Lap 8: Final Project - Analyze Your Final Project

Lap 8 : Final Project Your final project will be to analyze, design, and document a simple program that utilizes a good design process and incorporates sequential, selection and repetitive programming statements(i.e loops) as well as at least three functions and the use of at least three parallel arrays.

Your final project will be to analyze, design, and document a simple program that utilizes a good design process and incorporates sequential, selection and repetitive programming statements(i.e loops) as well as at least three functions and the use of at least three parallel arrays. Your program must collect all the information from the user, then do the calculations and display of the total counts. The specific problem you need to solve for the final project is: Design a program that will allow a user to Input a list of his Classmate's studentID along with their Student Major (where 1=Mathematics, 2=Comp.Science, 3=other) and Age. You must first collect all the information from the user ( three parallel arrays). Then, count the number of each Major and calculate the average age of the classmates. Finally display all the information collected (with each student information on a separate line). After the list is printed then display these counts of each of the Majors, and the average age. Optional data items: Student Name –Collect and Display +1pts Student City or Residence – Collect and Display +1pts Student Marital Status (Married,Single) – Collect and Count each and Display +2pts Gender (Male, Female) –Collect and Count each and Display +2pts There are 4 components of your submission including: ï‚· Analysis- Demonstrates your thought process and steps used to analyze the problem. Be sure to include the required input and output and how you will obtain the required output from the given input? Also, include your variable names and definitions. Be sure to describe the necessary formulas and sample calculations and processes that might be needed. ï‚· Design – choose 1 of the following two design tools….. o Program Design- A detailed, clear description of the program you are building. It should show the flow and logic of your program.(this is the outline approach) o Flowchart – Provide a flowchart for your design. You can use Excel, Word, Powerpoint, Visio or any software you have available that will allow to draw shapes and connectors o Pseudocode- Provide pseudocode of your overall design that fulfills the requirements of the project ï‚· Test plan - Prepare at least 1 set of input data (Test data) along with their expected output for testing your program. Your test data can be presented in the form of a table and must contain at least 10 classmates. ï‚· C-code – submit a separate .c or .txt file. - Make sure you code is documented with header and in-line comments and is neatly (i.e. indented properly) written All of these components (except the C-code) should be placed in word (or other acceptable) document for submission. OPTIONAL: You may choose to do the Pseudo-code instead of the C-code but it is only worth 15pts (meaning the highest possible grade will be a 90). And you must do the Program Design or Flowchart for the Design section. Additional details about the program you need to consider: 1. Class sizes vary, however you should design to be able to enter at most 40 Classmates, but be flexible enough to handle less than 40. It will be easier if you loop on studentID (which should be an Integer array) 2. Your test case should have at least 10 classmates. 3. Be sure to separate some functionality into functions. Having all functionality in the main module is not a good design. 4. Your design should consider how to indicate the classmate entry is complete. 5. Carefully consider the best data type for each of your variables. (e.g. when to use Float versus Integers versus Strings versus Boolean) 6. Strings in C are an array of characters, hence an array of Names will need to be two dimensions, one for the number of classmates, one for the length of the Names. 7. If you use one char for Gender the arrays can then be one dimension. But it may be easier to use an integer array and store a 1 or 2. OR a Boolean array. Suggestion: Do you Analysis and Design first then implement in C in a stepwise fashion. In others, implement the loop first, compile, and run. Then implement the next step (i.e. the prompts and input) then compile and run. Save your code at each step so you have something to fall back to. Submission requirements: See Submission requirements under Syllabus. Grading guidelines: Analysis: (20pts) Design: (25pts) Test Plan: (20pts) C-code: (25pts) OR Pseudo-code (15pts) Documentation: (10pts) - Header and In-line comments, Indentation, Filename specs Rubric NRNP_6675_Week8_Assignment_Rubric NRNP_6675_Week8_Assignment_Rubric Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIn 2–3 pages, address the following: • Explain your state laws for involuntary psychiatric holds for child and adult psychiatric emergencies. Include who can hold a patient and for how long, who can release the emergency hold, and who can pick up the patient after a hold is released. 15 to >13.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% The response includes a thorough and well-organized explanation of student's state laws for involuntary psychiatric holds for child and adult emergencies. 13 to >11.0 pts Good 80%–89% The response includes an accurate explanation of student's state laws for involuntary psychiatric holds for child and adult emergencies. 11 to >10.0 pts Fair 70%–79% The response includes a somewhat vague or inaccurate explanation of student's state laws for involuntary psychiatric holds for child and adult emergencies. 10 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of student's state laws for involuntary psychiatric holds for child and adult emergencies. Or the response is missing. 15 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome• Explain the differences among emergency hospitalization for evaluation/psychiatric hold, inpatient commitment, and outpatient commitment in your state. 15 to >13.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% The response includes an accurate and concise explanation of the differences among emergency hospitalization for evaluation/psychiatric hold, inpatient commitment, and outpatient commitment in your state. 