You will not receive a separate grade for each of the deliverables. Instead, your assignment will be graded as a whole from 4 different points of views:
- Hardware-technical point of view (i.e. does your setup work? Does it meet the requirements? Do you use the components in the right way? Are the schematics as intended?)
- Software-technical point of view (i.e. does your sketch work? Does it meet the requirements? Do you tackle the challenges in the right way? Is your code lean and mean?)
- Functional point of view (i.e. does the system as a whole function as intended? Does it meet the requirements? How smart and interactive is it? Do you use the right sensors and actuators for the right job? How smart / creative is your solution? What extras did you implement?)
- User needs and heuristic evaluation point of view. Consult the rubric below for how we assess these aspects of the assignment.
| User needs and heuristic evaluation – Rubric for grading | |||
| Criterion | Adequate | Competent | Proficient |
| User needs gathering | Conducts user needs gathering with minor methodological flaws. Attempts to establish a connection between user needs and design decisions. | Executes a correct plan using standard methods with clear reporting. Connects design decisions with user needs in a clear manner. | Uses multiple method and employs advanced data analysis. |
| Report quality | Uses correct language with minor mistakes, sporadic use of colloquial language and awkward phrasing. | Communicates results in a clear academic language, with proper grammar, spelling and punctuation. Effectively avoids ambiguity and colloquialism with only minor mistakes. | Exhibits a skilful command of academic languages with almost no mistakes. Uses signposting and cross-referencing for effective text organisation. |
| Context of use specification | Includes basic factors that influence the user experience of the interactive artefact in a limited context. Limited information about the environment of the system. | Considers a broader context of the technology designed. Identifies stakeholder and user groups correctly. Extensive information about the environment of the system. | Describes the broader social context of the technology. Provides extensive characteristics of the user group. |
| Requirements specification | Specifies a subset of the key requirements for the system. The requirements are vaguely linked to other analyses | Includes key requirements of the system. Provides a clear link to user needs and other observation. | Derives a clear account of requirements derived in a reflective manner. Includes measurable usability goals and satisfaction criteria. |
| Heuristic evaluation | Uses a minimum of three experts. The expert report has limited depth. The suggestions for improvement are limited. | The expert report features extensive explanations. Reflects on the expert report to offer actionable improvement to the system. | Uses more than three experts and produces in-depth feedback. Contributes clear improvement measures. |
Each of the 4 aspects (hardware / software / functional / user needs & heuristic evaluation) will get a grade of its own. This means most of the deliverables will add to more than one of these grades. Your final grade for the assignment will be the average of these 4 grades. You will only receive a final grade for the assignment if you did participate in the soldering workshop or are exempt from that requirement.
If you get to this point, you’re probably done with the assignment. We wish to thank you for your enthusiasm and we hope that you enjoyed learning about the fascinating world of embedded systems and sensors. We also aspire that this will not be the end of your physical computing journey with the Arduino platform. You now have the hardware, after all. So, what will you build next…?
Oh, and by the way, there’s this second assignment that we’ll get around to soon and involves this whole new world of the Internet of Things… 🙂