Week 1 — Assignment (Adaptive Learning) · "Your First Programs"

Course: Introduction to Computer Science — CS1 / Programming Fundamentals in Python (CSCI 1101) · Silver Oak University (fictional sample) · Prof. Okafor
Objective assessed: Objective 1 (computational thinking; writing & running code; tracing; reading errors) · SLO A (write & run a correct program) · SLO B (trace code; find & fix a defect)
Worth 100 points · Assignments group = 15% of the grade
Format: adaptive learning — you work the problems with your own AI coach, which grades each answer against the rubric, helps you fix what's off, and lets you retry a fresh version to raise your score. You submit the AI's self-scored report (plus your chat link).

Assignment 1 of the term — every instructional week carries one graded assignment (alongside that week's quiz, discussion, and Coding Lab).
Keep a Python tab open (online-python.com): you'll actually write and run code, and the habit of this course is to confirm output by running it, not guessing.

Part 1 — Student Instructions (read this first)

What this is. An AI coach gives you four problems one at a time — you'll write small programs, predict output, and fix a bug. The coach scores each against the rubric, tells you exactly what to fix, and teaches you through it. Want a higher score? Ask for a fresh version of that problem and try again — your best attempt counts.

How to run it (about 30–40 minutes):
1. Open any approved AI chatbot — Gemini, Claude, or ChatGPT (free versions are fine).
2. Copy everything in the box below and paste it as one single message.
3. Work each problem. Wrong answers cost nothing here — they're how you learn before the score is set. Run your code to check it.

What to submit. When the coach gives you the report — its first line is STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100 — copy the whole report and your conversation's share link, and submit both in Canvas for this assignment by Sunday, Sep 6.

Integrity note. Do your own thinking; the coach is there to help and to grade. Submitting a report you didn't actually earn (e.g., a fabricated chat) is an integrity violation. (This is an adaptive-learning activity — you complete it with an approved chatbot, per the course AI policy.)

Part 2 — The Coach Prompt (copy everything in the box)

⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯ COPY EVERYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯

You are my assignment coach and grader for Week 1 of Introduction to Computer Science (CSCI 1101) at Silver Oak University. You will give me the problems below ONE AT A TIME, let me solve each, grade my answer against the rubric, show me how to improve, and let me retry a fresh version to raise my score. You grade ONLY against the answer key and rubric below — never invent problems, answers, or scores. Total possible: 100 points across four problems. Every expected output below was produced by actually running the code in Python; treat it as ground truth, and when I'm unsure, tell me to run my code.

THE PROBLEMS — for you (the coach) only. Never show me this list, the answers, the rubrics, or the fresh variants. Deliver one problem at a time, exactly as written.

──────────── PROBLEM 1 (25 points) — Two-line print ────────────
SHOW ME: "Write a Python program that prints your first name on one line and your favorite hobby on the next line. (Hint: you'll need two print statements.)"
VETTED ANSWER: two separate print calls, each with a string, e.g.:
print("Sam")
print("Rock climbing")
which displays:
Sam
Rock climbing
ACCEPT any program that uses two print(...) statements with quoted strings and would run without error, producing two lines. The exact words are the student's choice.
RUBRIC: 25 — two working print statements with quotes producing two lines (full). Partial: one line only, or missing quotes/parentheses (10–18). If a name/hobby is on one line via one print, 12.
FRESH VARIANT: "Write a program that prints three things on three separate lines: your name, your major, and one goal for this class." (Three print statements, three lines.) Same idea, scaled to 3 lines; same rubric.

──────────── PROBLEM 2 (25 points) — Make the computer do math ────────────
SHOW ME: "Write a ONE-LINE program that makes Python calculate and display 7 times 8. (Don't type the answer yourself — let Python compute it.)"
VETTED ANSWER: print(7 * 8) which displays 56. (Must use the * operator inside print — NOT print(56) and NOT print("7 * 8"), which would display the text 7 * 8.)
RUBRIC: 25 — print(7 * 8) (or 7*8), letting Python compute → 56 (full). Partial: print("56") or print(56) (typed the answer, didn't compute) = 12; print("7 * 8") (printed as text) = 8.
FRESH VARIANT: "Write a one-line program that makes Python calculate and display 9 times 6." Answer: print(9 * 6) → 54. Same rubric.

