GradingrubricforaGroupProject

Project Proposal and the System Analysis and Design Deliverable Rubric
Component
Teamwork
( 25 Points)

Contribution
( 25 Points)

Subject
Knowledge
( 25 Points)

Supporting
Material
( 20 Points)

Composition
( 5Points)

Sophisticated
Competent
Theteamworkedwell
The team worked well together
togethertoachieve
mostofthetime,withonlyafew
objectives.Eachmember
occurrencesofcommunication
contributedinavaluable
breakdownorfailureto
waytotheproject. Alldata collaboratewhenappropriate.
Membersweremostlyrespectful
sourcesindicatedahigh
level of mutual respect and ofeachother.
collaboration.
Allrequirementsand
All requirementsareidentified
objectivesareidentified,
andevaluatedbutsome
evaluatedandcompeted.
objectivesarenotcompleted.

Thedeliverableofferednew The deliverable offered some

information or approach to newinformationorapproachto
the topic under discussion. thetopicunderdiscussion.The
Likewise,the applicationis applicationisreasonable;
basedonstatedcriteria,
further analysis of someof the
analysisandconstraints.

alternativesorconstraints may
haveledtoadifferent
recommendation.

NotYetComplete
Teamdidnotcollaborate
orcommunicatewell.

Somememberswould
workindependently,
withoutregardto
objectivesorpriorities.A
lack of respect and regard
wasfrequentlynoted.
Manyrequirementsand
objectivesarenot
identified,evaluated
and/orcompleted.

The deliverable offered no

newinformationor
approachtothetopic
underdiscussion.Few
applicationconsiderations
areanalyzedandother
factorswereignoredor
incompletelyanalyzed.
Thedeliverable
not
Thedeliverabledemonstrated Thedeliverabledid
demonstratedknowledge
demonstrateknowledgeof
knowledgeofthecourse
ofthecoursecontentby
thecoursecontent,
contentbyintegratingmajor
integratingmajorand
conceptsintotheresponse.The evidenceof the research
minorconceptsintothe
deliverablealsodemonstrated effort or depth of thinking
response.Thedeliverable
aboutthetopic.
evidenceoflimited research
alsodemonstrated
effort and/orinitialofthinking
evidenceofextensive
aboutthetopic.
research effort and a depth
ofthinkingaboutthetopic.
Allrelevantinformation was Sufficientinformation was
Insufficientinformation
obtainedandinformation
obtainedandmostsources
wasobtainedand/or
sourceswerevalid.Analysis were valid.Analysisanddesign sourceslackvalidity.
anddesignconsiderations considerations were
mostly
Analysisanddesign
werewellsupportedbythe supportedbytheinformation.
considerationswere
not
information.
supportedbythe
informationcollected.
Thedeliverablewas
well

The deliverable was organized Thedeliverablelacked

organizedandclearly
and clearly written for the most overallorganization.The
written.Theunderlying
part. In some areas the logic readerhadtomake
logicwasclearlyarticulated and/orflowofideaswere
considerableeffortto
and easy to follow. Words difficult to follow. Wordswere understand the underlying
were chosen that precisely wellchosenwithsomeminor
logicandflowofideas.
expressedtheintended
expectations.Diagramswere Diagramswereabsentor
meaningandsupported
consistentwiththetext.
inconsistent withthetext.
readercomprehension.
Sentenceswere

mostly
Grammaticalandspelling
Diagramsoranalyses
grammatical and/or only a few errorsmade it difficult for
enhancedandclarified
spellingerrorswerepresentbut the readertointerpret the
textinplaces.
theydidnothinderthereader.
presentationofideas.
Sentenceswere

grammatical and free

from errors.
page 1 of 1

ApplicationDemonstrationRubric

Component

Sophisticated

Theteamworkedwelltogether
toachieveobjectives.Each
membercontributedina
valuablewaytotheproject.All
data sources indicated ahigh
levelofmutualrespectand
collaboration.
Contribution Thedemonstrationofferednew
informationorapproachabout
( 30Points)
theapplication .The
demonstrationalsoshowed
strongeffortwasmadein
breakingnewgroundand
building excitement about the
application.

