Boring homework

Peer assessment for last week's code projects time. Two students had almost identical submissions that weren't links to code in the repl.it online IDE thingie we were supposed to submit links to, just .html attachments to the submission, which is fine, exact the almost identical part. They were both broken in a bunch of ways, many of them shared with the broken skeleton we were given and some new ones. The original skeleton pulls in a fire-bug.js from before Firefox had Firebug built in, amazingly enough, so the course materials may be about as old as Ewe People. Both the same render() function that nothing calls that use a variable that was never initialized and calls methods on it, or tries to. Call render() in the debugger and it fails in the extremely predictable way. One of the three submissions worked great. It could have been more complicated instead of using flat shading and been a more interesting shape, but by golly, full credit. Interesting to see that cheating is alive and well at the 4000 level there. Maybe I should transfer everything to the (British) Open University, if it'll go, which it might, being distance-ed to distance-ed.

I was kind of wondering why instructors fuss so much about perfect APA7 references and I'm realizing that that's a big part of the veneer of respectability here. I know DeVry costs a lot more but I wonder if it's actually better than this not that I would do that.

R reports that the bridge is broken, on top of the pool, and Tempe doesn't get a Tour de Fat, so, everything is broken.