Shelley Evenson, School of Design, CMU

Senior Interaction Capstone Project

assessment
We use a detailed course evaluation rubric (divided into three levels of achievement—
sophisticated, competent and not yet competent) which we feel helps students better
understand what is expected of them through each stage of the process. The rubric
addresses the student’s work products, their presentation skills and their abilities to work
well as a member of a team.
Course evaluation framework

Criteria Levels of Achievement

Sophisticated Competent Not Yet Competent
Stage 1 definition 2.5
Teambuilding Team has energy and Team has energy, but roles are Team has no cohesion
enthusiasm, each member has undefined
a clear role
Clarity of direction Hypothesis is clear and a draft Hypothesis is clear, but Hypothesis is confusing and is
of a good plan for research is research plan is not or vice not tied to research planning
presented versa

Stage 2 discovery 15
Quality Good data collection—the Information is mostly Information is unreliable
information is accurate; accurate; ‘reading’ of one and/or inaccurate; situations
sources are legitimate; situation may be questionable; observed don’t provide valid
appropriate ‘reading’ of the sources good but not varied data
situations observed or enough
information collected
Broad spectrum of Includes six dimensions: Includes five dimensions Includes four or less
information gathered context, audience, analogous dimensions
situations, technologies,
materials, other
systems/competitive
landscape
Report/presentation of the 1) Report/presentation of the Good report but few insightful Poor report and few
research research process summarizes implications or vice-versa implications
needs and opportunity areas;
2) highlights key findings; and
3) many insightful
implications are drawn from
the data
Stage 3 construct 30
Connection to research Deep and logical connection Some connections to research Little or no connection to the
between research and concept conducted, but other important research conducted
directions developed findings are not addressed
Rigorous design explorations 1) Alternatives explore 2 of 3 components are 1 of 3 components are
different facets of use; 2) form addressed such as: addressed such as:
evokes appropriate meanings; Alternatives explore different Alternatives explore different
and 3) scenarios cover several facets of use and form evokes facets of use but form evokes
dimensions of use appropriate meanings but inappropriate meanings and
scenarios are weak scenarios don’t seem to
connect to realistic use
Effective communication of Sketches and/or prototypes Uneven sketches and/or Sketches and/or prototypes
form and content directions and scenarios of use bring prototypes so that it takes lots don’t get ideas across;
opportunity areas to life of explanation to
communicate and it is more
difficult to imagine actual use

Eberly Center for Teaching Excellence, Carnegie Mellon University

Shelley Evenson, School of Design, CMU
Senior Interaction Capstone Project

Stage 4 refine 10
Product evaluation Team used systematic testing Used very informal feedback No testing or feedback
to validate or drive refinement to drive refinement
Quality of craftsmanship and 1) Final direction works well Only 2 of the 3 components Final direction would fail in
level of completion —the form and the interaction are addressed such as it works use and either the interaction
are seamless and 2) it looks well and looks great, but it’s or product form are unfinished
great and 3) its complete incomplete

Stage 5 reflect 25
Product|project brief Documents process, explains Document is coherent for the Document lacks coherence
and quality of the team’s ideas well, clear introduction most part, but missing 1 or 2 and is missing 3 or more
reflection on a design solution and conclusion, obvious important elements important
transitions, doesn’t use jargon,
demonstrates knowledge of
key points
Poster Is an effective summary of the Is an effective summary of the Is not an effective summary
team’s efforts and works team’s efforts and doesn’t and does not work visually
visually work visually or vice versa
Presentation content Effective slides with coherent For the most part slides are Slides interfere with the story
and logical progression, helpful in telling the story
covers all key points, slides with only a few glaring
clearly aid the speaker in problems
telling a coherent story
Presentation delivery Presentation is polished, Presentation is polished, for Presentation is not polished
speakers use sentences, the most part, but missing 1 or
enunciates well, maintains an 2 important elements
effective pace and eye contact,
doesn’t run over allotted time
Connections Brief, poster and presentation Some components relate and Brief, presentation and poster
build and enhance one another others do not feel as though different people
produced them

Progress reports 5
Quality Goals, accomplishments and Goals, accomplishments and Goals, accomplishments and
time are covered; completed time are covered; but are not time are not covered; not
each week completed each week or vice completed each week
versa
Self-evaluation 10
Analysis of group process and Clearly articulates what Discusses only two of the Does not articulate any of the
individual role within it worked well and why, what three; discusses group without three – what worked well and
did not work well and why, discussing self; discusses self why, what didn’t work well
and ways to increase without discussing group and why, how to improve
effectiveness and efficiency of
group process in the future,
considering self as well as
others
Participation 2.5
Active participation Active participation in Some participation Little participation
projects, assignments,
attendance/discussions, and
critiques

Eberly Center for Teaching Excellence, Carnegie Mellon University