AlgoRhythmic Reflection
On April 3rd from 8:30 to 9:30, the AlgoRhythmic Performance occurred in the PAC. A video of our group’s performance, the quick sort performance, has been posted on Youtube. The link to the video of our performance is here.
Additionally, a link to all of 3 our practices, which all 16 members of our members each attended, has been posted on Youtube. The link to the video of our practices is here.
The link to our script is here. My major contribution to the script was writing the rap at the end that summarized quick sort. I was the person carrying the juice in bogo sort in the performance.
These are the posters we used for advertising (which doubled as the numbers for quick sort and bogo sort):
This is what every judge said:
| Criteria | Judge | Score | Feedback |
|---|---|---|---|
| Algorithmic Accuracy | Erika Larsen, Reanna Hightower (Math Department co-chairs) | 9 | Wanted the numbers to be readable |
| Artistic Impression | Patrick Coleman (Arts and Electives chair) | 9 | Liked the music, also wanted the numbers to be readable |
| Career Ready | Nandhu Nandakumar (CTO Alat, VP LG, Father of 2 former DN CS students in UCs) | 9 | Said that he struggled to maintain focus of both quick sort and bogo sort but liked the comparison |
| Career / College Juggling | Tristan Copley (Del Norte 2023, Zenith R&D, Miramar College) | 9 | Also liked the comparison between quick sort and bogo sort |
| College Ready | Abhijay Devi (Del Norte 2022, UCSD CS Major) | 9 | Liked the entire scene, also wanted the numbers to be readable |
Things We Did Great On
Our AlgoRhythmic performance was a success thanks to several key elements that came together seamlessly. First and foremost, the presentation was highly organized, allowing for a clear and cohesive delivery. The decision to display two algorithms side by side was particularly effective, making it easy for the audience to compare and understand the efficiency of each. This layout also maximized the use of space on stage, contributing to a visually appealing performance.
One standout aspect was the incorporation of music, which significantly enhanced the atmosphere and was well-received by both the audience and judges. The effort put into finding fitting music paid off, elevating the overall impact of the performance. Additionally, despite not having fully memorized his lines, Rohin’s energetic delivery infused the presentation with emotion and enthusiasm, compensating for any minor lapses in memorization. Bharghav’s comedic relief also added a delightful touch, showcasing skilled delivery.
In terms of preparation and coordination, our team excelled in creating management materials such as drawings explaining the Quick Sort algorithm and stage directions. This ensured that everyone had a comprehensive understanding of the sorting process and choreography. The creation of props, such as orange juice bottles/cans and decorative signs, added depth to the performance, complementing the coordinated all-black outfits.
Emotion played a crucial role, with rehearsed performances by Rohin and Vinay, guided by prior direction and feedback sessions. The involvement in music creation by Haseeb contributed dynamism, underscoring the execution of the sorting process without major errors. Overall, our success stemmed from careful planning, effective collaboration, and passionate execution, resulting in a memorable and well-rounded algorithmic performance.
Things We Could’ve Done Better:
To enhance our AlgoRhythmic performance, several key areas could have been improved. Firstly, clarity in presentation was lacking, particularly with our “costumes” which obscured our numbers and made it difficult for the audience to follow. This issue affected the overall comprehension of our performance. Additionally, our script needed refinement to convey a clearer narrative, enabling better audience engagement and understanding of the storyline. Further rehearsal of the script was also necessary to ensure smooth delivery and comprehension by all participants.
Teamwork proved to be a significant challenge due to uneven distribution of responsibilities and lack of cooperation among team members with varying commitments. This led to some members being overburdened, working unhealthy hours to compensate for others’ lack of participation. Communication was another weak point, as crucial information and deadlines were often ignored until late in the process, preventing timely adjustments and improvements to the performance. This was evident in the lack of response to script revisions and poor attendance at rehearsals, resulting in disorganized practices.
Commitment issues were prevalent, with some team members unwilling to contribute effectively to essential aspects of the performance, such as participating in the quick sort portion or accepting roles vital to the overall success of the project. This lack of commitment disrupted the cohesion and quality of our performance. Furthermore, individual shortcomings, like failure to memorize lines or excessive reliance on phone prompts during the show, detracted from the professionalism of our presentation.
The script development process was particularly challenging, marked by disagreements and delays in reaching compromises. Some members were resistant to changes, prolonging the process unnecessarily. Our planning was also subpar, highlighting the need for better coordination and commitment to executing tasks efficiently. Ultimately, these shortcomings impacted our performance compared to other teams who experienced smoother practices and more effective collaboration.
In summary, addressing issues related to clarity in presentation, teamwork, communication, commitment, script development, and planning would have significantly enhanced the quality and success of our algorithmic performance. Implementing these improvements would contribute to smoother rehearsals, clearer execution, and better overall team cohesion in future projects.
Other Performances:
Among the various AlgoRhythmic performances showcased, Tanisha’s group tackled Bubble Sort with a captivating dating show concept. This approach was not only informative about the sorting method but also infused with humor and clarity, making the complex topic accessible. Ethan’s group presented Merge Sort with a visually impactful demonstration reminiscent of clusters forming and merging, enhancing understanding significantly.
Paaras’s team took on Selection Sort with a rap performance that, while entertaining, posed initial challenges in comprehension. Each group’s unique take on the sorting algorithms provided varied perspectives. The first performance by the “Pool Noodles” stood out for its creativity, incorporating rap and engaging narration that effectively conveyed the sorting process. The second performance, featuring the speaker’s group, was similarly lively and informative, managing to cover two different sorting methods effectively.
The third performance, centered around Bubble Sort in a “bachelorette” theme, showcased a creative approach with paired participants, offering an entertaining twist to algorithmic concepts. In the fourth performance, styled as a Murder Mystery play, the group’s theatrical execution brought a narrative flair to the explanation of algorithms, demonstrating innovative ways to engage and educate the audience. Each performance reflected the diversity of creative interpretations applied to the technical topic, making the learning experience enjoyable and memorable.