Starting with your cylinders around arbitrary minor axes, I noticed that you did not number your cylinders. I'll have to take your word for it that they're all here, but as you can imagine, numbering them would have been very helpful.

Looking at the cylinders themselves, yours fall into two main categories. You've got cylinders where their side edges are running effectively parallel to one another on the page (suggesting a vanishing point at infinity, in the manner discussed back in Lesson 1), and cylinders with a bit of convergence to the side edges. In this regard, you ended up missing one critical point from the assignment section, as pictured here - in bold, it states that you should be varying the rate of foreshortening across your cylinders.

Of the two categories in which your cylinders fall, the second is fine, but the first is actually incorrect. That is because we do not actually control where the vanishing point goes - it is determined by the orientation of the edges in 3D space it's meant to govern. We do control how we want our cylinder to be oriented (and in this challenge they're all rotated randomly and freely), but the only situation in which our vanishing point ends up at infinity is if the set of lines it governs in 3D space run perpendicular to the viewer's angle of sight - that is, going straight across their field of view, not slanting towards or away from them through the depth of the scene. For anything else, there must be a convergence, even if only slightly, towards a concrete vanishing point.

Since our cylinders here are freely and randomly rotated, we can pretty much assume that we're never going to end up with such a perfect alignment, and thus, to have any of your side edges run parallel on the page (towards an infinite vanishing point), that would be extremely unlikely at best. To have a significant number across the set be that way would be fundamentally incorrect.

I also noticed a few cylinders scattered across the pages where you skipped on starting with a minor axis, and some where you skipped doing the error checking (as well as cases where you neglected to do both). As a whole, I feel you're definitely struggling when it comes to following the instructions that are laid out in the challenge, so unfortunately this section is going to require a redo.

As to the cylinders in boxes, there are definitely some here where you're once again forcing the vanishing points to infinity, but overall most of them are reasonably well done. This exercise is really all about helping develop students' understanding of how to construct boxes which feature two opposite faces which are proportionally square, regardless of how the form is oriented in space. We do this not by memorizing every possible configuration, but rather by continuing to develop your subconscious understanding of space through repetition, and through analysis (by way of the line extensions).

Where the box challenge's line extensions helped to develop a stronger sense of how to achieve more consistent convergences in our lines, here we add three more lines for each ellipse: the minor axis, and the two contact point lines. In checking how far off these are from converging towards the box's own vanishing points, we can see how far off we were from having the ellipse represent a circle in 3D space, and in turn how far off we were from having the plane that encloses it from representing a square.

In applying the line extensions correctly, you're allowing yourself to identify where your estimations can be adjusted to improve your proportions, ultimately rewiring the way in which your brain perceives those 3D forms, and developing your ability to draw squares in 3D space regardless of how they're oriented. Just be sure to avoid forcing edges to be parallel - for any exercise where you've got freely rotated forms, always work with convergences towards concrete vanishing points, even if those convergences are gradual.

Anyway, as I said, I am going to require you to redo the first part of the challenge. Be sure to include lots of variation in your rates of foreshortening, including both shallow convergences (not fully parallel side edges) and more rapid, dramatic ones.