The course grade is based on maximum of 20p from the essay and 20p from the group work assignment.
- max. 15 points based on the peer-review assessment
- max. 2 points from the BYOE workshop feedback
- max. 3 points from providing excellent feedback and peer-reviews
- max. 12 points from the final pitching
- max. 8 points from the lecture exercise deliverables (see detailed criteria below)
|0 - 19
|20 - 23
|24 - 27
|28 - 31
|32 - 34
|35 or more
Referencing (0-2 points)
0p: Very poor referencing or no
references used at all. Referencing style is erratic.
1p: Referencing used almost right, but there are unclear references, poor list of references, or several sentences whose source is unclear.
2p: Referencing used properly; easy to see, which parts are from the materials and which ones are the writer's own ideas.
Coverage of material (0-4 points) (materials include 9 given articles and 1 searched new article)
0p: 3 or more of the given materials are not included in the essay, or the essay does not include any new material in addition to the given one.
1p: Essay does not discuss 1-2 of the given materials, or all the materials are referred in the essay, but they are just mechanically listed/summarized without proper discussion or conclusions.
2p: All materials are discussed in the essay, and about half of the given materials (at most 4 are covered insufficiently) are explained and discussed in an appropriate detail.
3p: All materials are discussed in the essay, and most of the given materials (at most 2 are covered insufficiently) are explained and discussed in an appropriate detail.
4p: All materials are explained and discussed in an appropriate detail.
Structure of the essay (0-2 points)
0p: There is no understandable structure that the reader could follow.
1p: The essay goes through the materials one by one without synthesis or clear conclusions.
2p: The essay has a clear structure that supports the topic and synthesises the materials to reach conclusions.
Language and presentation (0-2 points)
0p: The essay is hard to read, including disruptively many spelling errors. The text consists mostly of lists instead of sentences. The language is too complicated making the essay difficult to understand. The essay does not include any visualizations (figures, tables or charts).
1p: The text includes minor spelling errors, but is mostly finalized and easy to understand. The figures, tables or charts do not support the text.
2p: The essay is easy and fluent to
read. The presentation includes figures, tables or charts that support or
summarize the text.
Content (0-5 points)
0p: There are substantial misunderstandings or errors in the essay.
1p: Presentation of the materials includes some misunderstandings and errors, but is mostly correct. There are no real conclusions or they are irrelevant or trivial.
2p: In between: better than 1p, but does not fully meet the requirements of 3p
3p: The essay presents the materials in a clear and understandable way, but does not include writer's own experiences or thoughts. The conclusions are quite brief, but they have been drawn appropriately from the material.
4p: In between: better than 3p, but does not fully meet the requirements of 5p
5p: The essay combines the cited works consistently and clearly, and reflects them to writer's own experiences or thoughts. Conclusions are clear and well elaborated. Also the material has been assessed critically.
Show Me Your Data criteria (2p)
-Selection and application of user user research methods (0.5p)
-Ability to describe the chosen Customer Scene (0.5p)
-Validity or perceived validity of the data (0.5p)
-Linkage,relevance and potential with the course theme (2018 Public Transportation) (0.5p)
User Research & Qualitative Analysis criteria (2p)
-Deliverable: Affinity Diagram or Mind Map (0.5p)
-Deliverable: 3 Transcribed and Anonymized Interviews (should include focusing follow-up questions) (0.5p)
-Description of the categories/clusters in the Affinity Diagram (0.5p)
-Description of the used Strategy to perform the categorization / clustering (0.5p)
Communicating Results criteria (2p)
-Deliverable: Description of main User Groups (User Profiles) (0.5p)
-Deliverable: Personas (for main User Groups) (0.5p)
-Deliverable: User Task Analysis (visualize main tasks) (0.5p)
-Deliverable: Scenario (0.5p)
Customer Journey and Stakeholder Maps criteria (2p)
-Customer Journey Map
-Map and visualize the entire Customer Journey, identify relevant touch points (0.5p)
-Describe found touch points in sufficient detail (0.5p)
-Identify relevant stakeholders (0.5p)
-Describe the stakeholders and their connections in sufficient detail (0.5p)
Reliability and quality of the empirical evidence (0-4 points)
Analysis is valid and conclusions are meaningful (0-4 points)
Clear communication of results, essentially presentation technique and materials (0-2 points)
Relevance and value to the customer and to their customers (0-2 points)