Project Grading Sheet

HCILectures.SystemRedesignImplementationGradingSheet History

Hide minor edits - Show changes to output

April 17, 2007, at 10:36 PM by 24.64.76.194 -
Deleted line 222:
(:cell :) O(:cellnr :) of heuristic evaluation
Added line 224:
(:cellnr :) of heuristic evaluation
Added line 227:
(:cell :) O
April 17, 2007, at 10:36 PM by 24.64.76.194 -
Added lines 172-241:
(:cellnr :) '''Implementation: Technical Aspects'''
(:cell :) '''Poor'''
(:cell :) '''Okay'''
(:cell :) '''Great'''
(:cellnr :) robust/bulletproof
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) sophistication
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) code
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O\\
\\

(:cellnr :) '''Demonstration'''
(:cell :) '''Poor'''
(:cell :) '''Okay'''
(:cell :) '''Great'''
(:cellnr :) group present
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) group members all understand project
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) gave a good feel of system
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O \\
\\

(:cellnr :) '''Overall impression'''
(:cell :) '''Poor'''
(:cell :) '''Okay'''
(:cell :) '''Great'''
(:cellnr :) of final design
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) of design evolution
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) of portfolio
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O(:cellnr :) of heuristic evaluation
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) of demonstration
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) of implementation
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) of complete project
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O\\
\\
Changed line 246 from:
'''Note : A is superior report; B is better than expected; C is adequate; D is poor; F is unacceptable
to:
'''Note : A is superior ; B is better than expected; C is adequate; D is poor; F is unacceptable
April 17, 2007, at 10:32 PM by 24.64.76.194 -
Changed lines 82-85 from:
\\
\\

(
:cellnr :) '''Final Design Critique'''
to:
(:cellnr :) '''Implementation: completion'''
Changed line 86 from:
(:cellnr :) indicates major problems
to:
(:cellnr :) depth of interface shown
Changed line 90 from:
(:cellnr :) indicates how they could be solved
to:
(:cellnr :) breadth of interface shown
Changed line 94 from:
(:cellnr :) demonstrates a design evolution
to:
(:cellnr :) non-interface aspects
Changed lines 97-105 from:
(:cell :) O \\
to:
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) scope of project
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) sophistication and quality
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
\\
Changed lines 108-112 from:



(:cellnr :) fixes major flaws in storyboards
to:
(:cellnr :) '''Implementation: Graphical Design'''
(:cell :) '''Poor'''
(:cell :) '''Okay'''
(:cell :) '''Great'''
(:cellnr :) visual appearance
Changed lines 116-135 from:



(:cellnr :) Organization
(:cell :) 0
(hard to follow)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (well organized)
(:cellnr :) use of white space
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cellnr :) use of illustrations (if any)
(:cell :) 0 (adds little)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (really helps)
(:cellnr :) overall visual appearance
(:cell :) 0 (ugly)
(:cell :) 0 (acceptable)
(:cell :) 0 (wow!)
to:
(:cellnr :) sensibility of layouts
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) sophistication and quality
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O \\
Changed lines 126-308 from:
(:cellnr :) '''Language and writing style'''
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cellnr :) Spelling/grammar
(:cell :) 0 (proof read!)
(:cell :) 0 (minor)
(:cell :) 0 (good use of language)
(:cellnr :) Section structure
(:cell :) 0 (hard to follow)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (really flows well)
(:cellnr :) Clarity of writing
(:cell :) 0 (hard to follow)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (easy to read)
(:cellnr :) Style and interest
(:cell :) 0 (boring, a yawn)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (grabbed my interest) \\
\\

(:cellnr :) '''Section 1: Introduction'''
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cellnr :) gives good general background
(:cell :) 0 (vague)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (situates the problem)
(:cellnr :) describes expected users
(:cell :) 0 (vague)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (good detail)
(:cellnr :) indicates their context of work
(:cell :) 0 (not relevant)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (highly relevant, detailed)
(:cellnr :) indicates constraints to the design
(:cell :) 0 (not relevant)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (relevant and realistic)
(:cellnr :) indicates expected uses of system
(:cell :) 0 (vague, a grab bag)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (relevant and realistic)
(:cellnr :) sophistication, maturity, and quality
(:cell :) 0 (a token effort)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (wow!) \\
\\

(:cellnr :) '''Section 1: Concrete task examples'''
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cellnr :) situation
(:cell :) 0 (completely made up)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (uses real people, real tasks)
(:cellnr :) exhibit properties of good task examples
(:cell :) 0 (didn't use them)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cellnr :) accompanying descriptions
(:cell :) 0 (little value added)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (indicates task nuances)
(:cellnr :) good breadth of tasks and users
(:cell :) 0 (key tasks/users missing)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (good coverage)
(:cellnr :) describes how tasks were validated
(:cell :) 0 (didn't)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (well-validated)
(:cellnr :) sophistication, maturity, and quality
(:cell :) 0 (a token effort)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (wow!) \\
\\

