APSC-100 Module 3: Final team evaluation 1 2 3 4 Mark (not (marginal) (meets expectations) (outstanding) demonstrated) Information No significant Insufficient usage; Gathers and uses information Uses information from Management information used, improper citations. from appropriate sources, multiple authoritative, /4 not cited; blatant including applicable objective, reliable sources; 3.04-FY4: Gathers info plagiarism. standards, patents, and formatted properly regulations as appropriate, with proper citations Project Management No useful timeline Poor timeline or budget; Plans and efficiently manages Efficient, excellent project or budget infrequent meetings; time and money; team plan presented; detailed /4 described; poorly minor safety problems effectively used meetings; budget; potential 3.11-FY1: Manage time managed project; safety considerations are foreseen and mitigated and money safety issues clear Design process No discussion of Generic design process Describes design process used Comprehensive design process /4 design process. described. to design system, component, described, with appropriate 3.04-FY1: Uses process or process to solve iterations and revisions based complex problem. on project progress No consideration of Factors mentioned but no Incorporated appropriate Well-reasoned analysis of Social, environmental, /4 these factors. clear evidence of impact social, environmental, and these factors, with risks and financial factors on decision making. financial factors in decision mitigated where possible 3.09-FY4: Sustainability making in decisions Implementation Insufficient Sufficient Appropriate effort, analysis, Outstanding implementation /4 implementation implementation but some and/or construction opportunities not or demonstrated to implement feedback at proposal not product, process, or system incorporated in implementation Evaluation No evaluation of Some factors missed in Compares the design solution Comprehensive evaluation of /4 design solution evaluating design against the project objectives design solution, with 3.04-FY7: Compares solution and functional specifications, recommendations solution providing qualitative for future work or evaluation appropriate implementation
APSC-100 Module 3: Final team evaluation 1 (not demonstrated) 2 (marginal) 3 (meets expectations) 4 (outstanding) Mark Information Management 3.04-FY4: Gathers info No significant information used, not cited; blatant plagiarism. Insufficient usage; improper citations. Gathers and uses information from appropriate sources, including applicable standards, patents, regulations as appropriate, with proper citations Uses information from multiple authoritative, objective, reliable sources; and formatted properly /4 Project Management 3.11-FY1: Manage time and money No useful timeline or budget described; poorly managed project; safety issues Poor timeline or budget; infrequent meetings; minor safety problems Plans and efficiently manages time and money; team effectively used meetings; safety considerations are clear Efficient, excellent project plan presented; detailed budget; potential foreseen and mitigated /4 Design process 3.04-FY1: Uses process No discussion of design process. Generic design process described. Describes design process used to design system, component, or process to solve complex problem. Comprehensive design process described, with appropriate iterations and revisions based on project progress /4 Social, environmental, and financial factors 3.09-FY4: Sustainability in decisions No consideration of these factors. Factors mentioned but no clear evidence of impact on decision making. Incorporated appropriate social, environmental, and financial factors in decision making Well-reasoned analysis of these factors, with risks mitigated where possible /4 Implementation Insufficient implementation Sufficient implementation but some opportunities not or feedback at proposal not incorporated in implementation Appropriate effort, analysis, and/or construction demonstrated to implement product, process, or system Outstanding implementation /4 Evaluation 3.04-FY7: Compares solution No evaluation of design solution Some factors missed in evaluating design solution Compares the design solution against the project objectives and functional specifications, providing qualitative evaluation appropriate Comprehensive evaluation of design solution, with recommendations for future work or implementation /4
Sample_CEAB_Section3.0_QUEENS_GEOLOGICAL_ENGINEERING_2011.docx