There is no such concept as points in the traditional sense in this class.
Measuring your success with points implies items with the same “point value” equally represent your success and are ultimately interchangeable in the “final equation”. In the context of this class, we do not believe two half-correct math proofs are worth the same as one completely correct math proof. Many of our learning goals, such as mathematical communication, are not quantifiable by points.
Instead, the grading mechanism in this class is discrete at a micro-level and milestone-like at a macro-level. Similar grading mechanisms are regularly used at U of Washington CS, UCSD CSE, UNC Charlotte Software and Information Systems, and many other disciplines.
Here is a summary of our grading mechanism.
For every item (e.g., a question or subpart in an assignment), you receive an outcome (along with concrete technical feedback) that looks like one of the following:
E (Excellent or Exemplary): your work satisfies everything that we ask for and displays full mastery. There is no place where we feel an improvement is necessary. As the name suggests, your work can be directly shown to others.
S (Satisfactory but can use minor revisions): your work displays mastery and meets the learning goals, but there is room for improvement. For example:
there is one logical step in your proof that is technically correct but needs further elaboration
there is a minor arithmetic error in your work that does not impact your showcase of mastery
the concision in your mathematical writing needs some improvement
your proof is technically correct but contains bad practice
N (Not yet and need major revisions): your work does not display full mastery or does not satisfy the minimal requirement. For example:
your proof is technically incorrect
your proof relies on more assumptions than warranted
your approach is incorrect or you apply an approach incorrectly
U (Unassessable): your work is incomplete or does not provide enough information for the course staff to give concrete feedback. This is often rare, mostly only given to completely blank work.
For those who have taken CS216 and experienced the ESNU system in that class, note that our levels stay discrete and never map to points.
Your performance of the entire assignment is then an aggregate of the individual items.
For a Gradescope assignment, receiving S or above on all items will result in completing the assignment. Receiving one or more N/U will result in an incomplete and you will have the opportunity to correct these by the resubmit deadline.
Each assignment has an accompanying recitation and together they are considered a unit. Completing both the assignment and recitation (see [Recitation Policy] will result in completing the unit.
Specific details for exam grading will be released at a later date.
Letter grades in this class are earned by meeting a set of predefined requirements that will be released by the first day of class.
Note that everything including the exams has more than one attempt, and the highest scale of completion/performance is counted for each item.
Under this grading scheme, the grade that you receive is solely dependent on your own performance in the class and not others. In this sense, we encourage collaboration among your classmates. There is no "curve", and there is nothing in the course policy preventing everyone from doing well in the course.
Additionally, there should be no opacity in what grade you receive in this course. Unlike other courses that may have an arbitrary curve or adjustments applied upon grade calculation, at any given time during the term, you should have a clear idea of what else you need to complete or work towards in order to get the grade you desire.