13 to >11.0 pts Good 80%–89% The response includes a well-organized explanation of the differences among emergency hospitalization for evaluation/psychiatric hold, inpatient commitment, and outpatient commitment in your state. 11 to >10.0 pts Fair 70%–79% The response includes a somewhat vague explanation of the differences among emergency hospitalization for evaluation/psychiatric hold, inpatient commitment, and outpatient commitment in your state. 10 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% The response includes a vague explanation of the differences among emergency hospitalization for evaluation/psychiatric hold, inpatient commitment, and outpatient commitment in your state. Or the response is missing. 15 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome• Explain the difference between capacity and competency in mental health contexts. 10 to >8.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% The response includes an accurate and concise explanation of the difference between capacity and competency in mental health contexts. 8 to >7.0 pts Good 80%–89% The response includes an accurate explanation of the difference between capacity and competency in mental health contexts. 7 to >6.0 pts Fair 70%–79% The response includes a somewhat vague or incomplete explanation of the difference between capacity and competency in mental health contexts. 6 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of the difference between capacity and competency in mental health contexts. Or the response is missing. 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome• Select one of the following topics and explain one legal issue and one ethical issue related to this topic that may apply within the context of treating psychiatric emergencies: patient autonomy, EMTALA, confidentiality, HIPAA privacy rule, HIPAA security rule, protected information, legal gun ownership, career obstacles (security clearances/background checks), and payer source. 15 to >13.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% The response accurately and concisely explains one legal and one ethical issue related to the selected topic, within the context of treating psychiatric emergencies. 13 to >11.0 pts Good 80%–89% The response accurately explains one legal and one ethical issue related to the selected topic, within the context of treating psychiatric emergencies. 11 to >10.0 pts Fair 70%–79% The response somewhat vaguely or innacurately explains one legal and one ethical issue related to the selected topic, within the context of treating psychiatric emergencies. 10 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% The response vaguely or inaccurately explains one legal and one ethical issue related to the selected topic, within the context of treating psychiatric emergencies. Or, response is missing. 15 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome•Identify one evidence-based suicide risk assessment that you could use to screen patients. Attach a copy or a link to the assessment you identified. 15 to >13.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% The response identifies and explains an appropriate, evidence-based suicide risk assessment that could be used to screen patients. A copy of or a link to the assessment is included. 13 to >11.0 pts Good 80%–89% The response identifies an appropriate, evidence-based suicide risk assessment that could be used to screen patients. A copy of or a link to the assessment is included. 11 to >10.0 pts Fair 70%–79% The risk assessment identified is somewhat inappropriate for the intended use or dated. A copy of or a link to the assessment may be missing. 10 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% The risk assessment identified is inappropriate for the intended use, not evidence based, or dated. Or, response is missing. 15 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome• Identify one evidence-based violence risk assessment that you could use to screen patients. Attach a copy or a link to the assessment you identified. 15 to >13.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% The response identifies and explains an appropriate, evidence-based violence risk assessment that could be used to screen patients. A copy of or a link to the assessment is included. 13 to >11.0 pts Good 80%–89% The response identifies an appropriate, evidence-based violence risk assessment that could be used to screen patients. A copy of or a link to the assessment is included. 11 to >10.0 pts Fair 70%–79% The risk assessment identified is somewhat inappropriate for the intended use or dated. A copy of or a link to the assessment may be missing. 10 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% The risk assessment identified is inappropriate for the intended use, not evidence based, or dated. Or, response is missing. 15 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome•Written Expression and Formatting - Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria. 5 to >4.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.... A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria. 4 to >3.5 pts Good 80%–89% Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.... Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet they are brief and not descriptive. 3.5 to >3.0 pts Fair 70%–79% Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time.... Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are vague or off topic. 3 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 4.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors 4 to >3.5 pts Good 80%–89% Contains 1-2 grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors 3.5 to >3.0 pts Fair 70%–79% Contains 3-4 grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors 3 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% Contains five or more grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding 5 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome•Written Expression and Formatting - The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list. 5 to >4.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% Uses correct APA format with no errors 4 to >3.5 pts Good 80%–89% Contains 1-2 APA format errors 3.5 to >3.0 pts Fair 70%–79% Contains 3-4 APA format errors 3 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% Contains five or more APA format errors 5 pts