Rubrics
Every term, your project partners, mentors, instructors, and teaching assistants will evaluate you on the six facets using the rubrics below, either through Canvas assignments or a survey.
Note that each facet will have a different weight depending the term, see the grade distribution.
Reflection
The purpose of the Reflection facet is to evaluate your ability to critically analyze learnings and project experiences.
Reflection will be evaluated both individually and as a team through different activities.
| Points | Criteria |
|---|---|
| 100 | Demonstrates deep critical thinking, learning, and insight with specific examples. Identifies future improvements. |
| 90 | Shows clear critical thinking, learning, and insight. Provides some specific examples and suggestions for improvement. |
| 80 | Reflects on learning and experiences with general insights. May lack specific examples or suggestions. |
| 70 | Basic reflection on experiences. Limited insights and general observations. |
| 50 | Minimal reflection. Lacks depth, examples, and insights. |
Requirements and Specifications
The purpose of the Requirements and Specifications facet is to evaluate your ability to gather, document, and prioritize project requirements.
| Points | Criteria |
|---|---|
| 100 | Requirements are comprehensive, well-documented, and prioritized. Stakeholder needs are thoroughly addressed. |
| 90 | Requirements are detailed and mostly well-documented. Stakeholder needs are largely addressed. |
| 80 | Requirements are clear but may lack some detail or prioritization. Stakeholder needs are generally addressed. |
| 70 | Basic requirements documented. Some stakeholder needs may be overlooked. |
| 50 | Minimal requirements documented. Many stakeholder needs are missing or unclear. |
Stakeholders refers to the project partners, which can be faculty members, students, industry partners, or else. Make sure that the goals of the project are stated, clear, and measurable. We can’t evaluate requirements otherwise.
Design, Implementation, and Deployment
This rubric is very broad and we don’t expect to hit a hundred points before Winter or Spring. Fall term does not put a lot of weight on this rubric, but your goal is still to get the implementation and deployment under way to hit the ground running in Winter.
| Points | Criteria |
|---|---|
| 100 | Solution design is innovative, well-thought-out, and thoroughly implemented. Deployment is smooth and well-documented. |
| 90 | Design is solid and implementation is mostly complete. Deployment is successful with minor issues. |
| 80 | Design is adequate and implementation is functional. Deployment is successful but may have some issues. |
| 70 | Basic design and implementation. Deployment is functional but with notable issues. |
| 50 | Minimal design and incomplete implementation. Deployment is problematic or incomplete. |
We use the term “deployment” very loosely here. If you have a research project, this means that your code or artifacts are well-documented (think reusable/reproducible). If you have a FOSS project, it means your patches include all the necessary changes (incl. to documentation) and successfully works within the existing codebase with no regression.
Verification and Validation
The Verification and Validation facet looks at the outcome of your Capstone project, not just the output.
Each project category has a different grading scale, inherent to the category.
FOSS
This category involves contributing patches to an existing Free and Open-Source Software project. Examples include writing patches for the Rust compiler, the Xen hypervisor, the Habitica todo-list game, or the OSU Open Source Lab repositories.
| Points | Criteria |
|---|---|
| 100 | Patches accepted, positive mentions in press/release. |
| 90 | Patches accepted. |
| 85 | Patches accepted but then reverted due to bug/issue. |
| 80 | Patches submitted and reviewed. |
| 75 | Patches submitted. |
| 70 | Patch appears to work on student computers. |
| 50 | Patch is vaporware. |
Research
Collaborate with a professor on a research topic, aiming to publish a small paper with your findings.
| Points | Criteria |
|---|---|
| 100 | Novel results or context or paper published, etc. |
| 90 | Prototype works on a wide range of reasonable inputs and some challenging ones. |
| 80 | Prototype works on reasonable inputs. |
| 70 | Prototype works on trivial inputs. |
| 50 | Prototype is vaporware. |
Consultant
Develop software for a specific external project partner.
| Points | Criteria |
|---|---|
| 100 | System is in production and is public-facing or part of critical operations. |
| 90 | Project partner is actively working to integrate system into production, and system is public-facing or part of critical operations. |
| 80 | Project partner feedback on an earlier prototype; concerns have been addressed in newer version. |
| 70 | Project partner feedback on an earlier prototype. |
| 50 | System diverges significantly from Project partner requirements; project partner does not intend to use the system; team has stopped speaking to project partner. |
New Product or Game
This category involves creating a new product or game, which may or may not become a viable business.
| Points | Criteria |
|---|---|
| 100 | Hundreds of light users or tens of heavy users or positive mention in mainstream/industry press or winning a reputable startup/gaming pitch competition. |
| 90 | Two dozens users you don’t know or rigorous user study. |
| 80 | A dozen users you don’t know or user study. |
| 70 | Friends have tried your software. |
| 50 | No users, nor user testing. |
Teamwork
Capstone is fundamentally a team effort. Teamwork will be judged on the team and individual level.
| Points | Criteria |
|---|---|
| 100 | Actively contributes to team success. Demonstrates leadership, collaboration, and conflict resolution skills. |
| 90 | Contributes effectively to team goals. Shows good collaboration and some leadership or conflict resolution. |
| 80 | Participates in team activities and contributes to goals. Basic collaboration skills. |
| 70 | Inconsistent participation. Limited contribution to team goals and collaboration. |
| 50 | Minimal participation or negative impact on team dynamics. |
In addition to the general rubric for teamwork, we’re also using the Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness (CATME). The CATME Five Temwork Dimensions will only be used for individual peer reviews:
- Contributing to the Team’s Work
- Interacting with Teammates
- Keeping the Team on Track
- Expecting Quality
- Having Relevant Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities
Communication
| Points | Criteria |
|---|---|
| 100 | Clear, concise, and effective communication. Excellent presentations and well-structured documentation. |
| 90 | Good communication skills. Effective presentations and documentation with minor issues. |
| 80 | Adequate communication. Presentations and documentation are clear but may lack polish. |
| 70 | Basic communication skills. Presentations and documentation are understandable but with notable issues. |
| 50 | Poor communication. Presentations and documentation are unclear or ineffective. |