<aside> 🚀
The information on this page is an exempt from the EER (Education and examination Regulations). For the full version, please click here.
</aside>
Access to the exam is automatically granted once a student completes all the course modules. The student can work on the test at their own pace and submit it when they are satisfied with the result. After submission, an examiner will reach out to the student to schedule the examination date.
The evaluation process for the course will vary based on its duration. However, a crucial step at the end of each course involves conducting a comprehensive code review of the student's product. This assessment focuses on examining the implementation of course-specific aspects within the student's deliverable. The primary objective is to determine whether the required elements of the course have been correctly incorporated into the final product.
The table below shows the different types of examination which will occur per duration of the course, as well as the (amount of) examiners. While this standardisation applies to most courses, deviations from this structure may occur if a particular course is not well-suited to a specific examination method. In such cases, an alternative approach can be considered to better align with the course's objectives and content.
| Course duration | Examination Type | Examiners |
|---|---|---|
| 2 - 3 week | Code Review | 1x A |
| 4 - 5 weeks | Code Review | 1 x A |
| Criterion oriented interview | 1 x B | |
| 6 - 8 weeks | Code Review | 1 x A |
| Criterion oriented interview | 1 x B | |
| Presentation | 1 x A, 1 x B | |
| Internship (20 weeks) | Presentation | 1 x A, 1 x B |
| Written report | 1 x A, 1 x B | |
| Reflective Assignment | 1 x A, 1 x B | |
| End project | ||
| (package manager) | Code Review | 1 x A |
| Criterion oriented interview | 1 x B | |
| Presentation | 1 x A, 1 x B | |
| Written report | 1 x A, 1 x B | |
| Reflective Assignment | 1 x A, 1 x B |
You can find an overview of the assessment types per course on this page:
The process includes the following key components:
Code Review
During the code review, students present an application that incorporates feedback received from prior evaluations. This phase emphasizes iterative improvement and showcases the student's ability to implement constructive criticism. Students are required to submit a detailed account of the modifications and enhancements made to their application based on the feedback.
Presentation
Students will deliver a presentation to introduce their application, starting with the key decisions made during the development process. This includes explaining their rationale, highlighting the primary features of their package manager, and describing how various components interact within the application's architecture. Students will also reflect on potential improvements, discussing ways to enhance functionality and user experience. The presentation offers an opportunity to articulate both the strengths and challenges of the project.
Written Report
The written report serves as a comprehensive product description, providing valuable insights for new team members. This document includes an overview of the application’s architecture, key components, and their interdependencies. The report aims to give future developers a thorough understanding of the system's design, features, and inner workings, ensuring a smooth onboarding process for new team members.
Criterion-Oriented Interview
In a criterion-oriented interview, students engage with examiners to discuss the technical details of their codebase, as well as the development decisions made throughout the project. This segment evaluates the student's understanding of their work, requiring them to articulate their design choices, code functionality, and alignment with project requirements. The interview offers a platform for students to demonstrate their technical expertise and critical thinking abilities.
Reflective Assignment
As part of the graduation process, students complete a reflective assignment to assess their personal and professional growth throughout the project. This reflection encourages students to consider the skills they developed, the challenges faced, and how they have evolved as software developers. By critically evaluating their journey, students gain insights into their strengths and areas for future improvement.