| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

497 Grading

Page history last edited by Alex Kuhn 12 years, 8 months ago

EECS 497 Grading – Fall 2011

 

 

Your overall grade depends on an individual and team component.

 

-       The assumption is that every team member made reasonably balanced and equitable contributions to the overall project effort and the grades will be shared among all members.

-       If NOT: the instructors may at their discretion

  •  Alter the scores associated with each of the grade components, or
  •  May even shift the weights for each of the grade components at their discretion

 

Team Component (550 points)

Initial Project Presentation (100)

Demo 1 (150)         

Final Presentation (300)

 

Individual Component (300 points)

Initial Concept Presentation (15)

Company Report (45)

Peer Evals: Demo 1 (40)

Peer Evals: Final (50)

Team Evals (50)

Our Course Eval (50)

Instructor Discretion (50)

 

Total Points - 850

 

Due to the above average number of groups this semester, there will only be one demo before the final presentation instead of two.

 

 

Each component will be graded using a straight scale with the following values.

 

Grade

Value

A+

100

A

95

B

85

C

75

D

65

E

0-60 depending

 

 

Letter Grade

Project Characterization

A+

Perfect. Has that WOW factor

A

Engineering work is outstanding. Creativity and novelty are clearly observable. The project presents the best possible accomplishments given the difficulty level, and experience level of the student team. The amount of effort invested is substantial

B

Engineering work is very good but falls short in a few areas. Traces of creativity and novelty are observable. Project draws upon advanced coverage of coursework yet no noteworthy extension of knowledge is readily observable. There are potential (but not necessarily substantial) improvements to the project accomplishments and the end product. The amount of effort invested is noteworthy but could be increased.

C

Engineering work is minimally acceptable. Design fails to materialize through a refined process. Questionable design decisions are noted. Design rationale is not well-documented or simply not credible or not sound from a technical perspective. The project is below expectations with respect to a number of criteria; however it does score some successes which suggest project for the future. Students appear to be minimally prepared to undertake such endeavors unless significant refinement is implemented.

D

Engineering work is questionable. Most deliverables are substandard. The project draws upon shallow and limited knowledge base. Given the difficulty level, accomplishments are minor although promising in certain aspects. There is potential that a fully functional prototype could be delivered if additional time is allotted.

E

Project could not possibly be classified in any of the above categories

 

 

All materials are due on the assigned due date

-       Late work for individual components is not accepted, which includes:

  •  Initial presentations
  •  Company reports
  •  Evals

-       Late work for team components will result in reduced score, which includes:

  •  Posting of info to the wiki

 

After each team presentation, your team is responsible for updating your project info on the wiki and posting a link to your presentation slides within 48 hours, otherwise your team grade will drop by 15% for that presentation.

 

Team presentations must be done on the date assigned/chosen, otherwise there will be significant consequences.

 

 

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.