This rubric is intended to assess student proposals during the communication project day. The communication project homework rubrics helped inform the topics, and therefore should help expedite grading. Each section is equally weighted. Information provided in a proposal should cover both the work previously completed and the work that might emerge from it. This rubric intends to assess both aspects.

A previous communication project homework tasked students with critiquing proposals, everyone should be aware of both what is expected in a proposal as well as how to assess them, using feedback provided there to inform critique decisions and their assessment of others. While a complete proposal is expected, by the first project day, students have only received feedback regarding previous work. Therefore, the first proposal is likely to be stronger in that area. To account for this, the first proposal is weighted significantly less than the second. This activity and future homework assignments are intended to build further skills, culminating in the second proposal. As such, please make sure the feedback you provide is productive and useful to the students receiving it. Student­-assigned feedback that does not meet this condition will not satisfy the “in ­class” portion of the project grade.

The grading breakdown for this day is as follows:

  • 70% of the complete grade - Tutor­-assigned feedback
  • 20% of the complete grade - Student-­assigned feedback
  • 10% of the complete grade - In ­Class Portion: Completion of five peer reviews for other students

All feedback will be returned to the students, but will be returned anonymously. Both strengths and areas of possible improvement should be noted, with suggestions to successfully improve.

There is no intent to assess on “beauty,” and no benefit should be awarded for proposals that are visually more “appealing” or “official.” If images are included, no benefit or penalty should be included outside of clarity.

4.0 (100%) - Perfect, I cannot think of anything else they could have done
4.0 (96%) - A very good proposal, they just have a couple of things they could improve on
3.5 (88%) - A good proposal, could use some more work
3.0 (80%) - An alright proposal, they have some good stuff but it needs a lot of improvement
2.5 (72%) - Not great, they left out very important pieces of information completely and what they have needs a lot of work
2.0 (64%) - Very weak proposal, they turned something in but that's about it
0.0 (0%) - They did not turn anything in

Prior Work

  • Experimental Design: It is clear how the past data was taken.
  • Discussion: The document tells a complete story of the conducted experiment
    • Experimental Design
      • Method
        • The overall experimental method including pertinent equipment and critical procedural steps are included
      • Uncertainty
        • Discusses uncertainty in measurements, models, and results.
        • The quantitative data are presented with uncertainty
        • Sources of uncertainty are described
        • Deviations from the model are described
    • Discussion
      • Communication
        • Motivation of previous work is clear
        • Figures are complete (axes, titles, units, error bars, etc.)
      • Results
        • Results from previous work are presented within experimental constraints
        • Reasonable conclusions and implications are drawn from the data presented
        • Data are presented effectively

Future Work

  • Experimental design: It is clear how future data will be taken.
  • Discussion: The document discusses compelling future work.
    • Experimental Design
      • Method
        • Necessary or additional equipment is discussed
        • New experimental methodology is summarized
        • Reasons for conducting experiment in this manner are clear
      • Uncertainty
        • Future work has considered possible issues
        • Acknowledges concerns and complications
        • Considers potential solutions
    • Discussion
      • Proposed investigation is original, but connected to and motivated from the previous work
      • There is a need for the future work
      • The proposal is compelling and well argued
  • communication_project_rubric.txt
  • Last modified: 2019/08/22 14:34
  • by river