App Design Project Rubric

Technical

       

Exceptional                   

Effective                       

Competent                    

Needs Improvement     

Unacceptable

Comments:

  • Project submitted is a pdf 11” w x 8.5”
  • Pdf is under 10 mb
  • Image source information provided
  • Project submitted is a pdf.
  • Pdf is under 20 mb
  • Project is accompanied by the native files
  • Project is accompanied by fonts used, if non websafe.
  • Notes on team experience submitted separately in private by both team members
  • Pdf is over 20 mb in size
  • Project not accompanied by the native files
  • Sources for images not provided
  • Notes on team experience submitted separately in private by one team member
  • Project is submitted late by one week. Received one grade lower than assessed grade
  • Notes on team experience not submitted

Application Definition Statement

       

Exceptional                   

Effective                       

Competent                    

Needs Improvement     

Unacceptable

Comments:

  • Statement demonstrates an in-depth analysis of problem and opportunity
  • Makes unique and meaningful conclusions about the direction of the design
  • Impeccable grammar and spelling
  • Statement shows good understanding of the client
  • Clearly states the connections between problem and solution
  • Concretely summarizes what the app does and for whom
  • Statement includes a list of features, a list of possible users
  • Statement shows adequate vocabulary and grammar skills
  • Uses standard language conventions with occasional errors so that comprehension is still relatively clear
  • Adequate explanation of major parts of project statement
  • Statement shows confusion about who the client is
  • Makes unclear or incorrect statements about what the app does
  • Solution is irrelevant
  • Ideas are incomplete or largely underdeveloped
  • Occasional typos or poor grammar
  • No Application Definition Statement included.
  • Total incoherent use of language, impossible to read

Personas

       

Exceptional                   

Effective                       

Competent                    

Needs Improvement     

Unacceptable

Comments:

  • Helps you understand your customer profoundly and in detail
  • Includes why they might use your product
  • Includes their motivations
  • Helps you understand your customer in detail
  • Helps you discover previously unrecognized customer needs
  • Includes how your product fits into the context of their life.
  • Includes who the users are, what are the activities they wish to perform.
  • Statement shows adequate vocabulary and grammar skills
  • Uses standard language conventions with occasional errors so that comprehension is still relatively clear
  • Makes vague,  implausible statements about user
  • Solution is irrelevant
  • incomplete or largely underdeveloped
  • Jokey, ridiculous choices negate use value of some personas.
  • No Personas included.
  • incoherent use of language,difficult to read
  • Jokey, ridiculous choices negate use value of persona.

Thumbnails

Exceptional                   

Effective                       

Competent                    

Needs Improvement     

Unacceptable

Comments:

  • Thumbnail sketches are especially well developed in composition, and purpose.
  • All regions are labeled with title
  • Thumbnail sketches show exceptional development in quality and in quantity
  • The trail of the designer’s thoughts can be traced through sketches
  • Thumbnail sketches are well developed in composition, and purpose.
  • Thumbnail sketches show good development in quality and in quantity
  • Drawn process is used to develop app icon
  • Drawn process is used to map out, via flowchart and/or sitemap
  • Though sketches appear hurried, some studied attention is evident.
  • sketches show no awareness of format
  • sketches are not consistent
  • sketches appear haphazard, an afterthought.
  • ability to draw needs to be developed, based on sketches presented.
  • too few sketches are presented to be useful in the design process.
  • No Thumbnails included

Wireframe/Lofi

Exceptional                   

Effective                       

Competent                    

Needs Improvement     

Unacceptable

Comments:

  • Wireframes are especially well developed in composition, and purpose.
  • All regions are labelled with title
  • All regions pixel dimensions are labelled
  • Wireframes demonstrate a clear breakdown of purpose for regions
  • Wireframes show awareness of alignment and extension of edges
  • All regions are labelled with title
  • Wireframes break down of purpose for regions adequately
  • Wireframes show some awareness of alignment and extension of edges
  • Some regions are labeled with title
  • Wireframes show no awareness of format
  • Wireframes are not consistent
  • Wireframes appear haphazard, an afterthought.
  • No regions are labeled with title
  • No Wireframes included

Style Guide

Exceptional                   

Effective                       

Competent                    

Needs Improvement     

Unacceptable

Comments:

