Midterm Assessment

Time Estimate6-10 Hours   Grade Impact15%   Required for Pass  

Proposal DueOct 21 @ 5pm   Assessment DueOct 26 @ 12pm  

Additional Materials & Formats
Check Box for the most up-to-date versions of this lecture’s materials.

There are no traditional exams for this course. Students are expected to demonstrate competency via a flexible alternative. You are expected to propose and complete a midterm assessment that demonstrates a thorough understanding of topics in M1–M3.

The proposal is due during the lab session on October 21, but you are encouraged to submit it as early as possible. You may begin working on your assessment as soon as your proposal is accepted. The proposal appears as a separate (ungraded) assignment on Canvas, and feedback (including acceptance notifications) will appear in the proposal assignment.

Requirements & Rubric

The midterm assessment is graded on a 100-point scale and is worth 15% of the final grade. Partial credit is awarded to students who demonstrate an incomplete understanding.

• (10) Proposal, divided into:
  • (8) An informal, brief (under 500 words) written description of your proposed assessment
  • (2) A completed Midterm Checklist – ask if you need help adjusting a project.
• (8) Professionalism, divided into:
  • (4) Presentation (legibility, typesetting, etc.)
  • (4) Courtesy (punctuality, communication, etc.)
• (22) Breadth of Material, divided into:
  • (6) Integration of 3 topics from M1.
  • (8) Integration of 4 topics from M2.
  • (8) Integration of 4 topics from M3.
• (35) Theoretical Concepts, divided into:
  • (15) Demonstration of mathematical foundations.
  • (10) Synthesis of novel results (i.e., not found in course materials).
  • (10) Correct use of notations and diagrams.
• (25) Practical Applications, divided into:
  • (15) Application of mathematical foundations to real-world problems.
  • (10) Understanding of best practices for real-world systems.

If you’d like, you can view the spreadsheet I’ll use to grade the assessment. My advice for this assessment (and the rest of life) is to base your submission on this rubric. I applaud students who do extra work and enhance their education, but I will only award points for the items on this rubric.

Academic Integrity

Unless otherwise indicated, this assessment is governed by the following terms:

• Use of generative AI must be limited and disclosed. That is, generative AI may not be used to complete the intellectual effort for the assessment, and any usage of generative AI must be denoted with a disclaimer in the submission.
  • Example Acceptable AI Use:
    • I used ChatGPT to translate a scanned image of math notation into LaTeX code.
    • I passed my report through an AI proofreading tool before submitting it.
    • I asked Claude for feedback on my project idea before submitting it.
  • Example Unacceptable AI Use:
    • The “Related Work” section was produced using Gemini.
    • I used ChatGPT to translate a Boolean expression into a circuit diagram.
    • I asked Claude to do Shannon’s expansion on this expression.
• For sufficiently complex projects, students may work in small groups. These groups must be approved by the instructor, preferably before work begins. Otherwise, assessments must be completed individually. Students may consult their instructor for help, but not their classmates.
• The following materials may be used to help students complete all assessment types:
  • The “old internet” (i.e., reputable static websites, not generative AI)
  • Any book (printed or ebook)
  • Any academic paper
  • A calculator
  • Any resource permitted by the instructor.
• Submitted work must be original and produced exclusively by the student(s) named in the submission. I use a script to scrape the internet and identify likely plagiarism.
• All USU policies apply to this assessment.

Ideas

Mini Capstone Project. Students propose a unique digital circuit that is sufficiently complex to include concepts from the specified modules. This project should not re-use significant amounts of code from labs or homework assignments. The design should have a practical application. Sufficiently complex designs may be completed in small groups. Students submit the a project proposal including a theoretical design specification, Verilog code plus a testbench, a working project demonstration, and a brief experience report.

Research Paper. Students propose a research topic that encompasses concepts from the specified modules. The paper should synthesize academic conference papers and journal articles about the proposed topic. The paper should fill 5-10 pages (excluding references) and include many references, figures, and math to explore sufficient material. The paper should be professionally typeset; a template will be provided.

Educational Video. Students propose a topic for an educational video or series of videos covering topics from the specified modules. Students can work individually or in small groups to produce the video or series. Videos should be sufficiently detailed while remaining engaging. They should include references, figures, and math while giving high-level explanations of concepts. Students are encouraged to upload their videos to a public service like Youtube, Internet Archive, or Wikimedia Commons to promote open access to education.

Reverse Engineering. Students will receive a complex circuit specification (either a Verilog design or circuit diagram) with no comments, descriptive variable names, or other specification. Students are responsible for reverse-engineering the design and writing its theoretical specification, code comments, and descriptive variable names. If students believe the design contains errors, they provide corrections. Students submit the improved design and testbench alongside a detailed report. Available for midterm only.

Pedagogical Lab Kit. Students design a lab exercise to teach concepts from the specified modules. The lab exercise should be suitable for (hypothetical) future course use. Students should prepare lab instructions, starter files, example solutions, grading testbenches or scripts, and a short instructor walkthrough (video recording or script). Materials should be of comparable quality to those used in this course: professional typesetting, documented code, and detailed explanations. Existing lab materials may not be re-used.

In-person Oral Exam. I have prepared a selection of questions to ask in an interview-like exam that is expected to take about an hour. Students should prepare detailed notes and arrive prepared to discuss all specified modules. This could be great practice for a technical interview from a future employer. Students are responsible to schedule the exam, and it may be re-attempted until the student is satisfied with their grade. Additional attempts are likely to include a different selection of questions from previous attempts.

Traditional Take-Home Exam. Against my better judgment, I have prepared traditional take-home exam options. Students will have three days to complete the exam. It is open-book, open-notes, open-course-materials, but closed internet and must be completed individually. The exam will include theoretical as well as practical design questions. Exam scores are final and non-negotiable.