You've worked iteratively (formative) on your job story and finish with an oral test (summative). You'll show the research (wiki) and feature you've created for project-tech based on your code in your repository, documentation in the wiki and live version. A teacher will try out your feature and look at the code.
You will show you can create a quality project in which you apply the subject matter of this course and that you understand it. You will answer questions in such a way as to demonstrate sufficient knowledge of our goals.
This is an individual assessment, so tests will be conducted between one teacher and one student.
This is an assessment, not another moment for feedback. So you will be graded. There isn't much time for additional feedback or troubleshooting technical issues.
Since we have limited time make sure you come to the assessment prepared:
- Bring your computer and make sure it's charged and connected to Wifi.
- Make sure your webcam, microphone and screen sharing works in MS Teams
- Have the live version of your feature ready in your browser.
- Have the latest version of your code and wiki ready on GitHub.
- Have the latest version of your code ready in your editor.
Make sure your repository stays online after the assessment is finished, we might want to check the code handed in on GitHub after the assessment. We also want to download and archive your project when it’s done.
Use the peer review document as a checklist (AVV) for your assessments to check if everything in your repository and application is in order.
| Conditions |
|---|
| Source code is publicly available on GitHub in a repository |
The project is documented in the wiki and has a readme.md |
Cites the sources used; APA style in readme.md |
| Live version of the application is deployed |
Download a .pdf version of the Rubric
| 1-2 | 3-4 | 5-6 | 7-8 | 9-10 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concept | There is no concept and idea on what to build | You've written a job story and there is a concept but it's vague and lacks specificity | You've written a good job story, there is a clear concept and there are wireframes and requirements lists | You've researched other applications and did some benchmarking | You've researched other applications and implemented design patterns and insights in your own project |
| Research | There is no technical research in the wiki | There is some technical research in the wiki but it's very scanty | You researched technical terms and concepts related to web tech and documented them clearly in you wiki | You described more advanced technical research in the wiki | You describe the technical choices you made and can offer alternatives for chosen technology |
| Application | The feature doesn't work; there are errors and warnings | The feature partially works but is not complete; incomplete flow | The feature completely works and is usable from a user experience point of view | The feature is advanced and is technically more complex | The user experience is fantastic and the feature is complex. You took special care of your interface and your user |
| Quality | The project is handed in documented, on time, working without technical problems, and on GitHub | The code is readable, consistent and the code, project, and process are partially documented | Code adheres to standards; docs cover the process and what the project is and does | Code quality is good and enforced; docs are more than useful and professional | Code and docs both read like great books and the project is structured logically |
Note:
You'll need a > 5.5 for each row to pass: you can't compensate between rows.
Each of this rubric’s rows is cumulative: for example, to get a 5-6 on concept, you also need to have a 1-2 and 3-4.
- A teacher can refuse to take the assessment when you show up late regardless of the reason. That means you go straight to the re-sits and will be graded with a
1.0. Usually teachers give you a small window of time after the assessment(~5 minutes) to show up. - We don’t like plagiarism and report it to our assessment committee (examencommissie in Dutch).
- Grades will be published and communicated trough MS Teams and Brightspace. We also publish grade lists on Brightspace based on student numbers.