> Source URL: /demos/cs1-path/projects/project-2.rubric
---
project: project-2
title: Multi‑Week Weather Analyzer Rubric
total_points: 100
---

# Project 2: Multi‑Week Weather Analyzer – Rubric

This rubric is used to evaluate [Project 2: Multi‑Week Weather Analyzer](project-2.spec.md).

## Correctness (40 points)

Does the program produce correct multi‑week analysis results?

| Criterion                   | Points | Description                                                                |
| --------------------------- | ------ | -------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| Weekly averages             | 10     | Correctly computes and reports the average for each week                   |
| Overall average             | 10     | Correctly computes the total average across all 28 days                    |
| Hottest/coolest day finding | 10     | Identifies correct temperature AND week/day for hottest and coolest values |
| Classification counts       | 10     | Correctly counts Hot/Mild/Cool days per week                               |

### Deductions

- -5 points: incorrect nested loop logic
- -3 points: minor miscalculations
- -2 points: incorrect rounding or formatting

## Code Quality (30 points)

Is the code clean, readable, and appropriately structured?

| Criterion       | Points | Description                                              |
| --------------- | ------ | -------------------------------------------------------- |
| Nested loop use | 10     | Uses nested loops to process weeks and days effectively  |
| Variable naming | 10     | Meaningful, descriptive variable names                   |
| Function use    | 10     | Includes at least two helpful functions with clear roles |

### Deductions

- -5 points: avoiding functions when beneficial
- -3 points: confusing variable names
- -3 points: repeated logic that should be in a function

## Output Format (20 points)

Is the final report complete, clear, and easy to read?

| Criterion       | Points | Description                                                        |
| --------------- | ------ | ------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| Weekly summary  | 8      | Shows averages and category counts for all weeks                   |
| Overall summary | 8      | Shows overall average + hottest and coolest days                   |
| Readability     | 4      | Output uses spacing, labels, and formatting to improve readability |

### Expected Output Structure

```
=== Multi‑Week Weather Report ===

Week 1 Average: ...
Week 2 Average: ...
...
Overall Average: ...
Hottest Day: ...
Coolest Day: ...

Weekly Categories:
- Week 1: Hot X | Mild Y | Cool Z
...
```

### Deductions

- -4 points: missing sections
- -2 points: unclear labels or inconsistent formatting

## Documentation (10 points)

Does the code include meaningful comments?

| Criterion       | Points | Description                                      |
| --------------- | ------ | ------------------------------------------------ |
| Header comment  | 3      | Name, date, project description at top of file   |
| Inline comments | 7      | Key logic and functions include helpful comments |

### Deductions

- -3 points: missing header comment
- -2 points: no inline comments
- -1 point: comments are unclear or unhelpful

## Bonus Opportunities (+5 max)

- +2 points: additional statistics (median, weekly variance, trend detection)
- +2 points: especially clean function organization
- +1 point: elegant or creative presentation

## Common Issues to Avoid

1. Forgetting to track both **week number** and **day name** for extremes
2. Flattening data incorrectly instead of using nested loops
3. Missing function usage (everything in one long script)
4. Incorrect classification boundaries
5. Weak or missing documentation

## Feedback Format

Provide feedback using this structure:

```
Correctness: XX/40
- Weekly averages: ...
- Overall average: ...
- Hottest/coolest: ...
- Classification: ...

Code Quality: XX/30
- ...

Output Format: XX/20
- ...

Documentation: XX/10
- ...

Total: XX/100

Strengths:
- ...

Areas for Improvement:
- ...
```


---

## Backlinks

The following sources link to this document:

- [Rubric](/demos/cs1-path/index.path.llm.md)
- [project-2.rubric.md](/demos/cs1-path/projects/project-2.spec.llm.md)