021 year, but introduced some unexpected tensions compared to 2022. For some students, the flexibility and self-study/self-assessment nature of the course turn out to be challenging as they are unable to assess "where they are". The course had an external evaluator this year, who graded students' portfolios and the written exam. The external was very positive about the assessment and liked the students' work. He commented that the course has interesting coverage. The external has been harsher in both, the portfolio and the exam grading compared to the internal grading. The course coordinator is generally pleased with this year's performance and achieved objectives. The students have achieved, overall as a group, a bit more this year compared to last year.

The course continues to have a relatively high dropout rate. 48 students signed up, and 27 finished the course. This high dropout rate might be related to many elements and this is a target for further investigations. Most students feel overwhelmed with the amount of new concepts and materials. Some of the reasons might include a steep learning curve in the course itself, lack of work planning, and the need for context switching between all 4 relatively demanding courses. In this course, we have tried to flatten the workload and expectations as linearly as possible. This has worked better for Haskell and Rust in general and with the introduction of obligs. This semester, one problematic element was the introduction of external GUI dependency (SDL2) which caused problems on Windows (the interplay between Haskell and SDL2 worked seamlessly on Mac and Linux, but not on Windows). This needs more planning for next year. Exposing students to complex dependency chains and managing environments is within the course objectives however the progression needs to be made more linear and an effort be made to prevent students from getting stuck for long periods. SDL2 was a difficult factor contributing to some unscheduled workload and anxiety this semester for some of the students. The course also requires some re-alignment with earlier courses, especially Operating Systems and Algorithmic Methods, such that the course refreshes and builds on top of the concepts students gained there. Some feedback from students:<ul><li>having full week of time for preparing labs would work better than Sunday-Thursday.</li><li>labs should contain code reviews, but they should also allow students to work on the task at hand and ask questions</li><li>one student suggested 6 hours of contact time per week in the course instead of 4</li><li>tutorials were difficult, but helpful</li></ul>

NTNU:TIA:REST

Institutt for datateknologi og informatikk

Department of Computer Science

Alle trykte og håndskrevne hjelpemidler tillatt. Bestemt, enkel kalkulator tillatt.

Engelsk

Mer om vurdering

Anbefalte forkunnskaper

Forkunnskapskrav

Faglig innhold

Kursmateriell

Læringsutbytte

Læringsformer og aktiviteter

Avansert programmering

Informatikk

Program/system-utvikling

Bachelor i programmering

Bachelor i ingeniørfag - data

bidat

Web/Lists(guid'8b698a2d-6ad0-4f7d-b3be-219cc1979f02')/Items(23097)/FieldValuesAsText

The course is relatively new and undergoes active adjustments to improve the alignment between the content delivery and course objectives.There have been minor adjustments and changes while running the course this year based on the previous year's feedback and based on the discussions with the students.<ul><li>More attention was given to self-study and self-work, given that all the other courses in the 4th semester of BPROG have group work and group projects. The vast majority of students welcomed the self-, individual study and no group projects/assignments as a great feature.</li><li>The course assignment structure has been adjusted to allow average and below-average students to complete compulsory assignments and allow better-performing students to pick non-compulsory coursework.</li><li>The material has been updated and streamlined to help the students with their study progression, and earlier bootstrapping tasks have been added to make the initial learning curve less steep.</li></ul> The course had a single teaching assistant, who was available but not much utilized by students, and this needs further work in subsequent years when delivering the course.The quality measures involved direct communication with students during classes, feedback questions on the assignments and through the course wiki, as well as reflection and feedback questions during the final exam.

The learning outcomes have been achieved by most of the students. Note, that the course has run for the second time and long-term comparisons of a specific cohort against course averages are not yet possible. It is a 4th-semester course. The course consists of lectures, workshops (hands-on activities) as well homework-related activities. The course requires students to read training material related to language theory, conduct small programming tasks, as well as develop larger software artifacts with appropriate testing, documentation, and reflection reports. The students' feedback on this year's course organization was positive, and the splitting of tasks into compulsory (easier) and non-compulsory (harder) structured the course better, alleviated some of the expectations and stress related to assignments, and generally worked better than last year. Due to the hybrid nature of teaching, the teaching environment will be improved next year when the teaching can take full advantage of campus presence and in-person meetings with the students. The feedback, discussions, and informal chat have been limited due to the hybrid delivery.