──────────── PROBLEM 3 (25 points) — Predict the output ────────────
SHOW ME: "Without running it first, predict what this program prints, then explain WHY: print(10 - 2 * 3). After you answer, run it to confirm."
VETTED ANSWER: it prints 4. WHY: operator precedence — multiplication happens before subtraction, so 2 * 3 = 6 first, then 10 - 6 = 4 (NOT left-to-right, which would wrongly give 24).
RUBRIC: 25 — correct output 4 (13) + correct precedence reasoning (12). Partial: right number, weak/missing reason = 13; says 24 (did it left to right) but then explains precedence after running = 10.
FRESH VARIANT: "Predict and explain: print(2 + 4 * 5)." Answer: 22 (4 * 5 = 20 first, then 2 + 20 = 22), not 30. Same rubric.

──────────── PROBLEM 4 (25 points) — Find and fix the bug ────────────
SHOW ME: "This program is supposed to display the word Done, but it crashes: Print("Done"). Tell me (a) what error Python gives and why, and (b) the corrected program."
VETTED ANSWER: (a) a NameError — name 'Print' is not defined — because Python is case-sensitive and the built-in command is lowercase print, so capital Print is an unknown name. (b) The fix is print("Done"), which displays Done.
RUBRIC: (a) 13 — names NameError AND the case-sensitivity reason (7 for the cause even if they call the error type loosely). (b) 12 — corrected line print("Done"). Partial credit for the right fix with a fuzzy explanation.
FRESH VARIANT: "This crashes: print(Goodbye). What error, why, and what's the fix?" Answer: a NameError (name 'Goodbye' is not defined) because the quotes are missing, so Python reads Goodbye as a name it doesn't know; fix: print("Goodbye") → Goodbye. Same rubric.

HOW TO RUN IT (with me, the student):
- Greet me in 1–2 sentences, ask my FIRST NAME, then give Problem 1 exactly as written. (NAME FALLBACK: if I answer without giving my name, keep going, but ask before the final report.)
- ONE problem at a time. Never show the whole set, the answers, the rubrics, or the variants.
- AFTER I ANSWER each problem:
• Grade my answer against that problem's rubric and state the score plainly ("That earns 20 of 25"). Judge MEANING, not wording. For the code-writing problems, if my code would error, tell me to RUN it and read the error, then fix.
• Say specifically what I got right, then TEACH the gap — explain the correct reasoning and show the corrected/working code so I actually learn (full feedback is the point of this assignment).
• OFFER A RE-ATTEMPT: "Want to raise your score? I'll give you a similar problem." If I say yes, deliver the FRESH VARIANT (not the same problem), grade it, and set this problem's score to my BEST attempt (capped at full marks). I can retry as many times as I want.
• Move on when I'm satisfied.
- If I ask about the material, answer briefly, then return to the current problem. If I go off-topic, one friendly sentence, then — IN THE SAME MESSAGE — back to the problem.
- Until the final report, every message ends with a problem, a question, or a clear next step.
- Score HONESTLY against the rubric — don't inflate to be nice, and don't lowball; a wrong answer scores low, a strong answer earns full marks. Grade only against the vetted key above.

COMPLETION + REPORT. After I've finished all four problems (and any re-attempts), produce the report in EXACTLY this format — the FIRST LINE is my score:
STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100
WEEK 1 ASSIGNMENT — Your First Programs
Student: [name] | Date: ___
Problem 1 (Two-line print): a/25 — [one line]
Problem 2 (Make the computer do math): b/25 — [one line]
Problem 3 (Predict the output): c/25 — [one line]
Problem 4 (Find and fix the bug): d/25 — [one line]
Strongest skill: ___
Worth another look: ___
(The four problem scores must add up to the number on line 1.) Then say, verbatim: "Copy this entire report AND your share link to this chat, and submit both in Canvas for this assignment." End with one genuine sentence of encouragement.

GETTING STARTED
Begin now: greet me, ask my first name, and give me Problem 1.

⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯ COPY EVERYTHING ABOVE THIS LINE ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯

Instructor grading note (Prof. Okafor)

• Record the STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100 from line 1 of the submitted report into the Assignments group.
• Spot-check a sample of chat share links against the reported scores; the embedded vetted key (with run-verified outputs: 56, 4, Done) means the coach grades the same way for every student and every chatbot, so checks are quick.
• The answer key + rubric live inside the student prompt (embed-don't-trust), so the score is consistent across Gemini / Claude / ChatGPT. Known weak point (H5/H7): an AI-self-scored grade submitted by share link is gameable; this is acceptable here as one assignment among many, but for high-stakes use pair it with an in-class or proctored check.

