Grading

The final grade in the course is based on a portfolio, with the intention to facilitate learning and to provide feedback to students throughout the semester, and enable learning in the context of realistic development conditions through a semester project.

Portfolio Contents

The portfolio contains the following elements:

The language for all material is English.

Compulsory Deliveries

The following items are a compulsory prerequisite to hand in the portfolio:

The language for all material is English.

Specific Criteria

For all deliveries, we will define tables for the criteria, also called rubrics. These criteria give you an orientation about how to reach the learning goals of the course. The speficic tables explain how the performance levels and general criteria map to the specific task or learning outcome they cover. The example blow show a rubrics that applies for diagrams in general.

 

Excellent

Good

Sufficient

Not rateable

Layout

Layout follows a strategy that helps to understand the diagram.

Layout is structured.

Layout is structured.

Layout is unstructured and random.

Syntax

Correct syntax.

Correct Syntax.

Overall good syntax, with a few minor errors.

Major syntactical flaws.

Level of Detail

Consistent and intentional level of detail.

Adequate detailing.

Some inconsistencies, too much focus on some details on the expense of others.

 
 

The rows show a number of individual criteria groups, as for instance Layout. The individual columns then show what characterizes a layout on different performance levels excellent, good, sufficient. It also describes when a layout is not rateable.

We work together in the course to elaborate criteria to better understand what signifies for instance an excellent score for an item and how it is different from a good one.

Portfolio Grading

The portfolio is evaluated as a whole according to NTNUs grading scheme.

'''Symbol'''

'''Description'''

'''General, qualitative description of valuation criteria'''

A

Excellent

An excellent performance, clearly outstanding. The candidate demonstrates excellent judgement and a high degree of independent thinking.

B

Very good

A very good performance. The candidate demonstrates sound judgement and a very good degree of independent thinking.

C

Good

A good performance in most areas. The candidate demonstrates a reasonable degree of judgement and independent thinking in the most important areas.

D

Satisfactory

A satisfactory performance, but with significant shortcomings. The candidate demonstrates a limited degree of judgement and independent thinking.

E

Sufficient

A performance that meets the minimum criteria, but no more. The candidate demonstrates a very limited degree of judgement and independent thinking.

F

Fail

A performance that does not meet the minimum academic criteria. The candidate demonstrates an absence of both judgement and independent thinking.

The final grade is assigned based on the individual scores of the team deliveries (the system specification) together with the other contents in the portfolio. Many of the items are commented by rubrics, which have scores like excellent, good, sufficient and not rateable. The portfolio is graded as a whole. This means that there is not a simple mathematical formula to map the different rubric scores to a final result. Instead, grading is always approached top-down, starting with the definitions in the table above, with the scores of the rubrics aiding to find evidence for the different grades.

Still, you can expect the following:

Before you get too nervous. From looking at the results of previous years:

I think the grading is well aligned with the assessment, so you don't have to worry too much about the grading and can focus on learning. Simply working on all required items will guide you towards a good result.