Explanation

Evaluation will be done according to the Practice Enterprise 2 evaluation framework that was communicated.

• Practice Enterprise (theory) 20%
• Practice Enterprise (lab) 80%

Theory

Theory is assessed based on the active cooperation during the theory lessons, and evaluation of the deliverable tasks that go with it. (individual)

Realization

For the realization, on the one hand, a total score for the whole team (a score for ICT and a score for app) is calculated: this is an evaluation of what was effectively realized and delivered at the end of the semester.
This realization is evaluated on:

•     Analysis (functional + technical)
•     Proper functioning according to specifications and requirements
•     testing: design of tests and execution/results
•     documentation
•     demonstration

Each team member gets a share of that score, based on their own contribution to the whole.  That contribution is determined by:

•     presence and active cooperation during the planned lab sessions
•     Reporting (see below)
•     percentage of effectively realized scrum storypoints (how much % of the total work was effectively done and tested by the individual team member).  A task is considered completed when a demonstration has taken place.
•     taking responsibility and ownership
•     ACTIVE participation in the open campus days: each team member should attend at least 1 time and speak to the visitors.
•     Active participation in the final presentation (presenting and demonstrating + answering questions of the jury)

All team members report (in writing) individually every week to the supervising lecturer on the progress of the project and especially on their own tasks.  Even though the project is a team effort, tasks are individual and are assessed individually.

Given the project-based and teamwork-based nature of the project, there is no second examination opportunity.

Learning Objectives and Evaluation.

1) Technical knowledge, analyzing and researching (Level 2):

Insufficient

•     The problem statement is missing.
•     Client's question is not analyzed.
•     Does not bring in meaningful information.
•     Objectives have not been formulated.
•     Acts inadequately on the basis of technological knowledge and competencies.
•     Has not identified or insufficiently identified the required technical knowledge and/or has not taken actions to acquire the missing knowledge.

Sufficient

•     The student is able to formulate a problem statement, objective and assignment for electronic or ICT systems.
•     He/she substantiates the assignment through analysis and research. A sufficiently large set of objectives has been formulated.
•     The objectives are rather general in nature.
•     The analysis results in a limited set of requirements.
•     The required technical knowledge has been identified and action taken to acquire the missing knowledge.

Excellent

•     The student has positively exceeded expectations in terms of consultation with stakeholders to formulate a clear problem statement, objective and assignment for electronic or ICT systems.
•     He/she has excellently substantiated the assignment by means of analysis and research, for example by means of a market survey, requirement analysis of the interested party and comparison with other existing solutions
•     The student has expanded his/her own technical knowledge in such a way that a certain expertise in the domain has been built up.

Evaluation: Analysis is discussed at Scrum meetings and documented by individual team members.  All Scrum meetings are used as a basis for ongoing evaluation.

2) Design (Level 2):

Insufficient

•     The student has not developed an application,an ICT system or service or the project is insufficiently developed.
•     He/she is not able to realize a relevant implementation of the drafted requirements. He/she is not able to substantiate the choice made for the various components.
•     Block diagram and/or flow chart are not correct or not present.
•     Non-functional requirements such as usability were not sufficiently considered.
•     No or insufficient tests were provided in the design phase, or the tests were inadequate to check off the set of functional requirements.

Sufficient

•     The student is able to develop an application, an ICT system or service based on a program of requirements.
•     He/she is able to realize a relevant implementation of the established requirements. He / she motivates the choice made for the various components.
•     Block diagram and/or flowchart are elaborated and present.
•     Non-functional requirements such as usability have been sufficiently taken into account.
•     Sufficient testing was provided in the design phase, and the testing was sufficient to test off the set of functional requirements

Excellent

•     The student has more than exceeded the expectations for an application,an ICT system or service to be developed based on a program of requirements.
•     He/she is able to realize a relevant implementation of the set of requirements. He / she motivates the choice made for the various components.
•     The functional design is complete.
•     The technical design ensures proper interaction between the various components.
•     The technical design takes into account realizability and testability.
•     Block diagram and/or flow chart are elaborated and present.
•     Excellent consideration has been given to non-functional requirements such as usability.
•     A very good set of tests was provided in the design phase, and the tests far exceeded the requirement to test off the set of functional requirements

Evaluation: review of design, block diagram, testing
 

3) Achieve (Level 2):

Insufficient

•     Some components are realized.
•     Some components are missing.
•     Documentation does not adequately reflect the realization process.
•     Too little testing has taken place.

Sufficient

•     The student delivers a working proof of concept solution or service.
•     The solution is a complete and correct implementation of formulated requirements. He/she verifies and validates (e.g. through the designed tests) the product or service in relation to the set requirements.

Excellent

•     The choice of components is motivated by the integrality of the design and the solution.
•     All components are realized into an integrated product or service.
•     Product or service meets the set of requirements and even exceeds them in certain areas.
•     Product or service provides an ample answer to the problem statement.
•     The realization process is extensively and accurately documented.

Evaluation:

•     demo of working result
•     Successful testing (content of tests must be approved by instructors)

4) Manage (Level 2):

Inadequate

•     The management system is inadequately developed or missing.
•     The realization process is insufficiently documented.

Satisfactory

•     The student allows technological system to function optimally in its application context or work environment.
•     He/she establishes a management system with a view to reproducing it and continuing to function optimally.

