Release and Metrics

Team·Spring·7% of the spring grade

• Release and MetricsSunday of week 8·Rubric

Up to 48 hours late loses one rubric band on each criterion. After that it scores zero, unless you contacted the instructors before the deadline with a documented reason.

Two artifacts, each doing what its medium is good at: a 3-minute trailer that proves the software runs and that someone might actually watch, and a 2-page report carrying the numbers. Three minutes is short enough that a recruiter, a future teammate, or your partner’s boss watches to the end, and measured results belong in text, where they can be checked, quoted in a resume, and read again next year.

You have demoed every sprint for three terms. This is the polished cut of the one flow that matters.

What You Produce

The trailer runs three minutes at most, a hard cap, and the report is two pages.

AI use: AI may help with scripting, editing, and drafting the report. Fabricating demo footage, metrics, findings, or user feedback fails the assignment; a smaller true number always beats a bigger invented one. The outcomes section is graded under “Accurate outcomes”, and “we did not reach the bar, here is exactly how far we got and why” scores well.

The Trailer

Upload to media.oregonstate.edu as unlisted; public platforms in addition are welcome. Closed captions are required. WCAG 2.2 asks for them on prerecorded video at Level A and a transcript alone does not satisfy that, which is why the rubric grades captions and not a transcript. They also make the video work with the sound off. The Presentations guide covers structure and delivery.

Three minutes forces one decision: which single thing do you show? Answer it before you record.

• The problem, in one sentence (about 20 seconds). Who has it and what it costs them. No preamble, no team introductions, no agenda slide.
• The software running (about 2 minutes 10). One complete flow end to end from a realistic entry point. Product and tool teams: a real user task. Research and pipeline teams: the pipeline running on real data and producing the result. Narrate what is happening. No silence longer than five seconds, and no slides where you could show the thing itself.
• What it achieved, in one line (about 20 seconds). One real number, and where the report is.

Say plainly if a feature shown is partial. Fabricated footage fails the assignment.

The Report

The report is the graded evidence and the durable artifact. Give each section below its own heading, and name the example, link, or measurement behind every claim.

1. Problem and scope: the problem concretely, who experiences it, and what your team deliberately left out.
2. Delivered: the features, findings, or merged contributions that exist, with what is fully working, partial, or descoped stated as such.
3. Metrics: restate the 2 or 3 success metrics from your Definition of Shipped (the Shipping guide covers the rung those metrics were chosen against). Report a real measured value for at least one, with instrumentation evidence embedded: an analytics screenshot, benchmark output, install counts, user task results. Winter’s instrumentation commitment comes due here.
4. Delivered versus the Definition of Shipped: your target rung, where you actually landed, and the gap with concrete numbers. Patches accepted, users reached, deployment status, findings produced.
5. Limitations and next step: the one or two most important lessons and the highest-priority thing a successor should do.
6. Links: the trailer, the repository or archive, the Landing Page, and the release tag. Test every link in a private browser window before submitting; a link graders cannot open scores zero on the affected criteria.

What You Submit

The report as one PDF, linking the trailer uploaded as The Trailer describes; its first lines carry the cover Submitting Your Work describes.

If your project is under NDA

Submit a sanitized version: a trailer and report showing only what your partner agrees may appear. If that isn’t possible, contact the instruction team.

Rubric

Rubric: 100 points across 5 criteria

Criterion	Ratings
Trailer20 pointsOutcomes: SO2	Exceeds Expectations (20)Within 3 minutes and captioned. Shows one complete flow end to end from a realistic entry point (a real user task; for research and pipeline teams, the pipeline running on real data), narrated, with partial features named as partial. Meets Expectations (16)The trailer runs but overruns 3 minutes, shows a partial or stitched flow, leans on slides where the software could be shown, or lacks captions. Does Not Meet Expectations (4)No trailer, the software is never shown running, or footage misrepresents what exists.
Problem and scope15 pointsOutcomes: SO3	Exceeds Expectations (15)The report names who has the problem and what it costs them, in the audience's terms, and says what the team deliberately left out. Meets Expectations (12)The problem is stated, but without who has it or what it costs them, in the team's terms rather than the audience's, or with nothing said about what was left out. Does Not Meet Expectations (3)A reader cannot tell what problem the project addresses.
Metrics evidencemetrics match the Definition of Shipped, at least one reported with a real measured value and embedded instrumentation evidence30 pointsOutcomes: SO2	Exceeds Expectations (30)Metrics match the Definition of Shipped. At least one is reported with a real measured value and embedded instrumentation evidence (analytics screenshot, benchmark output, counts, task results). Meets Expectations (24)Metrics are reported but one is unmeasured, drifts from the Definition of Shipped, or is asserted without visible instrumentation evidence. Does Not Meet Expectations (6)No measured value, metrics unrelated to the Definition of Shipped, or numbers with no evidence behind them.
Accurate outcomes25 pointsOutcomes: SO6	Exceeds Expectations (25)Delivered versus the Definition of Shipped stated with concrete numbers against the target rung, including the gap, plus lessons and a prioritized next step. Falling short of the bar and saying exactly how far you got scores well here. Meets Expectations (20)The comparison is present but gives no number against the target rung, does not state the gap, leaves out the lessons, or the next step names an area ("improve testing") rather than a task a successor could start. Does Not Meet Expectations (5)No comparison against the Definition of Shipped, or an account that overstates what was achieved.
Report: length, sections, claims, cover, links10 pointsOutcomes: SO3	Exceeds Expectations (10)Within 2 pages; each required section under its own heading; every claim names its example, link, or measurement; the cover carries project and team; every link opens in a private browser window. Meets Expectations (8)One of the five missing. Does Not Meet Expectations (2)Two or more of the five missing.

Activities That Prepare This

Run an Acceptance Pass for the “Accurate outcomes” criterion, and Learn from TED Presentation Advice for the Trailer criterion. Identify Success Metrics from winter is what makes the metrics-evidence criterion answerable.

Examples. A project may match several rows or none. If none fits, ask your partner or mentor which activities do.

If	Activities
you contribute to an open-source project, so its maintainers cut the release	Software Release and Versioning: your release evidence is that project’s, so report merges and releases in its terms
your evidence is a result	Make Your Artifact Reproducible and Keep an Experiment Log, which together are what turns a result into reportable evidence
your metric is the partner’s adoption	External Feedback Session with the partner
your metric counts people using it	Identify Success Metrics, instrumented in winter and reported now

Browse Testing, Release, and Handoff and Presenting when these run out.