Overview

There are three main rubric categories that are detailed in the following sections.

Design Document (60)
1. Phase 1 (20 pts)
2. Phase 2 (15 pts)
3. Phase 3 (25 pts)
Project Completion (60)
1. Updates (10 Pts)
2. Functionality (40 Pts)
3. Presentation (10 Pts)
Ongoing (30)
1. Professionalism & Classwork

Design Document (60)

Phase 1 (20 pts)

Category	Excellent	Standard	Poor	Points
Project Description	Provides a clear, well-organized 2–4 paragraph overview. Thoroughly explains functionality so another developer could reasonably implement it. Clearly identifies and explains relevant JavaFX features used for graphical development.	Provides an overview but may lack clarity, detail, or organization. Functionality is somewhat understandable but missing key details. Mentions JavaFX features but explanation is limited.	Overview is unclear, incomplete, or too brief. Functionality is vague or confusing. Little to no mention of JavaFX features.	5
Features	Clearly defines three feature levels (prototype, core, advanced). Features are realistic, achievable, and show strong understanding of iterative development. Clear progression between levels with meaningful distinctions. Prototype focuses on validation and essential functionality; core enhances usability and value; advanced meaningfully extends complexity.	Defines feature levels but distinctions may be unclear or uneven. Features are mostly realistic but may lack depth or clear progression. Some understanding of prototype vs. core functionality is demonstrated.	Feature levels are unclear, incomplete, unrealistic, or poorly distinguished. Little understanding of iterative development or feature progression.	5
Purpose & Motivation	Clearly explains rationale for project choice. Articulates thoughtful learning objectives and personal or educational significance. Demonstrates meaningful reflection and intentionality.	Provides general explanation of project choice and learning goals. Some reflection present but limited depth or clarity.	Little or no explanation of rationale. Learning goals unclear or missing. Minimal reflection.	3
Learning Targets & Challenge Goals	Lists at least three substantial learning targets that are specific, measurable, and appropriately challenging. Targets go beyond basic functionality and include stretch goals (e.g., implementing advanced JavaFX features, optimizing performance, adding non-trivial algorithms, or extending beyond class examples). Clear success criteria are defined for each target so progress can be objectively evaluated.	Lists at least three learning targets that are mostly appropriate in scope. Targets include some level of challenge but focus primarily on core functionality rather than stretch goals. Measurability is present but success criteria may lack detail or rigor.	Fewer than three learning targets, or targets are vague, minimal, or easily achievable with little demonstrated challenge. Limited evidence of stretch or measurable growth. Success criteria unclear or missing.	2
High Level Timeline	Clearly outlines 10–11 weeks with logical sequencing. Includes 7 well-defined development milestones that are demonstrable, measurable, and checkable each Friday. Proper formatting (no time estimates or individual assignments).	Timeline provided but sequencing or clarity may be uneven. Milestones are present but may lack specificity, measurability, or clarity. Minor formatting issues.	Timeline incomplete, poorly organized, or missing milestones. Milestones not demonstrable or improperly formatted.	5

Phase 2 (15 pts)

Category	Criteria	Points
User Experience	Develop Wireflow. - At least 5 different screen layouts - Screen Layouts show connections and annotations to explain how transitions or changes are effected by mouse or keyboard input. - Includes every possible screen for your prototype, core and stretch features -You must show with coloring or a code which part of each screen is prototype, core and stretch. You will be graded that your wireflow can be `understood`. For this to be true it must be legible and descriptive so that someone could write the logic and code for your vision.	10
Testing	Provided a test strategy (overview) for the project and detailed test cases for each test category for prototype, manual and automated testing. You must convince me that your program will behave as you expect by having sufficient details on the testing. For manual testing you provided some detailed steps on the tests you will run through.	5

Phase 3 (25 pts)

Category	Criteria	Points
Detailed Design	Class Design & Data Structures are well-structured with appropriate attributes, methods with key parameters and return types. - Explains how classes communicate, share data, and interact within the system. - Includes a minimum of a class and sequence diagram. - Satisfies requirements in the Detailed Design Template (design diagrams etc)	15
Detailed Schedule (baseline)	All weekly goals have a subset of at least 4 tasks that will be individually assigned and estimated (assignments not required) - All tasks have reasonable initial estimates - Initial estimates with multiplier fits within a reasonable range of a weeks work in class. - Actual times can be recorded to calculate the teams velocity each week to adjust future work estimates.	5
Algorithms	Clearly documents key algorithms (If your project has approval for no algorithms, your detailed design will be weighted with these points)	5

Project Completion (60)

The following rubrics break out the assessment by different areas.