Excellent

•     The technological system functions optimally.
•     Performance of the product or service is tested.
•     Management of the technological system is facilitated by accurate documentation.
•     Management system anticipates potential problems, provides end-to-end follow-up of any problems.

Evaluation: assessment of management system (where it is relevant)

5) Communicating (Level 2)

Insufficient

•     Little to no communication with the team during the various phases of the project.
•     Presents without structure and enthusiasm.
•     Relationship between different aspects is not clear.
•     Student is very sloppy with language errors.
•     Student uses inappropriate communication style.
•     Student does not have (or has not participated in the creation of) promo materials of the completed project.
•     Student does not attend the information event.

Sufficient

•     Student communicates purposefully about the assignment using the main current communication forms and techniques.
•     He/she is able to clearly summarize the various aspects of his/her project, articulate them orally and in writing, and present them visually.
•     Communicates agreements in group work.  When working in a large team, student communicates clearly with other members of the team during each phase of the project.
•     Student communicates with care and courtesy.
•     Student has participated in creating promo materials of the completed project....
•     Student is present at the information event.

Excellent

•     Clearly summarizes the results of analysis and research
•     Establishes the relationship with the assignment
•     Illustrates his presentation meaningfully.
•     Student has a clear and convincing way of presenting.
•     Student is an ambassador for the program
•     Student proactively communicates with group members.
•     Student spontaneously assumes a directing and moderating role within the team.
•     Student uses language fluently and without errors.
•     Student made a significant contribution to the delivery of promo material of the realized project.  The promo material gives a clear picture of the entire project and its added value.
•     Student is present at the information event and acts as a true ambassador for TMMA.

Evaluation:

•     Participation in scrum meetings: present at meeting, actively participate, take up role
•     Pro-active reporting to the team and to lecturers
•     Review of promotional materials

6) Advising (Level 2):

Unsatisfactory

•     The student is not able to give advice to third parties about the design and process.
•     The student does not assume his/her role within the team within his/her area of expertise.

Satisfactory

•     The student is able to offer relevant advice to third parties in relation to his/her design and associated process.
•     This for a wide variety of stakeholders and possible target groups.
•     Student assumes the role from within his/her own domain of expertise to assist and advise other team members as needed.

Excellent

•     Student can offer relevant advice to third parties in relation to his/her design and associated process.
•     The student translates technical terms into language understandable by non-technicians.
•     This is for a wide variety of stakeholders and potential audiences.
•     The student conveys advice in an enthusiastic and persuasive manner.
•     He/she advises other students with the progress of their project.
•     Within a larger team, the student takes initiatives and a guiding and proactive role within their own area of expertise.

Evaluation:

•     Takes active role within the team within own chosen area of expertise
•     Is proactive in following up and advising throughout the different teams

8) Project and Performance Management (Level 2):

Insufficient

•     Does not develop any activities
•     Does not produce results
•     Makes major mistakes, works carelessly
•     Does not take responsibility for own tasks
•     Does not meet deadlines.
•     Does not respect planning and organization and does not communicate with the team about this.
•     Incomplete or absent GANTT chart
•     Does not participate or sufficiently participates in relevant team meetings for follow-up.

Inadequate

•     He/she directs, evaluates and optimizes his/her own effectiveness. He/she makes adjustments based on feedback.
•     In doing so, he/she tackles assignments in a project-based manner and respects the planning and budgetary context and makes adjustments when necessary.
•     Has attention for quality of work
•     In doing so, he/she functions in a team-oriented and entrepreneurial way.
•     Takes responsibility for own tasks
•     Hardly misses any deadlines
•     Respects the planning and organization
•     GANTT-chart is present and adjusted during the design process.
•     Student masters Scrum (ICT) or GTD methodology and takes a steering role where necessary.

Excellent

•     Develops activities with focus on the end result
•     Own results are visible in the end result
•     Tests the quality of his own work with experts
•     Takes responsibility to the fullest and thus motivates others
•     Sees deadlines through to completion
•     Respects the planning and organization
•     Adjusts the planning on the basis of interim results
•     Anticipates possible risks in his planning
•     GANTT-chart is worked out in detail, is linked to the log-files and adjusted during design process.
•     Student is constantly aware of all aspects in terms of monitoring and steering of the project during all phases of the project, and takes action for adjustment where necessary.

9) Collaboration (Level 2):

Inadequate

•     Is not a team player
•     Does not take the tasks of others into account
•     Is not present or insufficiently present at team meetings.
•     Almost never takes ownership

Sufficient

•     The student acts constructively as an expert member of a (project) team with a view to his/her own (future) role and responsibility within a company or organization.
•     He/she thinks in an international and digital working environment.
•     Is a team player, and regularly takes on a steering role within the team.
•     Shows sufficient ownership.
•     Takes the tasks of others into account

Excellent

•     Is a good team player with attention to good functioning of the group.
•     Actively provides feedback to other students
•     Aligns own tasks with the tasks of others.
•     Takes a clear guiding role during all phases of the project, taking into account the strengths, weaknesses and sensitivities of everyone on the team.
•     Takes ownership of a task or problem very easily.
•     Shows clear leadership qualities.

Information about retaking exams

No 2nd examination opportunity.
This course unit does not allow partial mark transfers.

Evaluation can not be retaken