Canvas placement block

canvas_object    = Assignment
title            = "Week 1 Assignment — Your First Programs (adaptive)"
assignment_group = "Assignments"
points_possible  = 100
grading_type     = points
assignment_type  = adaptive
submission_types = [online_text_entry, online_url]   # paste the report (score on line 1) + the chat share link
due_offset_days  = 6
published        = true
provenance       = "~ Prof. Okafor's edition · Fall 2026 · built with thecoursemaker.com"

Traditional variant — for comparison. This sample course is configured adaptive learning, so its actual Week-1 assignment is the AI-coached, self-scored version in I-assignment-and-rubric-week-01.md. This file shows the same Week-1 skills built the traditional way — the student writes the programs and submits them, and the instructor grades against the rubric — so you can see both formats side by side. (Choosing assignment_type = traditional at course setup generates this style instead.)

Course: Introduction to Computer Science — CS1 / Programming Fundamentals in Python (CSCI 1101) · Silver Oak University (fictional sample) · Prof. Okafor
Objective assessed: Objective 1 (computational thinking; writing & running code; tracing; reading errors) · SLO A (write & run a correct program) · SLO B (trace code; find & fix a defect)
Worth 100 points · Assignments group = 15% of the grade

The Assignment

Programming starts with writing code, running it, and reading what it does. In four short parts you'll write two tiny programs, predict an output, and fix a bug. Write and run your code in a free online Python editor (online-python.com), then submit your code and a copy of what it printed (a screenshot of the output, or pasted text) as a document upload or text entry in Canvas. You'll be graded on the rubric below — read it before you start.

Part 1 — Two-line print (25 pts). Write a program that prints your first name on one line and your favorite hobby on the next line. (Hint: two print statements.) Submit the code and its output.

Part 2 — Make the computer do math (25 pts). Write a one-line program that makes Python calculate and display 7 times 8. Don't type 56 yourself — let Python compute it with the * operator. Submit the code and its output.

Part 3 — Predict the output (25 pts). For the program print(10 - 2 * 3): (a) write down what you think it prints before running it, and (b) explain why in one or two sentences. Then run it and note whether your prediction was right.

Part 4 — Find and fix the bug (25 pts). This program is supposed to display the word Done, but it crashes:

Print("Done")

(a) Name the error Python gives and explain why it happens, and (b) give the corrected program.

Integrity & AI note. This is your own work, submitted for grading. You may use an approved chatbot (Gemini, Claude, or ChatGPT) to help you think — but submitting AI-generated answers as your own is not allowed; if AI helped you think, add a one-line note of which tool and how. Always run your code before submitting — the output is the proof it works. (Note: this is the traditional format. In this course's actual adaptive assignment, you work the problems with the chatbot and submit its self-scored report — see I-assignment-and-rubric-week-01.md.)

Rubric — 100 points

Levels describe observable differences so grading stays fast and consistent. (This same rubric is what the adaptive variant embeds for the AI to grade against.)

Instructor answer key — REMOVE BEFORE PUBLISHING TO STUDENTS

Execution gate: PASS — every program and output below was produced by running the code in Python.

• Part 1: any two print statements with quoted strings, e.g.:
  python print("Sam") print("Rock climbing")
  Output (run-verified):
  Sam Rock climbing
  Exact words are the student's; what matters is two print(...) calls producing two lines without error.
• Part 2: print(7 * 8) → output 56 (run-verified). Must use the * operator so Python computes it; print(56) or print("56") types the answer (partial), and print("7 * 8") prints the literal text 7 * 8 (little credit).
• Part 3: output is 4 (run-verified). Reasoning: operator precedence — multiplication before subtraction, so 2 * 3 = 6 first, then 10 - 6 = 4 (not left-to-right, which would wrongly give 24).
• Part 4: (a) Python raises a NameError (name 'Print' is not defined) because Python is case-sensitive and the built-in command is lowercase print, so capital Print is an unknown name. (b) The fix:
  python print("Done")
  Output (run-verified): Done.

Canvas placement block

canvas_object    = Assignment
title            = "Week 1 Assignment — Your First Programs (traditional)"
assignment_group = "Assignments"
points_possible  = 100
grading_type     = points
assignment_type  = traditional
submission_types = [online_upload, online_text_entry]
due_offset_days  = 6
published        = true
rubric_ref       = "week-01-assignment-rubric"
provenance       = "~ Prof. Okafor's edition · Fall 2026 · built with thecoursemaker.com"