Thedemonstrationwas
Contentand
imaginativeandeffectivein
Creativity
conveyingideastothe

(40Points)
audience.
Teamwork
( 30 Points)

page 1 of 1

Competent

NotYetComplete

The team did not collaborateor

communicationwell.Some
memberswouldwork
independently,withoutregardto
objectivesorpriorities.Alackof
respectandregardwas
frequentlynoted.
The demonstrationoffered somenew Thedemonstrationwasnot
informationorapproachaboutthe
complete andoffered nonew
application. Thedemonstrationalso
informationorapproachabout
showedinitialeffortwasmadein
theapplication.The
buildingexcitementaboutthe
demonstration also showed that
application.
littleeffortwasmadeinbuilding

excitementaboutthe
application.
Thedemonstration techniquesused
Thedemonstration failed
to
wereeffectiveinconveyingmainideas, capturetheinterestofthe
butabitunimaginative.
audience and/orisconfusing in
whatwascommunicated.
Theteamworkedwelltogethermost
ofthetime,withonlyafew
occurrencesofcommunication
breakdownorfailuretocollaborate

when necessary. Members

weremostlyrespectfulofeachother.

FinalPresentationRubric

Component

Sophisticated

Competent

Content and
Creativity

The presentationcontained an
abundanceofmaterialwhich
clearlyrelatedtothemain
arguments.Externalresearch
wasusedtojustifyarguments
or solutions.Thepresentation
ofthematerialwasoriginaland
presentedinacreativeway
thatheldaudienceattention.

Thepresentationcontainedmaterialto
support the main arguments, but: 1)
not all material clearly related to the
mainarguments; 2) limited external
researchwasusedtojustify
arguments orsolutions;
and/or3)thepresentationof

the material was appropriate, but

only somewhat
heldaudience
attention.

Speaking
Skillsand
Participation
(30Points)

Team membersweremostlyaudible
Teammemberswerepoised
and/orfluent on thetopic,but:1) not
andhadcleararticulation.
allteammembersspokeand/or

Everyteammemberspoke
participatedinahighandbalanced
participatedatavery
and
level;2)speakersdemonstratedfair
highandbalancedlevel.
volumeand/oreyecontactwas
Speakersdemonstrated
brokenwith audience; 3)light
goodvolume,and eye
discomfortwithpublic speaking was
contact.Enthusiasmand
exuded; and/or 4)thepresentation
confidencewasexuded.
slightlywentoverthe10

Thepresentationfitintothe
timeallotmentof10minutes. minuteallotment.

NotYetComplete

Theaudiencehadtomake
considerableeffortto
understandtheunderlying
(40Points)
logical and flow of ideas. Major
aspectsoftheanalysisor
recommendationswereabsent.
Noexternalresearchwasused
tojustifyargumentsorsolutions.
Thepresentationlacked
creativityanddidnothold
audienceattention.

The thesis,argument,solution
Thethesis,argumentand
Thethesis,argumenta ndsolution
Coherence
wereclearly stated, but: 1)not all
and exampleswerenotclearly
solutionwereclearlystated
and
exampleswere supportive
stated.Theconclusionwas
andexampleswere
Organization
appropriate.Thetransitions
unclear.Thetransitionsandflow
illustrations; 2) thetransitions
(30Points)

werenotlogical.Slides
and flowwereeasyto follow. and /orflowweresomewhat
difficulttofollow;and/or3)slideswere containederrorsandalackof
Slideswereerror- freeand
error-freeandlogicallypresented.
logicalprogression.
logicallypresented.

Teammemberswereoften
inaudibleand/orhesitantand
reliedheavilyonnotes.
madedistracting
Speakers
littleorno
gestureswith
audienceeyecontact.
A highlevelof discomfort
withpublicspeakingwasexuded.
Thepresentationwentoverthe

10 minuteallotment.

IndividualReflectionEssayRubric

Component

Sophisticated
Contributions Theindividualcontributedina
valuablewaytotheproject.
(50Points)
The individualisalsoableto
articulate the key performance
criteriaofsuccessfulteams
andevaluatethegroup
performanceaccordingly.
Theindividualhadalevel
Lessons
Learned
of engagementthat
demonstratedastrong
(50Points)
commitment to the classand

thelearningoutcomes.The
voiceoftheindividualwriteris
evident.

page 1 of 1

Competent
Theindividualdidnotcontributeas
heavilyasothersbutdidmeetall
responsibilities.Theindividual isalso
abletoidentifysomekey
performance criteriaofsuccessful
teamsand/ordrawrelated
connectionsthegroupperformance.

Theindividualhadalevelof
engagementthatdemonstrateda
commitmentto theclassand/orthe
learningoutcomes.Thelevelof
analysisandreflectioncouldhave

beendeeper.

NotYetComplete
Theindividualdidnotcontribute
totheprojectandfailedtomeet
responsibilities.Theindividual
doesnotidentifykey
performancecriteriaof
successfulteamsordraw
inferencetoownexperience.
Theindividualhadalevelof
engagementthatdidnot
demonstrateacommitmentto
theclassorthelearning
outcomes.Conclusionssimply
involvedrestatinginfo rmation
withoutreflectivethought.