CM1205-Coursework-Proforma-21-22 portfolio report代写

Cardiff School of Computer Science and Informatics
Coursework Assessment Pro-forma
Module Code: CM1205
Module Title: Architecture and Operating Systems
Module Leader: Dr Yipeng Qin
Assessment Title: Individual Portfolio
Assessment Number: 1
Date Set: Spring week 1
Submission Date and Time: 13th May, 2022 at 9:30am
Return Date: w/c 6th June, 2022
If coursework is submitted late (and where there are no extenuating circumstances):
1 If the assessment is submitted no later than 24 hours after the deadline,
the mark for the assessment will be capped at the minimum pass mark;
2 If the assessment is submitted more than 24 hours after the deadline, a
mark of 0 will be given for the assessment.
Your submission must include the official Coursework Submission Cover sheet, which can be
found here:
https://docs.cs.cf.ac.uk/downloads/coursework/Coversheet.pdf
Submission Instructions
Table 1 shows the files and formats expected for submission of your portfolio.
Table 1: Files for submission
Description Type Name
Cover sheet Compulsory One PDF (.pdf) file [student number]-cover-sheet.pdf
Portfolio Compulsory One Word file (.doc or .docx) [student number]-portfolio.(doc or docx)
This assignment is graded as either a PASS or a FAIL. Please note there is a strict 11-page
limit, and font should be Calibri size 11. Appendices and references do not count towards
this limit.
Any deviation from the submission instructions above (including the number and types of
files submitted) may result in a mark of FAIL for the assessment. Staff reserve the right to
invite students to a meeting to discuss coursework submissions
Assignment
Your assignment takes the form of a structured portfolio detailing how you completed each
task delivered throughout the module. The purpose of this assignment is for you to reflect
on what you’ve learned during the teaching activities. You will be able to reflect on your
initial understanding of topics including, but not limited to, the main components of a
computer system and their functionality, assembly language, and operating systems, and
engage in a self-reflection of how the exposure to the class material changed your initial
understanding. The portfolio is split into 11 sections corresponding to the 11 weeks and the
content is semi-structured: you must complete a section for each week like a diary/blog, yet
the content itself is expected to include your reflection on both the learning materials AND
your discussion with peers during the seminar (if applicable). Thus, each section is split into 2
parts:
⚫ Part 1: Reflection on Learning Materials. This part must include a discussion of topics
covered in asynchronous learning activities and perhaps a concise description of tasks
completed and how each contributed to your learning. You must cite all the external
materials you used, e.g. links to youtube videos, references to academic articles.
⚫ Part 2: Reflection on Seminar Discussions (if applicable). This part must include a
reflection on what you discussed during the seminar. For example, you can start by
showing your understanding of the topic before the seminar, and then summarize other
students’ ideas on the topic, and finally reflect on what you learned from the discussion
and what conclusions you have achieved.
When writing your portfolio, you should write each week as a self-contained entry, but you
can reference entries from other weeks to ensure all the material from the first section of
your learning portfolio are connected. This will allow you to write on a specific topic covered
each week, drawing from both academic and professional industries material, spanning text
and audio-visual formats, while showcasing your broad grasp of the module learning
material.
There is no right or wrong way to approach the learning portfolio. If you follow the
instructions, you have creative freedom in terms of which content you choose to include in
your work. For example, you may choose to include sketches, brief literature surveys, code
examples in Part 1 and mind-mapping or brainstorming figures in Part 2.
Template document
A template document is provided. Please see learning central for details and a link to
download the template. You must use this template as the basis for your portfolio
submission. In addition to the template, to help keep you on the right path when writing,
here are some suggestions to keep in mind:

• Writing style: Long sentences with complex prose should be avoided.
• Bullet points are acceptable but should not be overused. Apply them appropriately
  in moderation.
• Stick to the topic: it is easy to lose track and start writing about nonrelated or
  tangentially related concepts when discussing your work. Keep on point and
  maintain the focus of your writing on what you have done and what you have
  learned.
• Active voice: Write in an active tone, in the first person. Avoid sentences like “A
  literature review was completed covering…” and instead use “I completed a
  literature review covering…”.
  Learning Outcomes Assessed
  All learning outcomes specified in the module description are assessed in this assignment.
  Criteria for assessment
  As stated previously, this assignment is graded as either a PASS or a FAIL. Portfolios which
  meet the following criteria may receive a PASS mark:
• Contain an entry for each week of scheduled module activities. Note that you do not
  have to complete “Part 2: Reflection on Seminar Discussions” if it is not applicable,
  for example, a seminar is not scheduled that week. Note that you MUST email the
  lecturer and apply for an exemption if you cannot attend the seminars (e.g.
  disabilities).
• Demonstrate clearly your participation in module activities, and how they shaped
  your learning and understanding of the module.
• Reference your own work. Activities completed in seminars should be discussed
  from your perspective, detailing how/what you contributed to and learned from the
  discussion.
• Contain enough detail when describing tasks e.g. what the task was, how you
  managed to complete it, what the outcomes were, and citations to external
  materials.
  You may receive a FAIL mark if:
• There is at least one missing entry of the weekly scheduled module activities.
• Insufficient demonstration of your participation in module activities, and how they
  shaped your learning and understanding of the module.
• Little reference on your own work but descriptions of what your group did.
• Lacking details when describing tasks.
  To make it clearer, examples of high-quality/low-quality entries are included in the
  appendices for your reference.
  Feedback and suggestion for future learning
  Formative feedback on the submission is available, upon request, from the lecturer during
  Spring week 7. This feedback will indicate the quality of your submission and indicate a PASS
  or a FAIL grade.
