NEA remark advice - AQA A level Computer Science NEA

Hi,
I just got the mark back for my computer science nea, I had planned for it to be a multiplayer first person shooter, i got 27/75, my writeup wasn't perfect since my testing and evaluation was really short due to my ambitious plans and I rushed it to finish my project. I had 105 pages of actual writeup which mostly consisted of my design, explaining how the algorithms i coded would work in the solution, and 105 pages of code in the technical solution of my writeup. But my code has alot of functionality, I implemented TCP servers for main menu/lobby interaction, UDP servers for the ingame multiplayer environment, cross table SQL, using aggregate prompts within the code, an authentication system that uses 2 hashing algorithms to salt and hash users passwords, and their details are stored in an SQL table, I had grid map generation, where a random map was generated each time, with further algorithms to generate obstacles based on the initial generation of the map, and then use of flood fill algorithms to find areas for players, enemies, or AI to spawn, I also had some calculations for movement and shooting, as well as A* pathfinding for the AI, with a sound system for the AI to pathfind directly to the player when in a given radius,
I only really got to show the testing for the TCP server, main menu with leaderboards, sql stuff, and authentication system since i couldn't really figure out how to put together all the other classes i had created for the main functionality for the game into a 3D enviroment properly, since I was coding in python using the panda 3d library, and there wasn't really many good tutorials to show how to put it all together, or at least help me learn how to.
so i had all this functionality in my code, but i only got 27/75, is it worth appealing? I'm not sure if its because i don't have evidence that the code actually works due to my limited testing, but if you look and read the code, you can understand what it is meant to do, and see the complex algorithms behind it.
I feel my teacher has been lazy, just read over my write up, ignored my code and only used my testing as a measure of how far into coding i got, and just gave me a mark based on that, 3 other students i spoke to who also got marked by her also got lower marks than expected, with 18/75, 38/75, and 52/75, these last 2 students put alot of effort in too. we have 2 teachers, so the other half of the class that got marked by the other teacher had marks like 57/75, 60/75, 72/75, 68/75, each teacher marks 7 students each, i feel i got the lazier teacher that left it to last minute, and rushed her marking. one of the students in the other batch of students who got 57/75 had done her entire NEA in 2 days, with a 30 page writeup, and 300 lines of code, but she had met all of her objectives because there wasn't many, and i think demonstrated that her code met her functions in her testing.
Do you think that my mark is justified since i didn't directly demonstrate in testing that i met my objectives? or that the algorithms aren't exactly ran and tested within testing? I do feel that if you looked at the algorithms and you had done enough training to become an a level computer science teacher, you should be able to understand the logic behind some code
If you have any further questions please let me know, I can still get the grades I wanted, but i feel I should've gotten a higher mark for the amount of effort i put into coding this.

I'm not sure about you but our college is allowing us to appeal our marks, if your teacher doesnt allow that you could try speak to your head of department, or perhaps even headteacher and get your parents involved as it is 20% of our grade afterall

yeah our sixth form allows us to appeal it, but do you think based on the info i have given, whether it is worth appealing, do you think the mark is justified since i didn't really show testing for half the code, im not sure. I'm gonna speak to the marking teacher on monday, im just looking for advice since I'm desperate for answers as soon as possible.

