Rubric
The poster is graded out of a total of 20 points.
General points will be taken off for:
- Missing check-in meeting (-5 points);
- Missing units where appropriate (-1-2 points depending on frequency);
- Unlabeled figures or figures without captions (-1 point)
System Overview (3 points)
| No overview of system, or system overview neglects description of relevant components and dynamics. |
System overview is present, but includes errors or is too vague to connect to project. |
System overview is present but contains minor inaccuracies or gaps. |
Overview provides clear idea of system components and dynamics. |
Problem Framing and Motivation (3 points)
| No objective or key question is clearly specified. |
Objective or key question is specified but is not motivated by or connected to the system overview. |
Objective or key question specification is unclear or vague. |
Clear presentation of objective or key question with connection to the underlying system. |
Method Appropriateness (2 points)
| Methods are not aligned with the project objective. |
Methods are somewhat aligned with project objective, but this may be unclear. |
Methods are appropriate for the question. |
Assumptions (2 points)
| No discussion of key assumptions. |
Some key assumptions are left implicit. |
Key assumptions are specified and justified. |
Results (3 point)
| Results are missing or do not seem to follow from the methods. |
Results are unclearly presented but make sense given the methods. |
Results make sense given the methods but do not quite address the project question as articulated. |
Results follow from the methods and address the project question. |
Conclusions (3 point)
| Conclusions are not presented or are unclear. |
Conclusions do not accurately summarize results and implications for the question. |
Conclusions may be somewhat superficial (e.g. they just repeat the findings without synthesis or reflection on methods). |
Conclusions are clearly presented, synthesize the findings, and accurately summarize the results. |
Discussion (3 points)
| No relevant discussion included. |
Discussion is vague and does not reflect on how student extended their understanding of the class material. |
Discussion is unclear in places but describes how student extended class material. |
Discussion clearly reflects the findings and assumptions in the context of class material. |
References (1 point)
| No references are included. |
Key references are included (note: not all references are needed in the interest of space). |