Dartmouth College
Mathematics 3
Fall Term 1998
Evaluation of CSC Reports and Written Exam Questions
All writing in the CSC Reports and Exams should be in grammatically correct English just as in any other course at Dartmouth. We expect you to express your ideas using proper sentences, paragraphs, punctuation, and the like. Writing should be succinct and to the point. We will interpret an incoherent narrative to be an expression of faulty mathematical thinking.
The evaluation is holistic, with quality levels defined roughly as follows, and on the criteria stated below. Numbers on point-scales of 10 (for the CSCs), 50 (for the hour-exams) and 40 (for the final exam) are shown in parentheses.
Exceptional (CSCs: 10; Exams: 48-50; Final: 38-40):
The work goes well beyond the task assigned. The report is truly impressive, unusually complete and imaginative. Excellent use is made of graphical data and numerical data. The mathematical analysis is well motivated, and is clearly supported by the graphical and numerical data. Extensions or provocative new ideas are included. Only truly outstanding submissions will be designated as Exceptional.
Strong (CSCs: 8-9; Exams: 40-47; Final: 32-37):
The work in the report fully engages the major mathematical issues imbedded in the Problem. The report is complete and presented clearly. Both the graphical and numerical data are good and well chosen to convey information. The mathematical analysis makes good use of the graphical and numerical data. All in all, the report demonstrates a clear understanding of the fundamental issues of the topic being explored.
Respectable (CSCs: 6-7; Exams: 30-39; Final: 24-31):
The approach to addressing the issues contained in the topic being explored is largely sensible. The report engages most of the mathematical issues, while some small problems may remain. The choice of graphical and numerical data is sensible. The mathematical analysis makes sensible use of both the graphical and numerical data, and the analysis is correct for the most part. Overall, gaps and missing data may be present but they don't seriously hinder the usefulness of the report. Most reports should earn (we hope) a designation of Respectable.
Marginal (CSCs: 4-5; Exams: 20-29; Final: 16-23):
The work partially engages the major mathematical issues embodied in the topic being explored. The report is generally related to the assigned task, but gaps and problems are more prominent and get in the way of effective usefulness of the report. The graphical and/or numerical data are poorly chosen and do not contribute substantially to the mathematical analysis. The mathematical analysis has gaps. The report is not convincing.
Weak (CSCs: 2-3; Exams: 10-19; Final: 8-15):
The work on the topic being explored shows little depth. The effort is spotty, with only fragmentary evidence of understanding the use of graphical and/or numerical data in producing a report on the subject. The mathematical analysis is incomplete, and the report is not of much use.
Minimal (CSCs: 0-1; Exams: 0-9; Final: 0-7):
There is little or no meaningful work to examine. The approach taken is apparently devoid of knowledge of the ideas of calculus imbedded in the topic being explored.