The course had a single individual project that run from the start of the semester, however, most students have not started to do anything until after all the other assignments have been submitted. The project is designed to help students solidify their knowledge as they progress through the code, and provide an opportunity for refactoring, given more advanced techniques that the students are exposed to later in the semester. To achieve that, some intermediate checkpoints must be introduced throughout the semester to help students work systematically on their individual projects. The final submission of the project video worked really well for evaluation and allowed the students to focus the evaluation on the key elements that they picked as important. Additional feedback from students (paraphrased or copy verbatim as quotes):<ul><li>Rust is a preferred language for some students, compared to Haskell. Others have the opposite suggestion.</li><li>The exam had too many questions, and some students suggested less coding and more conceptual questions should be used. </li><li>Peer review should happen immediately after assignments (not with a delay).</li><li>The peer-review tool was generally not liked very much due to some usability problems.</li><li>"Three programming languages are tough to master in a single semester."</li><li>Some students liked the ability to improve submissions and re-submit, and some did not like it or did not use the opportunity to do so.</li><li>"Obligatory assignments in Rust should be included."</li><li>"I really liked the course, especially the fun assignments, they were creative and challenging!"</li><li>"While the course and the course material are interesting, it is easy to fall off as the lecturer focuses on showcasing the end result rather the method for getting there. The lecturer clearly knows what he is talking about, but takes little time to ensure that people actually understand what he is lecturing in. Some students follow this type of course really well, where their own exploration is the important bit, others struggle and fall behind because there is no real pointer on where to go."</li><li>"I liked that there were a lot of different coding concepts taught, but it was really hard to learn Haskell because of all the concepts and names which were hard to grasp. Monad, functors, applicative, are completely new and I don't have any concept on it from before, just the words themselves had no meaning before, but now they at least have some meaning even though I don't grasp it well."</li><li>"The exam was challenging but interesting."</li><li>"The exam was well put together."</li><li>"The course covers the material well. The lectures are helpful and the frequent hand-ins and peer-review process makes practice and learning steady. However, I wish there was more time and hand-ins dedicated to rust, especially since it was a significant fraction of the exam."</li><li>"The exam: I found the format very stressful, considering the large amounts of questions and short time limit."</li><li>"The course was interesting and challenging. The exam as well had a lot of questions which were well within reach for a mid tier student as well as some very challenging questions to differentiate the students which are a tier above the rest."</li><li>The information regarding delivery formats and requirements for submissions should be provided earlier in the course. </li></ul>

Ikke bestått

Bachelor i spillprogrammering

Bachelor i ingeniørfag, data

Web/Lists(guid'8b698a2d-6ad0-4f7d-b3be-219cc1979f02')/Items(17619)/FieldValuesAsText

This was the first time for the course to run. The rationale for the design of the course has been to introduce additional study points for fundamentals in programming. In the 10-study points program, 30pts have been allocated to three fundamental programming courses. After the change to 7.5pts study program, the 3 fundamental programming courses constitute 22.5pts, and this course fills the gap. The course adds additional content to fundamental programming, by introducing students to more programming languages and new paradigms. This semester this has been done through Haskell, Rust and Golang.

Knowledge - Understand fundamentals of multi-paradigm programming - Understand the fundamentals of lambda calculus and functional programming style - Understand the main features of a lazy functional language - Understand the computation and memory management issues affecting the sequential implementation of lazy functional languages - Understand event-driven programming, reactive programming, functional programming - Understand multi-thread/concurrent programmingSkills - Be able to discuss various programming paradigms: OO, functional, reactive, event-driven, defensive - Be able to write programs in a functional style, reactive style, and others - Reason formally about functional programs - Use polymorphism in OO and Functional programming paradigms - Be able to use higher-order functions - Reason about the time and space complexity of programs - Be able to use modern approaches to multi-threaded and concurrent programming tasksGeneral competence - Have improved programming abilities - Be able to discuss various solutions to different programming problems - Be able to contribute to a wide spectrum of programming environments

<ul><li>Lectures</li><li>Tutorials and exercises</li><li>Web-based learning (online resources, online lectures, tutorials)</li><li>Internal assignments</li><li>Project work</li></ul>

The final assessment is based on the portfolio (60%) and the electronic written exam (40%). Both are done through Inspera. The assignments and project work has been peer-reviewed through an electronic tool. The exam has a letter grade and the portfolio has a letter grade. The portfolio consists of 5 tasks plus project work done as a group project.

There has not been a previous evaluation yet. The course has run for the first time.

Alle trykte og håndskrevne hjelpemidler tillatt. Alle kalkulatorer tillatt.

Ingen hjelpemidler tillatt.

Web/Lists(guid'8b698a2d-6ad0-4f7d-b3be-219cc1979f02')/Items(12032)/FieldValuesAsText

Avansert programmering - PROG2006