P02: Feature Design Rubric

General grade scale

A: Exceeding expectations

B: Meeting expectations

C: Not-quite meeting expectations

D/F: Not meeting/failing expectations

UI Evaluation Presentation (4 points)

Grading Focus: Punctuality of presentation, clarity and conciseness in explanation of research findings, completeness of research, and quality of rationale explaining why research findings are valid.

A: The presentation provided an exceptionally clear and concise explanation of the research findings and an exceptional use of supporting material (visual/textual) demonstrated the rationale for the findings clearly. All requested research pieces were completed and the presentation was finished in around five minutes.

B: The presentation provided a clear explanation of the research findings and an effective use of supporting material (visual/textual) helped demonstrate the rationale for the findings. All requested research pieces were completed and the presentation was finished in around five minutes.

C: The presentation provided an unclear explanation of the research findings and a problematic use of supporting material (visual/textual) weakened the rationale for the findings. The majority of requested research pieces were completed and/or the presentation was finished in around four or six minutes.

D/F: The presentation provided an unclear explanation of the research findings and a lack of supporting material (visual/textual) meant the findings had little to no rationale. A number of requested research pieces were missing and/or the presentation was finished in under four minutes or had to be ended early for going overtime.

Proposed Features Desk-crits (4 points)

Grading Focus: Punctuality of presentation, clarity and conciseness in explanation of features, and quality of rationale explaining why features presented are reasonable.

A: The presentation provided an exceptionally clear and concise explanation of the proposed features and an exceptional use of supporting material (visual/textual) demonstrated the rationale for the features clearly. Three features were proposed and the presentation was finished in around five minutes.

B: The presentation provided a clear explanation of the proposed features and an effective use of supporting material (visual/textual) helped demonstrate the rationale for the features. Three features were proposed and the presentation was finished in around five minutes.

C: The presentation provided an unclear explanation of the proposed features and a problematic use of supporting material (visual/textual) weakened the rationale for the features. Two to three features were proposed and/or the presentation was finished in around four or six minutes.

D/F: The presentation provided an unclear explanation of the proposed features and a lack of supporting material (visual/textual) meant the features had little to no rationale. Fewer then three features were proposed and/or the presentation was finished in under four minutes or had to be ended early for going overtime.

Final Feature Presentation (4 points)

Grading Focus: Punctuality of presentation, clarity and conciseness in explanation of final feature, and quality of rationale explaining why and how the final feature presented is reasonable.

A: The presentation provided an exceptionally clear and concise explanation of the feature and an exceptional use of supporting material (visual/textual) demonstrated the rationale for the feature clearly. The presentation was finished in around five minutes.

B: The presentation provided a clear explanation of the feature and an effective use of supporting material (visual/textual) helped demonstrate the rationale for the feature. The presentation was finished in around five minutes.

C: The presentation provided an unclear explanation of the feature and a problematic use of supporting material (visual/textual) weakened the rationale for the feature. The presentation was finished in around four or six minutes.

D/F: The presentation provided an unclear explanation of the feature and a lack of supporting material (visual/textual) meant the feature had little to no rationale. The presentation was finished in under four minutes or had to be ended early for going overtime.

Final Feature Design (8 points)

Grading Focus: Quality of final feature design in standard considerations (legibility, hierarchy, efficiency/balance, consistency, feasibility), integration with existing application's standards, and quality of user consideration in the feature (8pts)

A: The designed feature provides an exceptional visual design — legible, clear hierarchy, excellent use of space/composition, and consistent elements — that seamlessly integrates with the existing application. The feature successfully fulfills a user need as shown by research.

B: The designed feature provides an effective visual design — legible, clear hierarchy, effective use of space/composition, and consistent elements — that integrates with the existing application. The feature successfully fulfills a user need as shown by research.

C: The designed feature provides a somewhat problematic visual design — somewhat illegible, unclear hierarchy, somewhat ineffective use of space/composition, and, or inconsistent elements — that integrates somewhat effectively with the existing application. The feature fulfills a user need as shown by research.

D/F: The designed feature provides a significantly problematic visual design — illegible, unclear hierarchy, ineffective use of space/composition, and inconsistent elements — that does not integrate with the existing application. The feature does not fulfill a user need and/or is not supported by research.