(:cellnr :) '''Section 1: Tentative requirements list'''
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cellnr :) lists major requirements
(:cell :) 0 (an ad-hoc list)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (shows good insight)
(:cellnr :) requirements prioritized
(:cell :) 0 (odd set of priorities)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (good choices)
(:cellnr :) key users prioritized
(:cell :) 0 (odd set of users)
(:cell :) 0 0 (good choices)
(:cellnr :) sophistication, maturity, and quality
(:cell :) 0 (a token effort)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (wow!) \\
\\

(:cellnr :) '''Lab presentation of the above'''
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cellnr :) preparation
(:cell :) 0 (didn't have it ready)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (well-prepared, organized)
(:cellnr :) sophistication, maturity, and quality
(:cell :) 0 (a token effort)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (wow!) \\
\\

(:cellnr :) '''Section 2: Prototype designs'''
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cellnr :) uses prototyping method effectively
(:cell :) 0 (method not used well)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (excellent use of method)
(:cellnr :) gives good feel of interface
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cellnr :) easy to see how dialog progresses
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cellnr :) sophistication, maturity, and quality
(:cell :) 0 (a token effort)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (wow!) \\
\\

(:cellnr :) '''Section 2: Walkthrough results'''
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cellnr :) lists major problems /successes of walkthrough steps
(:cell :) 0 (an ad-hoc list)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :)0 (shows good walkthrough)
(:cellnr :) summarizes major design flaws
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cellnr :) summarizes major design successes
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cellnr :) indicates next direction
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cellnr :) sophistication, maturity, and quality
(:cell :) 0 (a token effort)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (wow!) \\
\\

(:cellnr :) '''Lab presentation of the above'''
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cellnr :) preparation
(:cell :) 0 (didn't have it ready)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (well-prepared, organized)
(:cellnr :) sophistication, maturity, and quality
(:cell :) 0 (a token effort)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (wow!) \\
\\

(:cellnr :) '''Overall impression'''
(:cell :) '''0 (a token effort)'''
(:cell :) '''0'''
(:cell :) '''0 (wow!)'''
to:
(:cellnr :) '''Implementation: Usability'''
(:cell :) '''Poor'''
(:cell :) '''Okay'''
(:cell :) '''Great'''
(:cellnr :) simple and natural dialog
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) speaks the users language
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) minimizes memory load
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) consistent
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) provides feedback
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) clearly marked exits
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) shortcuts for experts
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) user error handling
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) provides relevant help
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) use of windows/dialog structures
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O\\
\\
April 17, 2007, at 10:26 PM by 24.64.76.194 -
Changed lines 82-85 from:


(:cellnr
:) fixes major flaws in storyboards
to:
\\
\\

(
:cellnr :) '''Final Design Critique'''
(:cell :) '''Poor'''
(:cell :) '''Okay'''
(:cell :) '''Great'''
(:cellnr :) indicates major problems
Changed lines 93-96 from:
to:
(:cellnr :) indicates how they could be solved
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) demonstrates a design evolution
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O \\
\\





(:cellnr :) fixes major flaws in storyboards
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
April 17, 2007, at 10:25 PM by 24.64.76.194 -
Added lines 1-300:
(:title 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.''

(:table:)
(:cellnr :) '''Completeness of Portfolio'''
(:cell :) '''Missing'''
(:cell :) '''Incomplete'''
(:cell :) '''Satisfactory'''
(:cellnr :) 1st deliverable (screens+design rationale)
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) working demo
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) heuristic evaluation
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) redesign rationale+final design critique
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O\\
\\

(:cellnr :) '''Screen snaps/design rationale'''
(:cell :) '''Poor'''
(:cell :) '''Okay'''
(:cell :) '''Great'''
(:cellnr :) practical realization of storyboards
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) fixes major flaws in storyboards
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) shows progress of design
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) good rationale behind design
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) Sophistication and quality of design
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O \\
\\

(:cellnr :) '''Heuristic Evaluation'''
(:cell :) '''Poor'''
(:cell :) '''Okay'''
(:cell :) '''Great'''
(:cellnr :) Problems categorized by heuristics
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) Major problems detected
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) Severity ratings are reasonable
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) Main points of the evaluation are summarized
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cellnr :) Sophistication and quality
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O \\
\\




(:cellnr :) fixes major flaws in storyboards
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O
(:cell :) O




