Tags:
create new tag
view all tags

Final Presentation Rubric

Criteria & Points Assigned Missing Unacceptable Below Expectations Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations Points Earned
0 1 2 3 4
Content            
Summarize, compare and evaluate, at an advanced level, concepts, research findings and current theories and models in core content areas of computer science. Literature review in thesis or project is incomplete and/or omits important research findings or theoretical positions. Literature review is incomplete and includes excessive discussion of unrelated issues and/or significant errors in content. Assertions are made without adequate support from evidence. Literature review is brief, with insufficient detail. Unrelated issues are introduced and/or minor errors in content. Assertions made without adequate support from evidence. Literature review is brief but complete; review focuses only on issues related to question; review is factually correct; assertions are clearly supported with evidence and appropriate use of logic. Literature review is complete; sufficient detail is provided to support assertions; assertions supported with evidence; includes original and relevant insight or analysis of topic.
Identify computing principles and algorithms that are relevant to thesis or project topic and apply them within specific problem domain. Unable to identify relevant computer science theories or algorithms. Basic understanding of computing principles. Fails to apply them within specific problem domain. Basic principles and techniques relevant to project or thesis are included, but some are missing. Fails to develop complete theoretical or design framework for thesis or project. Provides good computing framework for thesis or project; applies principles and algorithms correctly to problem domain. Project or thesis is completely grounded in computing theories and techniques. Applies them to problem correctly and clearly establishes their relevance.
Critical Thinking          
Evaluate and integrate computer science literature to address specific theory or practical problem. Describe and select appropriate scientific methods to answer question. No clear research question or project posed. Relevance to existing literature and theory not established. Major errors in choice of research methods or analysis. Conclusions inconsistent with evidence presented. Project/Question posed is of questionable relevance or has clearly been answered. Question unrelated to existing literature. Errors in choice, execution or interpretation of methods and/or data. Conclusions weakly justified by evidence. Project is not very innovative. Question has been adequately answered in prior research; no clear rationale for reexamination of question given. Research and methods selected are flawed or inadequately carried out. Conclusions overreach evidence presented. Meaningful question/project is posed, but may not be fully explicated. Research and methods selected appropriate for project. Conclusions follow logically from evidence presented. Project addresses question or problem that is meaningfully connected to existing literature and theory. Student provides clear explanation of relationship. Research methods selected are appropriate for project. Conclusions follow logically from evidence presented.

Criteria & Points Assigned Missing Unacceptable Below Expectations Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations Points Earned
0 1 2 3 4
Communication            

Written:

Organization and logic

No logical order to information provided. Weak organization; sentences rambling; ideas repeated. Minor problems of organization or logic; Needs work on creating transitions between ideas. Presentation is organized, but does not present clear argument for research position/project rationale. Clear and logical presentation; good development of argument/project rationale; transitions made clearly and smoothly.
Mechanics of writing (spelling, punctuation, grammar, clarity of writing) Problems with mechanics of language serious enough to interfere with effective communication. Frequent errors in punctuation, spelling, sentence structure, etc. Major problems with mechanics of language; Awkward sentence construction; poor or absent transitions; frequently difficult to understand. Frequent problems with mechanics of language; Occasional awkward sentences and poor transitions reduce readability. Infrequent and minor mechanical problems; Errors do not impair readability. Clear, readable writing. Good use of transitions; no problems with spelling, punctuation, or grammar.
Use of relevant APA Style (Title page, citations & references, use of language, etc.) No evidence APA style used. Minimal use of APA style; frequent errors in all aspects of APA style. Adequate use of APA style, but frequent errors in citations & references. Infrequent errors in APA style; errors involve minor aspects of APA style – no errors in style for citations & references. All relevant aspects of APA style used effectively and correctly.

Oral:

Communication skills during presentation

Unable to respond effectively to questions posed by committee members. Answers to several questions incomplete; needs frequent assistance from thesis/project advisor. Answers to few questions incomplete; needs occasional assistance from thesis/project advisor. Provides complete answers to questions posed. Presents thesis/project work in coherent manner. Appropriate use of technology during presentation (where relevant). Presentation of thesis/project work is clear and well-organized. Responds to questions in poised, articulate, and professional manner.

Criteria & Points Assigned Missing Unacceptable Below Expectations Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations Points Earned
0 1 2 3 4
Integrity/Values            
Clear understanding of and adherence to scientific and professional ethics. Evidence of transgression of scientific, professional, or academic integrity. Lack of understanding of scientific and professional ethics. Inadvertent violation of academic-conduct code. Exhibits incomplete understanding but still complies with principles of scientific, professional and/or academic integrity. Adherence is poorly documented. Exhibits understanding and complies with principles of scientific, professional and/or academic integrity. Adherence is appropriately documented. Clear documentation of compliance with all relevant ethical guidelines. Clearly establishes authorship of thesis or project work.
Project Management          
Work individually, or as part of team where appropriate, to formulate, analyze, design, and implement a significant thesis, or computing project. Unable to formulate project idea. No timeline constructed. Fails to meet most timeline goals. Implementation falls below expected minimum standards. Demonstrates lack of ability to function as part of team if applicable. Problem formulation and solution contain numerous faults. Significant milestones in timeline not met. Implementation minimally meets expected standards. Unable to work effectively as team member if applicable. Problem formulation and solution design contain some faults. Some milestones in timeline not met. Implementation exceeds minimal requirements but does not represent significant computing project. Demonstrates marginal effectiveness as team member if applicable. Problem formulation and solution design contain no faults, but retain areas for significant improvement. Major milestones in timeline are met within acceptable timeframe. Implementation represents significant computing project with minor mistakes. Demonstrates effectiveness as team member if applicable. Well-formulated, designed, and implemented project. Completes project according to timeline. Implementation represents significant computing project. Demonstrates effectiveness as team member if applicable.
Student strengths:  
Student weaknesses:  
Topic revision: r1 - 2016-12-06 - JimSkon
 
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by PerlCopyright © 2008-2018 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback