2026 Set1 Prompts

Scoring Criteria:

The written response:

• describes a piece of documentation that would be appropriate to include with or in the program.

• explains how the documentation can be used by another programmer to better understand a particular code segment in the program.

Decision Rules:

Consider the Video, or Program Code if necessary, and Response 1 when scoring this point.

• Documentation is a description (e.g., text, video, or diagram) that helps someone understand how a code segment, procedure, or program functions or was developed.

• Appropriate uses of documentation include acknowledgment of code segments written by someone else or descriptions of what a code segment does or how it works.

• Responses can be a general description of the documentation or the actual documentation (e.g., a specific comment) that would be included with or in the program code.

Do NOT award a point if any of the following is true: 

• The description of the documentation is implausible, inaccurate, or inconsistent with the program.

• The explanation only references the user of the program and not another programmer.

Scoring Criteria:

The written response:

• identifies the variables and specific value(s) that cause the iteration statement to stop executing.

• explains why the identified value(s) cause the iteration statement to stop.

OR

• explains how the iteration statement stops executing if stopping the iteration statement is not controlled by any variables or specific values. 

Decision Rules:

Consider the PPR and Response 2a when scoring this point.

• If multiple iteration statements are included in the Procedure section of the PPR, use the first iteration statement to determine whether the point is earned. 

• The iteration statement does not need to be contained in a procedure to earn this point.

• The response can earn the point if the identified values lead to the program crashing as a way of exiting the loop, including forever loops.

• The response can earn the point if it describes how specific values are obtained or derived from the code even if the specific values are not explicitly given (e.g., using the length of a list as an identified value).

Do NOT award a point if any one or more of the following is true: 

• No iteration statement appears in the Procedure section of the Personalized Project Reference.

• The identified value(s), if given, do not cause the iteration statement to stop.

• The explanation is inconsistent with the code in the first iteration statement.

• The use of the iteration is trivial (i.e., does not affect the outcome of the program).

Scoring Criteria:

The written response:

• includes a call to the procedure with specific argument(s) that will cause the procedure to behave incorrectly.

• describes the incorrect behavior.

• explains why the incorrect behavior occurs as a result of the call.

OR

• explains why it is not possible for a call with accepted arguments to cause the procedure to behave incorrectly. 

Decision Rules:

Consider the PPR and Response 2b when scoring this point.

•  If multiple procedures are included in part (i) of the Procedure section of the Personalized Project Reference: 

  • Use the procedure referenced in the written response to determine whether the point is earned.

  • If no procedure is referenced in the written response, then use the first procedure to determine whether the point is earned.

• The procedure must have at least one explicit parameter. Explicit parameters are defined in the header of the procedure.

• The described behavior must be related to or dependent on the explicit parameter(s).

• A response that describes only the part of the procedure’s behavior that is relevant to the prompt may still earn this point. 

• The call may be the same as the one in the Personalized Project Reference.

• The syntax of the procedure call does not need to be correct if the response identifies the correct arguments to the procedure.

• A description of the call rather than program code is acceptable.

Do NOT award a point if any of the following is true: 

• A procedure is not identified in part (i) of the Procedure section of the Personalized Project Reference.

• The response does not apply to the procedure in part (i) of the Procedure section of the Personalized Project Reference.

• The use of the explicit parameter is irrelevant (e.g., does not affect the code segment of the procedure that is executed or is reassigned before being used).

• The identified arguments are not given specific values and are only described generally.

• The response includes an explanation that is implausible, inaccurate, or inconsistent with the procedure and its given argument(s).

• The response explains why it is not possible to write a call with arguments that cause the procedure to behave incorrectly instead of explaining why it is not possible for a call with accepted arguments to cause the procedure to behave incorrectly.

Scoring Criteria:

The written response:

• explains how the list uses abstraction to manage complexity in the program.

AND one of the following:

• • describes how the code segment in part (ii) of the List section would have to be adjusted to have the same behavior without the list. 

OR

• • explains why it is not possible to have the same behavior without the use of the list.

Decision Rules:

Consider the PPR and Response 2c when scoring this point.

• If multiple lists are included in the List section of the PPR: 

  • • Use the list(s) referenced in the written response to determine whether the point is earned. 

    • If no list is referenced in the response, then use the first list to determine whether the point is earned. 

Do NOT award a point if any of the following is true: 

•  A list (or other collection type) is not included in the List section of the Personalized Project Reference.

• The list is not being used in part (ii) of the List section of the Personalized Project Reference.

• The response includes an explanation or describes a behavior that is implausible, inaccurate, or inconsistent with the program.