Project: Submit revised project proposals

  • Due Sep 29, 2023 by 11:59pm
  • Points 110
  • Submitting a text entry box, a website url, or a file upload
No additional details were added for this assignment.
1696049999 09/29/2023 11:59pm

Rubric

Keep in mind that 200 students have already been assessed using this rubric. Changing it will affect their evaluations.
Proposal revised submission
Proposal revised submission
Criteria Ratings Pts
User Need
threshold: pts
Edit criterion description
10 pts Exemplary The user need was unique, credible and relevant to the course. Compelling evidence was provided that demonstrated the user need and why its worth addressing.
7.5 pts Accomplished
5 pts Acceptable The user need is well-known or minimal evidence was provided to demonstrate that the user need exists or is worth addressing.
2.5 pts Emerging
0 pts Unacceptable The user need was not described, was not credible, or was not relevant to the course.
pts
10 pts
--
Additional Comments
Existing Solutions
threshold: pts
Edit criterion description
10 pts Exemplary All obvious prior solutions were described and why these solutions do not adequately address the stated user need.
7.5 pts Accomplished
5 pts Acceptable Prior solutions were described, but some obvious solutions were missed or it was unclear why the existing solutions do not already satisfactorily address the user need.
2.5 pts Emerging
0 pts Unacceptable None of the obvious prior solutions were identified.
pts
10 pts
--
Additional Comments
Project Idea
threshold: pts
Edit criterion description
30 pts Exemplary The project idea addresses a credible user need and has the potential to offer a useful insight relative to existing solutions.
22.5 pts Accomplished
15 pts Acceptable The project idea might work for the course but needs further development in terms of addressing the user need or offering a useful insight relative to existing solutions.
7.5 pts Emerging
0 pts Unacceptable The project idea will not be viable for the course. It does not address a credible user need or does not offer a useful insight relative to existing solutions.
pts
30 pts
--
Additional Comments
User Audience
threshold: pts
Edit criterion description
10 pts Exemplary The user audience was specific, believable, and highlighted users' goals and behaviors relevant to the project. It went beyond demographics.
7.5 pts Accomplished
5 pts Acceptable The user audience lacked specificity, was not fully believable, or relied mostly on demographics.
2.5 pts Emerging
0 pts Unacceptable Not described or believable.
pts
10 pts
--
Additional Comments
Feasibility
threshold: pts
Edit criterion description
10 pts Exemplary The project is feasible for the course and balances a unique insight with a narrow focus.
7.5 pts Accomplished
5 pts Acceptable Possibly feasible for the course with moderate revisions to the implementation plan.
2.5 pts Emerging
0 pts Unacceptable Not feasible for the course.
pts
10 pts
--
Additional Comments
Context of Use
threshold: pts
Edit criterion description
10 pts Exemplary The context of use was specific and believable and described how it might affect the project.
7.5 pts Accomplished
5 pts Acceptable The context of use was incomplete, some parts lacked clarity or credibility, or the connections to the project were missing.
2.5 pts Emerging
0 pts Unacceptable Not described or believable or no connection was made to the project.
pts
10 pts
--
Additional Comments
Slide Design
threshold: pts
Edit criterion description
10 pts Exemplary The design of the slide deck enhanced the content. The visual design, such as the choice of colors, fonts, layouts, and images were effective; and the content had a logical organization.
7.5 pts Accomplished
5 pts Acceptable The design of the slide deck had noticeable problems, such as fonts being too small, too much textual content on the slide, or illogical organization. The problems, though present, did not overpower the content.
2.5 pts Emerging
0 pts Unacceptable The design of the slide deck had many noticeable problems, such as the fonts being too small, having too much text on the slides, or illogical organization. The problems overpowered the content.
pts
10 pts
--
Additional Comments
Delivery
threshold: pts
Edit criterion description
10 pts Exemplary The team delivered the presentation effectively, highlighted the key insights of the project, and were well prepared for the presentation.
7.5 pts Accomplished
5 pts Acceptable The team delivered the presentation but there were noticeable issues with the delivery such as awkward pauses, skipping content, or team members interrupting each other or forgetting what to say.
2.5 pts Emerging
0 pts Unacceptable The delivery of the presentation was ineffective because the team was unprepared.
pts
10 pts
--
Additional Comments
Feedback Integration
threshold: pts
Edit criterion description
10 pts Exemplary The team effectively addressed the key feedback from peers and course staff and described how the feedback was incorporated into the prototype or explained why it was not.
7.5 pts Accomplished
5 pts Acceptable The team demonstrated that they incorporated some (but not all) of the key feedback from peers and course staff or the integration of the feedback was not satisfactorily described.
2.5 pts Emerging
0 pts Unacceptable The team did not demonstrate that they incorporated the feedback from peers and the course staff into the revised prototype, or it was not satisfactorily described.
pts
10 pts
--
Additional Comments
Total Points: 110 out of 110