Final score

mixel's picture

In this page we give details about the calculation of the scores. Note that the final score is always given by the teachers. If the teacher creates a "dummy" the calculation of the students gets neglected.So at all time, the next calculation is effective.

You can see the effect in the tables that always show the current situation: the total score table, the issue detail table and the evaluation detail table. The total score is the sum of: the score of the issue, the evaluation and bonus points. We shall now elaborate each in more detail.

Score for Issues

The final total score for your issues is obtained by following rules.

There are 3 types of issues: model, sensitivity/solver, MC (MonteCarlo simulation).
For each type only your best scoring issue, the top-score, is taken into account.

Each issue-evaluation yields a score as follows:
first following scale is used: bad=1.5, poor=2, reasonable=2.5, good=3, great=3.5,
which is multiplied by its level: basic *1, normal *2, advanced *3.

If there is a teacher's issue-evaluation it overrules all others (this guarantees
that the teacher has final say over all marks).
Otherwise the issue-evaluation-scores are then combined over all the (usually only two) evaluations received using a weighted average, with weights given by the corresponding meta-evaluations:
bad=0 (so is not counted), poor=1, reasonable=2, good=3, great=4
In this way good quality evaluations have more impact than low quality ones.
(Remark: issue-evaluations not yet meta-evaluated have provisionally weight 1)

The final total score of a student is the sum of all top-scores for the three types, and if necessary topped off at 10. See examples (link below).

Score for Evaluations

Basically we look at the average meta-evaluation of all the evaluations you did, which will give you a score in the range of bad=0, poor=3; reasonable=5; good=7 and great=9. The actual score will then also take into account if you did less than or more than the evaluations
you needed to do.
To get a grade of 10 you will also need to do meta-evaluations (see bonus points below).

Let us explain how you should understand this table. First, you have minimum criteria:

  • For every issue they put on "need-review", every student needs to evaluate two issues. These evaluations will also receive ratings (so-called meta-evaluations). Some issues may still be pending, in the evaluation detail table you can see several fields:
    • Need: shows the total number (amount) of evaluations you need to do.
    • Done: the number of evaluations done with a meta-evaluation (with a rating that is at least poor)
    • Pending: the number of evaluations that still need a meta-evaluation
    • Score: your current score (between 0 and 9 points)
    • Average: simply the mathematical average of all your evaluations, this is not your final score but may give you some info on what can become your score (in case you did not have the required amount of evaluations yet).

    A simple rule is that "done" + "pending" should be greater or equal to "need". Note the only value that should decrease is "pending" and this is done by meta-evaluation. The difference between score and average can be:

    • Negative: For every % your missing, you get -0.05 point. So missing 50% makes you lose 2,5 points.
    • Positive: You can make more evaluations than you need, in which case we only consider your best evaluations that fulfill the minimum criteria. For example if you need 4 and you made 6, we drop the two lowest evaluations you have.

    Evaluations inside a same project are allowed, but you need to have at least 1/2 of your evaluations outside your project. The rule is simple here, if you don't have the required evaluations of issues outside, you validate the rule above, so that it will decrease your score even if your total amount of evaluations are above the minimum.

Bonus points

Students can earn up to three bonus points for their collaboration within the system (creating qualitative comments). The details of this calculation are not given.

Note that dedicated students that can do meta-evaluation can earn additional evaluation point in a similar way.