(:cellnr :) Organization
(:cell :) 0 (hard to follow)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (well organized)
(:cellnr :) use of white space
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cellnr :) use of illustrations (if any)
(:cell :) 0 (adds little)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (really helps)
(:cellnr :) overall visual appearance
(:cell :) 0 (ugly)
(:cell :) 0 (acceptable)
(:cell :) 0 (wow!)
\\

(:cellnr :) '''Language and writing style'''
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cellnr :) Spelling/grammar
(:cell :) 0 (proof read!)
(:cell :) 0 (minor)
(:cell :) 0 (good use of language)
(:cellnr :) Section structure
(:cell :) 0 (hard to follow)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (really flows well)
(:cellnr :) Clarity of writing
(:cell :) 0 (hard to follow)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (easy to read)
(:cellnr :) Style and interest
(:cell :) 0 (boring, a yawn)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (grabbed my interest) \\
\\

(:cellnr :) '''Section 1: Introduction'''
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cellnr :) gives good general background
(:cell :) 0 (vague)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (situates the problem)
(:cellnr :) describes expected users
(:cell :) 0 (vague)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (good detail)
(:cellnr :) indicates their context of work
(:cell :) 0 (not relevant)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (highly relevant, detailed)
(:cellnr :) indicates constraints to the design
(:cell :) 0 (not relevant)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (relevant and realistic)
(:cellnr :) indicates expected uses of system
(:cell :) 0 (vague, a grab bag)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (relevant and realistic)
(:cellnr :) sophistication, maturity, and quality
(:cell :) 0 (a token effort)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (wow!) \\
\\

(:cellnr :) '''Section 1: Concrete task examples'''
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cellnr :) situation
(:cell :) 0 (completely made up)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (uses real people, real tasks)
(:cellnr :) exhibit properties of good task examples
(:cell :) 0 (didn't use them)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cellnr :) accompanying descriptions
(:cell :) 0 (little value added)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (indicates task nuances)
(:cellnr :) good breadth of tasks and users
(:cell :) 0 (key tasks/users missing)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (good coverage)
(:cellnr :) describes how tasks were validated
(:cell :) 0 (didn't)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (well-validated)
(:cellnr :) sophistication, maturity, and quality
(:cell :) 0 (a token effort)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (wow!) \\
\\

(:cellnr :) '''Section 1: Tentative requirements list'''
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cellnr :) lists major requirements
(:cell :) 0 (an ad-hoc list)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (shows good insight)
(:cellnr :) requirements prioritized
(:cell :) 0 (odd set of priorities)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (good choices)
(:cellnr :) key users prioritized
(:cell :) 0 (odd set of users)
(:cell :) 0 0 (good choices)
(:cellnr :) sophistication, maturity, and quality
(:cell :) 0 (a token effort)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (wow!) \\
\\

(:cellnr :) '''Lab presentation of the above'''
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cellnr :) preparation
(:cell :) 0 (didn't have it ready)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (well-prepared, organized)
(:cellnr :) sophistication, maturity, and quality
(:cell :) 0 (a token effort)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (wow!) \\
\\

(:cellnr :) '''Section 2: Prototype designs'''
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cellnr :) uses prototyping method effectively
(:cell :) 0 (method not used well)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (excellent use of method)
(:cellnr :) gives good feel of interface
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cellnr :) easy to see how dialog progresses
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cellnr :) sophistication, maturity, and quality
(:cell :) 0 (a token effort)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (wow!) \\
\\

(:cellnr :) '''Section 2: Walkthrough results'''
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cellnr :) lists major problems /successes of walkthrough steps
(:cell :) 0 (an ad-hoc list)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :)0 (shows good walkthrough)
(:cellnr :) summarizes major design flaws
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cellnr :) summarizes major design successes
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cellnr :) indicates next direction
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0
(:cellnr :) sophistication, maturity, and quality
(:cell :) 0 (a token effort)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (wow!) \\
\\

(:cellnr :) '''Lab presentation of the above'''
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cell :)
(:cellnr :) preparation
(:cell :) 0 (didn't have it ready)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (well-prepared, organized)
(:cellnr :) sophistication, maturity, and quality
(:cell :) 0 (a token effort)
(:cell :) 0
(:cell :) 0 (wow!) \\
\\

(:cellnr :) '''Overall impression'''
(:cell :) '''0 (a token effort)'''
(:cell :) '''0'''
(:cell :) '''0 (wow!)'''
(:tableend:)

Grade: A+ ... A ... A- ... B+ ... B ... B- ... C+ ... C .... C- ... D+ ... D ... D- ... F+ ... F ... F-

'''Note : A is superior report; 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.'''