Hi,
I just got the mark back for my computer science nea, I had planned for it to be a multiplayer first person shooter, i got 27/75, my writeup wasn't perfect since my testing and evaluation was really short due to my ambitious plans and I rushed it to finish my project. I had 105 pages of actual writeup which mostly consisted of my design, explaining how the algorithms i coded would work in the solution, and 105 pages of code in the technical solution of my writeup. But my code has alot of functionality, I implemented TCP servers for main menu/lobby interaction, UDP servers for the ingame multiplayer environment, cross table SQL, using aggregate prompts within the code, an authentication system that uses 2 hashing algorithms to salt and hash users passwords, and their details are stored in an SQL table, I had grid map generation, where a random map was generated each time, with further algorithms to generate obstacles based on the initial generation of the map, and then use of flood fill algorithms to find areas for players, enemies, or AI to spawn, I also had some calculations for movement and shooting, as well as A* pathfinding for the AI, with a sound system for the AI to pathfind directly to the player when in a given radius,
I only really got to show the testing for the TCP server, main menu with leaderboards, sql stuff, and authentication system since i couldn't really figure out how to put together all the other classes i had created for the main functionality for the game into a 3D enviroment properly, since I was coding in python using the panda 3d library, and there wasn't really many good tutorials to show how to put it all together, or at least help me learn how to.
so i had all this functionality in my code, but i only got 27/75, is it worth appealing? I'm not sure if its because i don't have evidence that the code actually works due to my limited testing, but if you look and read the code, you can understand what it is meant to do, and see the complex algorithms behind it.
I feel my teacher has been lazy, just read over my write up, ignored my code and only used my testing as a measure of how far into coding i got, and just gave me a mark based on that, 3 other students i spoke to who also got marked by her also got lower marks than expected, with 18/75, 38/75, and 52/75, these last 2 students put alot of effort in too. we have 2 teachers, so the other half of the class that got marked by the other teacher had marks like 57/75, 60/75, 72/75, 68/75, each teacher marks 7 students each, i feel i got the lazier teacher that left it to last minute, and rushed her marking. one of the students in the other batch of students who got 57/75 had done her entire NEA in 2 days, with a 30 page writeup, and 300 lines of code, but she had met all of her objectives because there wasn't many, and i think demonstrated that her code met her functions in her testing.
Do you think that my mark is justified since i didn't directly demonstrate in testing that i met my objectives? or that the algorithms aren't exactly ran and tested within testing? I do feel that if you looked at the algorithms and you had done enough training to become an a level computer science teacher, you should be able to understand the logic behind some code
If you have any further questions please let me know, I can still get the grades I wanted, but i feel I should've gotten a higher mark for the amount of effort i put into coding this.

Marks have to be moderated within the school so both teacher should be marking it.

For us a random student was selected to be moderated, it was a different student to me.

Well that seems very lax and most will be sent to the board for external moderation. See below
https://www.aqa.org.uk/subjects/computer-science/a-level/computer-science-7517/specification/subject-content/non-exam-assessment-the-computing-practical-project
https://www.aqa.org.uk/subjects/computer-science/a-level/computer-science-7517/specification/non-exam-assessment-administration
'6.4 Internal standardisation
You must ensure that you have consistent marking standards for all students. One person must manage this process and they must sign the Centre declaration sheet to confirm that internal standardisation has taken place.
Internal standardisation may involve:
6.5 Annotation
To meet Ofqual’s qualification and subject criteria, you must show clearly how marks have been awarded against the marking criteria in this specification.
Your annotation will help the moderator see, as precisely as possible, where you think the students have met the marking criteria.
Work can be annotated using either or both of the following methods:

'6.9 Moderation
You must send all your students' marks to us by the date given at aqa.org.uk/deadlines . You will be asked to send a sample of your students' NEA evidence to your moderator.
You must show clearly how marks have been awarded against the assessment criteria in this specification. Your comments must help the moderator see, as precisely as possible, where you think the students have met the assessment criteria. You must:
The moderator re-marks a sample of the evidence and compares this with the marks you have provided to check whether any changes are needed to bring the marking in line with our agreed standards. Any changes to marks will normally keep your rank order but, where major inconsistencies are found, we reserve the right to change the rank order.'

Yeah we were told this too about the exam board receiving a sample, I plan to discuss it with my teacher on Monday, depending on whether she marked like this intentionally or not, she should hopefully either change my mark or provide me with a genuine reason for my low score, or she will blabber on with reasons for me not to appeal, since that may affect her since she has marked inaccurately.

