Mini-Project Evaluation Rubric 

 

 

Unsatisfactory (50% of max marls)

Satisfactory(70% of max marks)

Good (85% of max marks)

Excellent (Max Marks)

Delivery

Max Marks: 10

  • Completed less than 70% of the requirements.
  • Not delivered on time or not in correct/project format
  • Completed between 70-80% of the requirements.
  • Delivered on time, and in correct format 
  • Completed between 80-90% of the requirements.
  • Delivered on time, and in correct format 
  • Completed between 90-100% of the requirements.
  • Delivered on time, and in correct format 

Coding Standards

Max Marks: 30

  • No name, date, or assignment title included
  • Poor use of white space (indentation, blank lines).
  • Disorganized and messy
  • Poor use of variables (many global variables, ambiguous naming).
  • No comments included
  • Plagiarism detected
  • Includes name, date, and assignment title.
  • White space makes program fairly easy to read.
  • Organized work.
  • Good     use of variables (few global variables, unambiguous naming).
  • Basic comments including description of all variables
  • Purpose is noted for each function
  • Slight plagiarism detected
  • Includes name, date, and assignment title.
  • Good use of white space.
  • Organized work.
  • Good     use of variables (no global variables, unambiguous naming)
  • Clear comments including descriptions of all variables
  • Specific purpose is noted for each function and control structure
  • No plagiarism
  • Includes name, date, and assignment title. 
  • Excellent use of white space.
  • Creatively organized work.
  • Excellent  use of variables (no global variables, unambiguous naming).
  • Clear and effective comments including description of all variables
  • Specific purpose is noted for each function, control structure, input requirements, and output results
  • No Plagiarism

Runtime

Max Marks: 40

  • Does not execute due to errors.
  • User prompts are misleading or non-existent.
  • No testing has been completed.
  • Executes without errors. 
  • User prompts contain little information, poor design.
  • Some testing has been completed.
  • Executes without errors. 
  • User prompts are understandable, minimum use of symbols or spacing in output.
  • Thorough testing has been completed
  • Executes without errors excellent user prompts, good use of symbols, spacing in output.
  • Thorough and organized testing has been completed and output from test cases is included.

Efficiency of the solution

Max Marks: 10

  • A difficult and inefficient solution.
  • A logical solution that is easy to follow but it is not the most efficient.
  • Solution is efficient and easy to follow (i.e. no confusing tricks). 
  • Solution is efficient, easy to understand, and maintain.

General knowledge(viva)

10 

Varies with the problem (Marks between 0 and 10 as decided by the evaluator)