  • Dominant Color choices labelled and described via websafe Hexidecimal values
  • Typefaces and sizes  chosen are shown and labelled
  • Web font schema described for incorporation of non websafe fonts
  • Dominant Color choices labelled and described via Hexidecimal values
  • Good Layout, division of space to convey information.
  • All Typefaces and sizes  chosen are shown and labelled
  • Dominant Color are shown, but not labelled with Hexidecimal values
  • Some typefaces chosen are shown and labelled
  • Layout is adequate, with some concern for alignment and extension.
  • Style Guide is missing dominant typefaces
  • items missing
  • mispelling
  • CMYK or non web colors.
  • type or color choices not labelled
  • Typefaces are listed but not shown
  • layout confuses
  • No Style Guide included

Hi Fidelity Mockup

Exceptional                   

Effective                       

Competent                    

Needs Improvement     

Unacceptable

Comments:

  • The Design is novel and unique
  • Looks unlike existing designs
  • The design targets something essential about your target audience in taste, vibe.
  • Intimate understanding of the User’s needs and challenges is evident at every step in processes.
  • Mockup depicts interesting details, interactions above and beyond specifications
  • Inarguably unique concept
  • Design features all steps in principle interactions
  • Design somewhat reflects your target audience in taste, vibe.
  • Mockup depicts all pages and features specified
  • A good understanding of the User’s needs is evident at all steps in processes.
  • Few elements are derivative of existing design.
  • Design features most steps in principle interactions
  • Awareness of the User is apparent at most steps in processes.
  • Design skips important steps in principle interactions
  • Poor sense of proportion, sizes of header, buttons may be outsized or undersized
  • Text is illegible
  • Mockup skips some steps.
  • Will confuse the User at certain steps
  • Design is directly copied from an existing template or website.
  • Mockup skips important features and is missing the major parts.
  • Navigation is nonsensical.

Critique

Exceptional                   

Effective                       

Competent                    

Needs Improvement     

Unacceptable

Comments:

  • exceptionally insightful feedback for many students’ projects
  • Respectful observations are helpful to other students projects
  • Adding to discussion reasonably; not overbearing.
  • Finds ways to speak to the positive in the project.
  • Uses the critique process to hone own understanding of design vocabulary and design concepts
  • Is kind by pointing out areas for improvement.
  • Challenges critique reasonably and logically.
  • Comments occasionally, offers up feedback with solicitation.
  • Comments are adequately relevant to the discussion and to the work being discussed.
  • Comments once or twice
  • Worked as team to explain project
  • No input to the critique process, silent throughout
  • Resistant to receiving critique,
  • consistently arguing against reasonably simple and clear methods of improvement
  • Not participating in critique at times; focusing on own computer screen.
  • Argumentative.
  • Personally attacking fellow students
  • Openly Hostile to reasonable critique of work.
  • Oblivious to discussion, focusing on own computer, not on other students’ projects.

Teamwork

Exceptional                   

Effective                       

Competent                    

Needs Improvement     

Unacceptable

Comments:

  • exceptionally attentive to the needs of the partner
  • Replies immediately to emails/texts/phone calls
  • Consistently and actively contributes knowledge, opinions, and skills.
  • Is willing to do more than their share of the work
  • Values the knowledge, opinion and skills of all group members and encourages their contribution.
  • Group member completed assigned tasks on time.
  • Finds ways to speak to the positive in the project.
  • Always does the assigned work without having to be reminded.
  • A strong group member who tries hard
  • Other group members can count on this person.
  • Helps group identify necessary changes and encourages group action for change
  • Group member usually completed assigned tasks on time and did not hold up progress on the projects because of incomplete work.
  • Does half of the required work.
  • Replies to emails
  • Usually does the assigned work–rarely needs reminding.
  • Shows sensitivity to the feelings of others.
  • Participates in needed changes, with occasional prompting.
  • Group member often did not complete assigned tasks on time, and held up completion of project work.
  • little input to the design process, silent often
  • Unsure of role in partnership
  • Slow to respond to email, does less than half of work
  • Does not follow through on most assigned tasks and sometimes depends on others to do the work
  • Group member did not complete most of the assigned tasks on time and often forced the group to make last-minute adjustments and changes to accommodate missing work.
  • did not communicate well with partner in class lab time, distracted.
  • Does not seek out assistance, tutoring for skills needed for project
  • Overbearing, not showing respect for partner’s input
  • Does not perform any duties of assigned team role.