Technical Paper

Technical Paper: Object-oriented Programming (OOP) / Event-Driven Programming (EDP) versus Procedural Programming (PP)

Criteria

Unacceptable

Below 60% F

Meets Minimum Expectations

60-69% D

Fair

70-79% C

Proficient

80-89% B

Exemplary

90-100% A

1. Identify at least two (2) advantages to using OOP as compared to using only PP.

Weight: 20%

Did not submit or incompletely identified at least two (2) advantages to using OOP as compared to using only PP.

Insufficiently identified at least two (2) advantages to using OOP as compared to using only PP.

Partially identified at least two (2) advantages to using OOP as compared to using only PP.

Satisfactorily identified at least two (2) advantages to using OOP as compared to using only PP.

Thoroughly identified at least two (2) advantages to using OOP as compared to using only PP.

2. Create one (1) original example of a class with at least one (1) attribute and one (1) method. Identify what the class in question represents, the attributes the class stores, and the purpose of the related method. Next, examine the relationship between the class, attributes, and methods that you have identified. Weight: 25%

Did not submit or incompletely created one (1) original example of a class with at least one (1) attribute and one (1) method. Did not submit or incompletely identified what the class in question represents, the attributes the class stores, and the purpose of the related method. Did not submit or incompletely examined the relationship between the class, attributes, and methods that you have identified.

Insufficiently created one (1) original example of a class with at least one (1) attribute and one (1) method. Insufficiently identified what the class in question represents, the attributes the class stores, and the purpose of the related method. Insufficiently examined the relationship between the class, attributes, and methods that you have identified.

Partially created one (1) original example of a class with at least one (1) attribute and one (1) method. Partially identified what the class in question represents, the attributes the class stores, and the purpose of the related method. Partially examined the relationship between the class, attributes, and methods that you have identified.

Satisfactorily created one (1) original example of a class with at least one (1) attribute and one (1) method. Satisfactorily identified what the class in question represents, the attributes the class stores, and the purpose of the related method. Satisfactorily examined the relationship between the class, attributes, and methods that you have identified.

Thoroughly created one (1) original example of a class with at least one (1) attribute and one (1) method. Thoroughly identified what the class in question represents, the attributes the class stores, and the purpose of the related method. Thoroughly examined the relationship between the class, attributes, and methods that you have identified.

3. Describe at least one (1) feature of object-oriented programming that Visual Logic lacks.

Weight: 20%

Did not submit or incompletely described at least one (1) feature of object-oriented programming that Visual Logic lacks.

Insufficiently described at least one (1) feature of object-oriented programming that Visual Logic lacks.

Partially described at least one (1) feature of object-oriented programming that Visual Logic lacks.

Satisfactorily described at least one (1) feature of object-oriented programming that Visual Logic lacks.

Thoroughly described at least one (1) feature of object-oriented programming that Visual Logic lacks.

4. Identify at least one (1) advantage to using event-driven programming, as compared to using purely procedural programming.

Weight: 20%

Did not submit or incompletely identified at least one (1) advantage to using event-driven programming, as compared to using purely procedural programming.

Insufficiently identified at least one (1) advantage to using event-driven programming, as compared to using purely procedural programming.

Partially identified at least one (1) advantage to using event-driven programming, as compared to using purely procedural programming.

Satisfactorily identified at least one (1) advantage to using event-driven programming, as compared to using purely procedural programming.

Thoroughly identified at least one (1) advantage to using event-driven programming, as compared to using purely procedural programming.

5. 3 references

Weight: 5%

No references provided

Does not meet the required number of references; all references poor quality choices.

Does not meet the required number of references; some references poor quality choices.

Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices.

Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices.

6. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements

Weight: 10%

More than 8 errors present

7-8 errors present

5-6 errors present

3-4 errors present

0-2 errors present