Project Grading Sheet
Student IDs ________________ ________________ ________________
The points below are just "convenience" checkpoints to help structure the grading. However, the grade is mostly based on your project as a whole; getting many satisfactory checks does not necessarily guarantee a good project.
| Completeness of Portfolio | Missing | Incomplete | Satisfactory |
| 1st deliverable (screens+design rationale) | O | O | O |
| working demo | O | O | O |
| heuristic evaluation | O | O | O |
| redesign rationale+final design critique | O | O | O |
| Screen snaps/design rationale | Poor | Okay | Great |
| practical realization of storyboards | O | O | O |
| fixes major flaws in storyboards | O | O | O |
| shows progress of design | O | O | O |
| good rationale behind design | O | O | O |
| Sophistication and quality of design | O | O | O |
| Heuristic Evaluation | Poor | Okay | Great |
| Problems categorized by heuristics | O | O | O |
| Major problems detected | O | O | O |
| Severity ratings are reasonable | O | O | O |
| Main points of the evaluation are summarized | O | O | O |
| Sophistication and quality | O | O | O |
| Implementation: completion | Poor | Okay | Great |
| depth of interface shown | O | O | O |
| breadth of interface shown | O | O | O |
| non-interface aspects | O | O | O |
| scope of project | O | O | O |
| sophistication and quality | O | O | O |
| Implementation: Graphical Design | Poor | Okay | Great |
| visual appearance | O | O | O |
| sensibility of layouts | O | O | O |
| sophistication and quality | O | O | O |
| Implementation: Usability | Poor | Okay | Great |
| simple and natural dialog | O | O | O |
| speaks the users language | O | O | O |
| minimizes memory load | O | O | O |
| consistent | O | O | O |
| provides feedback | O | O | O |
| clearly marked exits | O | O | O |
| shortcuts for experts | O | O | O |
| user error handling | O | O | O |
| provides relevant help | O | O | O |
| use of windows/dialog structures | O | O | O |
| Implementation: Technical Aspects | Poor | Okay | Great |
| robust/bulletproof | O | O | O |
| sophistication | O | O | O |
| code | O | O | O |
| Demonstration | Poor | Okay | Great |
| group present | O | O | O |
| group members all understand project | O | O | O |
| gave a good feel of system | O | O | O |
| Overall impression | Poor | Okay | Great |
| of final design | O | O | O |
| of design evolution | O | O | O |
| of portfolio | O | O | O |
| of heuristic evaluation | O | O | O |
| of demonstration | O | O | O |
| of implementation | O | O | O |
| of complete project | O | O | O |
Grade: A+ ... A ... A- ... B+ ... B ... B- ... C+ ... C .... C- ... D+ ... D ... D- ... F+ ... F ... F-
'''Note : A is superior ; B is better than expected; C is adequate; D is poor; F is unacceptable Students are invited to see the T.A. for further comments on their report.'''