I didnt show testing for quite abit of the code, because it didnt fully work, but because i got my code fairly marked with time spent the teacher picked out where i used certain high level code. testing has such little marks comparative to other sections that basing the project on that could miss out on like 25 marks tbh, worst case scenario with appealing you dont go up, but its much more likely when they sit with your code and spend time on it youll go up

Has it been annotated as described so you can understand the marking?

we have literally just received a raw mark on a google classroom post, no scoring board or anything specific.

You need to see the coursework with your teacher - it MUST be annotated so you can decide whether to appeal.

The only issue is, the code wasn't printed out onto the writeup which we handed it, but the code is available on the digital copy, we were instructed to do this, my main theory is that she assumed what mark to give my code based on what she saw in my testing, without actually looking at any of the python files or my digital write up which includes my code, my code is over 3500 lines long, I think my analysis and design are near perfect, so i think i wouldve gotten basically full marks in those sections, thats about 16-18 marks, the other 9-11 marks could be a few from testing and technical solution, and maybe 1 mark from evaluation. 3500 lines of code that actually has functionality doesn't really make sense to get practically 0 marks. It says the technical solution can get up to 27 marks for complex algorithms, and 15 for completeness, guess ima have to figure out on monday

There must be some comment to show it's all been marked Read the guidance I posted straight from the AQA website.

i guess ima have to wait till monday to find out

I would definitely appeal based on what you’ve said and the low mark but keep in mind it may not improve. I just got my NEA back too and while not as bad as yours something similar happened with one of my algorithms (a user based matrix recommendation system). I also didn’t have much time to do testing and pretty much rushed that and evaluation on the last day.
My teacher explained that although everything was good, because i didn’t properly show how it worked in testing (either the processing in PyCharm’s console or the list of recommendations changing in one account while the rest of the program was being used) it wasn’t obvious whether or not it was fully functional and therefore didn’t count as one of my type A techniques, luckily I had several others that were shown properly so i didn’t lose too many marks by not meeting the requirement of it being A level standard.
From what it sounds like, maybe only 2 things of what you showed in testing counted as type A techniques (TCP server and Relational Databases) and unfortunately if you don’t have enough of those shown to be working it’s possible to be automatically put in the lowest band of marks because your project ‘isn’t of A level standard’ and lots of marks can also be taken off if you don’t show that its meeting all the objectives you set out as well. It’s really unfortunate and i feel like many schools don’t put enough emphasis on how important testing is and what you actually need to show in it. But just in case your appeal fails, these are the likely reasons why. Definitely go for it though, its always worth appealing if you genuinely thinks there’s an issue and i obviously don’t know what your teachers are like.
Hopefully my personal example is of some help.

I would definitely appeal based on what you’ve said and the low mark but keep in mind it may not improve. I just got my NEA back too and while not as bad as yours something similar happened with one of my algorithms (a user based matrix recommendation system). I also didn’t have much time to do testing and pretty much rushed that and evaluation on the last day.
My teacher explained that although everything was good, because i didn’t properly show how it worked in testing (either the processing in PyCharm’s console or the list of recommendations changing in one account while the rest of the program was being used) it wasn’t obvious whether or not it was fully functional and therefore didn’t count as one of my type A techniques, luckily I had several others that were shown properly so i didn’t lose too many marks by not meeting the requirement of it being A level standard.
From what it sounds like, maybe only 2 things of what you showed in testing counted as type A techniques (TCP server and Relational Databases) and unfortunately if you don’t have enough of those shown to be working it’s possible to be automatically put in the lowest band of marks because your project ‘isn’t of A level standard’ and lots of marks can also be taken off if you don’t show that its meeting all the objectives you set out as well. It’s really unfortunate and i feel like many schools don’t put enough emphasis on how important testing is and what you actually need to show in it. But just in case your appeal fails, these are the likely reasons why. Definitely go for it though, its always worth appealing if you genuinely thinks there’s an issue and i obviously don’t know what your teachers are like.
Hopefully my personal example is of some help.