Student Names | _____________________ | _____________________ | _____________________ | Group #_______ |
Note: These are just "convenience" checkpoints. Getting many satisfactory checks does not necessarily indicate a good project (or vice versa). |
Completeness of Project | Missing | Incomplete portions | Satisfactory |
1st deliverable (screens+design rationale) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
working demo | 0 | 0 | 0 |
heuristic evaluation | 0 | 0 | 0 |
redesign rationale+final design critique | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Screen snaps/design rationale | Poor | Ok | Great |
practical realization of storyboards | 0 | 0 | 0 |
fixes major flaws in storyboards | 0 | 0 | 0 |
shows progress of design | 0 | 0 | 0 |
good rationale behind design | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Sophistication and quality of design | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Heuristic Evaluation | Poor | Okay | Great |
Problems categorized by heuristics | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Major problems detected | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Severity ratings are reasonable | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Main points of the evaluation are summarized | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Sophistication and quality | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Final Design Critique | Poor | Okay | Great |
indicates major problems | 0 | 0 | 0 |
indicates how they could be solved | 0 | 0 | 0 |
demonstrates a design evolution | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Please |
turn over... |
Student IDs | _____________________ | _____________________ | _____________________ |
Implementation |
|||
Completion | Poor | Okay | Great |
depth of interface shown | 0 | 0 | 0 |
breadth of interface shown | 0 | 0 | 0 |
non-interface aspects | 0 | 0 | 0 |
scope of project | 0 | 0 | 0 |
sophistication and quality | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Graphical design | Poor | Okay | Great |
visual appearance | 0 | 0 | 0 |
sensibility of layouts | 0 | 0 | 0 |
sophistication and quality | |||
Usability | Poor | Okay | Great |
simple and natural dialog | 0 | 0 | 0 |
speaks the users language | 0 | 0 | 0 |
minimizes memory load | 0 | 0 | 0 |
consistent | 0 | 0 | 0 |
provides feedback | 0 | 0 | 0 |
clearly marked exits | 0 | 0 | 0 |
shortcuts for experts | 0 | 0 | 0 |
user error handling | 0 | 0 | 0 |
provides relevant help | 0 | 0 | 0 |
use of windows/dialog structures | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Technical aspects | Poor | Okay | Great |
robust/bulletproof | 0 | 0 | 0 |
sophistication | 0 | 0 | 0 |
code | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Demonstration | Poor | Okay | Great |
group present | |||
group members all understand project | |||
gave a good feel of system | |||
Overall impression | Poor | Okay | Great |
of final design | 0 | 0 | 0 |
of design evolution | 0 | 0 | 0 |
of portfolio | 0 | 0 | 0 |
of heuristic evaluation | 0 | 0 | 0 |
of demonstration | 0 | 0 | 0 |
of implementation | 0 | 0 | 0 |
of complete project | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Grade: A+ ...... A ....... A- ....... B+ ....... B ....... B- ....... C+ ....... C ....... C- ....... D+ ....... D ....... D- ....... F+ ....... F ....... F-
Note : A is superior; 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.