  Feedback based on submissions from the entire cohort will be returned in Spring week 14
  via LearningCentral announcement and/or email.
  Your grade and individual feedback will be returned individually to you by the school office
  and LearningCentral respectively after the Exam Board.
  Appendices
  Examples of high-quality entry:
  Reflection on Learning Materials (Week 1)
  This was my first week with CM1205 Architecture and Operating Systems. This week was mainly an
  introductory week, so we did not do a seminar discussion. However, during our first seminar, we did
  do a little test in which we were placed in break out rooms to understand how it will be like in future
  weeks. The lecture materials for this week were an insight into the history of computer
  development. I have always found the development of computers fascinating because we now have
  everything we could need on a tiny little
  laptop where before we needed huge
  machines the size of a whole basement to
  do minor calculations.
  My favourite form of early computing to
  learn about must be the powerful abacus
  (Bellos, 2012). I was so amazed by the
  ability that the young girl, shown in the
  referenced video, had in using the tool to
  add such large numbers with units in the
  trillions, especially as I do not understand
  how to use it myself. From the lecture
  material for this week, the examples we
  were given on the different methods of calculations included the powerful abacus, multiplications
  using Napier’s bones (1617), and the Slide rule (1621). All the different methods that were invented
  in order to do calculations are incredible and it made me realise how much we really take modern
  calculators and computers for granted, especially since calculators
  are very common nowadays.
  After learning about the progress of calculators (which were referred to as computers in the past), I
  learnt about the people and their contributions to the development of computers. This went from
  the famous Charles Babbage, also known as the father of the computer, to Augusta Ada King, one of
  the first computer programmers and the first to recognise the full potential of computers, to Alan
  Turing, and finally to George Robert Stibitz, the first to propose the idea of something ‘digital’.
  Figure 1 – This image showcases the powerful abacus.
  Finally, we covered hardware implementation. Having done Von Neumann architecture in our first
  module CM1101 Computational Thinking, I was already familiar with it, but it was good to have a
  refresher. In order to further familiarise myself with the Von Neumann architecture, specifically the
  fetch-execute cycle, I watched a YouTube video, “The Fetch-Execute Cycle: What’s Your Computer
  Actually Doing?” (Scott, 2019). This video helped better my understanding of how the components
  within the control unit (CPU), such as the accumulator and instruction register, work together with
  the RAM to execute an instruction through the fetch-execute cycle.
  Reflection on Seminar Discussions (Week 5)
  This week we were tasked with creating an infographic of the registers in an 8086 microprocessor.
  Within this task, we were to act as graphics designers in a MOOC company and the infographics to
  be created were for the CM1205 module. An infographic is “a visual representation of information
  or data” (Nediger, 2020). When it comes to understanding the 8086 registers, I think that a visual
  representation is the best way around it – though, I may be biased because I tend to be a visual
  learner and learn better when presented with diagrams and images. Infographics can be used for
  several reasons, but in this case, they are required in order to explain a complex process.
  Upon joining the seminar this week, each of my peers, including myself shared our created
  infographics and then we made comments on one another’s. I found that we had all created similar
  infographics, whether it be Microsoft publisher, Word or PowerPoint. Before beginning, we
  discussed where we had created our designs and I mentioned that upon researching the topic, I
  found that there are
  many tailored websites
  for this specific area of
  design. However, we all
  opted for the simpler
  options. Upon starting,
  Simon showcased his
  infographic, and I was
  quick to point out that
  perhaps colour coding it
  may make it easier on a
  viewer’s eyes and allows
  each type of register to
  be classified by colour.
  My peers all agreed to
  this comment. I found it
  to be a common theme
  that we all tried to keep the writings minimal in order to make it more approachable and perhaps
  further explanations would be placed within the MOOC itself. Jasmine pointed out that it was
  noteworthy that most of us tried to follow the layout of the 8086 register and I agreed with this
  because it, again, makes it easier on the viewers eyes in terms of visualisation. The main goal was to
  be brief in explanation and create a visual experience. When one classmate had written quite a lot of
  text, my classmates gave him some constructive criticism recommending that he decrease the text
  content which I agreed with! Through reading the other descriptions my classmates had written, it
  inspired me to refine mine and to attempt to decrease some text a little. It also interested me to
  investigate the different types of registers again, specifically returning to a previous source and
  rewatching the video in order to refresh my memory.
  Figure 2 – the infographic I created for the week 5 seminar.
  Examples of low-quality entry:
  Reflection on Learning Materials (Week 2)
  This week I completed the week two slides. The slides went through basic computer architecture
  and the lower levels of the computer level hierarchy (logic gates, binary…). I have not previously
  learned about decoders and their role in the ALU. I later watched a couple of videos discussing
  neural networks, as it was briefly mentioned in the lecture. From the first video I understood how
  forward and backward propagation calibrated the “weights” to give more accurate results. The
  second video was a part of a tutorial series on using python to make neural networks. It shed light
  on the mathematics that occurred in the “hidden layers” and what methods to use when
  implementing it in python.
  Reflection on seminar (Week 3)
  This week’s seminar activity revolved around a scenario where we are required to compare two
  different CPU based on their specifications. The first CPU being the intel core I5-8265U and the other
  i7-3517u.
  From their names I could immediately see that the I7 processor is from a much older generation.
  Meaning the i5 would be the better option. Someone mentioned that the I5 had 4 cores compared
  to 2 for the i7. The obviously makes a big difference in performance. I mentioned that this can be
  quantified by the fact that the i5 has a clock speed of 3.9 Ghz compared to 3 GHz for the i7.
  It was concluded that these arguments would be sufficient to convince the customer. I think
  comparing CPUs is quite straightforward given the ample online information.