Problem Statement: How well the teams explain the below aspects:

HD

D C

P

N

Problem/

Challenge and Background

Exhibits rigorous

critical analysis.

AND

The problem /

opportunity is well defined, worth

pursuing

And falls under the category of IT for

Social good and the teams allocated

theme / topic.

AND

Research clearly

conducted with deep and extensive

understanding of the problem / opportunity.

Demonstration of

In depth analysis.

fundamental knowledge,

AND

skills and attributes at a

The problem /

proficient level of

opportunity is well

analysis.

defined / worth

AND

pursuing

The problem /

And falls under the

opportunity the team

category of IT for

has defined is worth

Social good and the

pursuing

teams allocated

And falls under the

theme / topic.

allocated theme / topic

AND

AND

Research conducted

Research conducted

with deep

with some

understanding of the

understanding of the

problem / opportunity.

problem / opportunity

Satisfactory analysis.

The problem /

opportunity the team has defined may be worth pursuing

AND falls under the allocated theme / topic but it is not

quite clear if this is a real problem /

opportunity to solve, with a pivot.

AND

Research conducted with some

understanding of the problem / opportunity

No perspective or little analysis

applied.The

problem /

opportunity defined is vague or not

precise

OR

Does not fall under the correct topic theme but might with a small pivot. OR

Little evidence of research as the

statement is too

generic or vague.

Proposed

Solution

Comprehensive well defined functions of how the proposed application will solve this problem.

AND can clearly see how the application will solve the problem.

Mostly detailed on

how the proposed

application will solve

Good understanding of

this problem, with

how the proposed

some level of details

solutions will assist in

on how the

helping with the

application will solve

problem, some details

the problem. AND

are lacking AND

relevant to the target

relevant to the target

audience.

audience

Minimal explanation or exploration of

proposed solutions OR

Does not fit the

defined target

audience

Limited or no

explanation or link between the

solution or problem. OR

Does not fit the

defined target

audience

Who (Personas) and Potential Sponsor

Well defined

SPECIFIC and VALID target audience,

clearly demonstration of extensive analysis completed. AND No aspect of their target audience is missing.

Exhibiting an

exceptional

understanding of their target audience

through persona

definitions.

AND Focuses on

Exhibiting an superior

understanding of their

Exhibiting a proficient

target audience

understanding of their

through persona

target audience through

definitions. AND

persona definitions.

Identified major

AND Identified major

needs and

needs and expectation

expectation

AND

AND Mostly

Mostly describes real

describes real people

people with

with backgrounds,

backgrounds, goals,

goals, values

values

Doesn’t exhibit an acceptable

understanding of

their target audience through persona

definitions.

OR Does not identify needs and

expectation

OR

Mostly describes real people with

backgrounds, goals, values

Vague OR little to no link the problem statement.

Unsatisfactory

amount of research demonstrated.

OR

Needs /

expectations are vague

OR

Little to no goals, values

major needs and

expectation of the target audience

AND Describes real people with

backgrounds, goals, values

Project Technical Review

Demonstrates

exceptional critical thinking, effectively applying hindsight, insight, and

foresight to enhance the value and

usability of the

application, within guidelines.

Articulates and

critically justifies a robust, multi-faceted code quality

strategy that

transcends basic

coding standards.

Demonstrates

exceptional

implementation of

security measures, with insightful

justification and

comprehensive risk assessment within security guidelines. Proactive approach to security.

Demonstrates

strong critical

thinking, effectively

Demonstrates basic

applying hindsight,

critical thinking, with

insight, and

some application of

foresight to improve

hindsight, insight, and

the application,

foresight, within

within guidelines.

guidelines.

Articulates a clear

Articulates a code

and justified code

quality strategy but

quality strategy that

lacks depth and

includes multiple

justification.

components.

Implements security

Implements

measures, within

security measures

security guidelines but

effectively,

justification and risk

providing clear

assessment may lack

justification and a

depth.

thorough risk

assessment, within

security guidelines.

Demonstrates

limited critical

thinking with

minimal application of hindsight,

insight, and

foresight. within

guidelines.

Articulates a code quality strategy but limited justification.

Implements some security measures, within security

guidelines but

justification and

risk assessment

are incomplete or inadequate.

Demonstrates

little to no critical thinking and

minimal

application of

hindsight, insight, and foresight and does not follow

the guidelines.

Fails to articulate a clear code

quality strategy or provide adequate justification

Fails to implement appropriate

security measures or demonstrate an understanding of project security

amd does not

follow guidelines.

Iteration # Plan (EPICS)

Shows exceptional analysis

and evaluation of what is

required in

determining the

successful

implementation.

Shows Superior

analysis

and evaluation of

what is

required in

determining the

Proficient analysis /

successful

critical evaluation of

implementation.

what is required

Satisfactory analysis of what is required OR

Shows very little (but some) thought of what is required in determining the

successful

implementation

Low level of

analysis completed to determine what required

OR

Shows no

understanding of requirements

Presentation

Skills

Excellent explanation of the problem

statement and

solution. Deep

insights into the

audience for the

solution and their

challenges.

Well explained and

detailed articulation of

the problem

Satisfactory articulate

statement, solution

the problem statement,

and audience

solution and audience.

Some explanation of the problem

statement, solution and audience.

However incomplete or not well explained.

Vague or little

explanation of the problem statement, solution and

audience

Team Work

The team has clearlyachieved a result that has leveraged the strength of all the

members. Excellent communication

among the team

during the

presentation.

Good communication

Evidence that the team

and cooperation

has worked together to

amongst the team

prepare the

members.

presentation and

Evidence of a lack of coordination and cooperation.

The team clearly has not worked

together. Either a disjointed

presentation or the work of just one

person.