HCI Rubric
For each lab exercise you are required to post the code you wrote if there is any, as well as videos, images, or/and sketches of the exercise, demonstrating you completed the exercise. Additionally, you will answer some questions related to the exercise and readings.
From day 1 to 9:
Lab Exercise:
- OUTSTANDING
Committed to purposeful, steady and deliberately paced movement so as to complete the project before next session. Work is well documented, code is clear, videos, images, and sketches demonstrate successful completion of the exercise.
- ACCEPTABLE
Progress noted, but marked by unevenness or slow pace, somewhat undermining timely project completion. Work only partially documented; missing code or media or the exercise is incomplete.
- WEAK:
Noticeably behind schedule. Progress obviously insufficient, with project completion questionable. Work is barely documented, not useful, has glaring gaps.
Reflections:
- OUTSTANDING
All questions are answered with insightful and carefully supported reflections. All demonstrate superb progress, effort and growth.
- ACCEPTABLE
Some questions are answered or sound reflections reached without much critical thinking involved. Level of analysis and reflection could be deeper.
- WEAK:
Do not answer the questions or present irrelevant reflections based on results achieved. Analysis and reflection lacking, as are links and support between results and conclusion.
day 10:
Lab Exercise:
- OUTSTANDING
Committed to purposeful, steady and deliberately paced movement so as to complete the project before next session. Work is well documented, code is clear, videos, images, and sketches demonstrate successful completion of the exercise.
- ACCEPTABLE
Progress noted, but marked by unevenness or slow pace, somewhat undermining timely project completion. Work only partially documented; missing code or media or the exercise is incomplete.
- WEAK:
Noticeably behind schedule. Progress obviously insufficient, with project completion questionable. Work is barely documented, not useful, has glaring gaps.
Reflections:
- OUTSTANDING
Insightful and carefully supported conclusions are reached, drawn directly from specific results achieved. All demonstrate superb progress, effort and growth.
- ACCEPTABLE
Sound conclusions reached based on results achieved. Level of analysis and reflection could be deeper, drawing on more detailed support between results and conclusion.
- WEAK:
No or erroneous conclusions based on results achieved. Analysis and reflection lacking, as are links and support between results and conclusion.
Creativity / Taking Risks
- OUTSTANDING
Creates something unique by building upon a known environment. Delivers a brave, bold statement with challenging execution. Actively seeks out and follows through on new and potentially risky directions or approaches to the assignment.
- ACCEPTABLE
Mostly imitates a known game or effective interaction. Some interest in exploration beyond comfort zones, but little advance.
- WEAK:
Shows no interest in further development of ideas; merely replicates. Stays strictly within the guidelines of the assignment.
Subject Understanding
- OUTSTANDING
Depth of thinking about topics learned during the course evident in the deliverable. Exceptional understanding of interaction design, electronic components and/or programming techniques demonstrated by thorough integration of major and minor concepts into the response.
- ACCEPTABLE
Some thinking about the topic evident, if limited, in the deliverable. Knowledge of interaction design demonstrated in the somewhat effective application of adequate technical skills using electronic components and/or programming techniques.
- WEAK:
Course content comprehension, effort or depth of thinking about the topic barely, if at all, evident in the deliverable. Little knowledge of interaction design and the use of electronic components and/or programming techniques demonstrated.