Updates (10 Pts)

Your updates will be graded out of 10 points. You must submit your updated Design Document to match your finished project.

This update should include updates to your design diagrams and any changes on the algorithms that you actually ended up implementing. See the Final Updates page for more information.

Functionality (40 Pts)

If you copy code (even small amounts) from the internet, from AI or other sources, you MUST attribute the origin of that code or you will receive an overall penalty on your grade. (Add the attribution links to your README.md file)

Criteria	Exemplary (100%)	Satisfactory (80%)	Not Yet (60%)	Unassessable (0%)
Quality (Bugs)	No major bugs or glitches. Program does not crash. All basic use cases work as advertised. Only minor bugs present.	Few major bugs. Program does not crash. Behavior is mostly correct.	Some major bugs. Program seldom crashes.	Major bugs prevalent. Important behavior malfunctions.
Polish/User Design(UI)	Appearance is clean and professional. No visual or audio bugs. Great attention to detail and creativity.	Appearance is mostly well-organized and neat. No usage issues. Minor UI glitches.	Appearance is somewhat organized. Usage is somewhat difficult.	Appearance is poor. Usage is difficult.
Quantity (Features)	Completed all prototype features and then some. Code demonstrates many hours of focused work (6+ hours per week).	Completed all prototype features. Appropriate number of hours is evident (5 hrs/week).	Completed some prototype features. Shows a lack of effort and dedication (3-4 hrs/week).	A long way from appropriate effort and completion.
Difficulty	Difficult technology, algorithms, UI, and/or library integration.	Appropriate difficulty.	Lack of apparent or significant learning.	No demonstration of learning.
Data Structures	Appropriate in all cases.	Mostly good.	Some poor choices.	Poor choices abound.
Class Design	Strong use of all: abstraction, encapsulation, inheritance, polymorphism.	Use of inheritance and encapsulation is good. Reasonable set of classes.	Classes used, but not encapsulated well. Over or under-designed.	Few classes. Bad design.

Presentation (10 Pts)

You will be peer reviewed for your presentation but overall grade for the presentation will be assessed as follows below.

If you are not present on your presentation day you may present on the first day back to class for full credit but your partner will still need to present separately on the presentation day.

Criteria	Exemplary (100%)	Satisfactory (80%)	Not Yet (60%)	Unassessable (0%)
Formal Presentation	Thorough presentation of project: functionality, learnings, and experience. Professional slides and/or presentation.	Demonstrates functionality and some insight into the development experience. No slides necessary. Reasonable quality of presentation.	Falls short of sharing functionality or experience. Presentation lacks quantity or quality.	Missing or woefully disorganized, lacking details.

Ongoing (30)

Professionalism & Classwork

This section will be ongoing through the entire project lifecycle and count towards the final grade.

Criteria	Exemplary (100%)	Satisfactory (80%)	Not Yet (60%)	Unassessable (0%)
Classwork	Clear achievements made during each demo. Clear plan for start of each sprint. Shared learning along with functionality. Tasklist is completely up to date. Class demos completed.	Some progress is demonstrated. Task List has some updates.	Progress is missing or too small. Worksheet is missing important information.	No progress is discernible. Class demos not completed. Worksheet is inadequate.
Professionalism	No instances of being off task. Asks for hints occasionally, independently researches, demonstrates problem-solving abilities.	1 or 2 reminders needed to be on task. Needs help with difficult issues but demonstrates ability to debug and grow independently.	3+ reminders to get back on task. Consistently unable to resolve (minor) issues without assistance.	Frequently off task. Cannot make progress without assistance.