User Tools

Site Tools


chicoutimi_2016:grille_evaluation

Visual Analytics Course

Instructor: Guy Melançon (email: Guy dot Melancon at labri dot fr)

Chicoutimi Summer 2016 roadmap / Session by session cutdown

Project evaluation

It's worth studying the grid a bit, so you can get better grades – and because you will have to grade (some of) your colleagues' work.

Projects will be evaluated according to several criterion. Each of these criterion should be assigned a grade [1, 5], interpreted in accordance with the criteria. The interpretation suggested here should not be taken too strictly, they are meant to give a flavor of what makes a difference between assigning a 2 or a 3, instead of a 3 or a 4, for instance.

Grades & possible interpretations Comment
Criteria 1 2 3 4 5
Difficulty of problem addressed / questions asked Easy Requires some thinking but answer is straightforward Requires some thinking and average work Tricky, requires non obvious work Difficult, probably impossible to answer satisfactorily in given time Your comment here explaining why you assigned this score
Implicit difficulty of dataset used Straightforward, not much work Required work but obvious solution Required work, inventive solution Needed non obvious combination of ideas and tools Difficult, probably needed too much time Your comment here explaining why you assigned this score
Visualization (effort) Relatively easy, relied on ready-made solutions Good combinations of existing ideas and algorithms but could do better Some thinking, a mixture of ready-made and custom visualization, pretty good end result Astute and creative, pleasant and relevant Seems new, required non obvious work Your comment here explaining why you assigned this score
Visualization (quality) Many things wrong, ended producing misleading graphical views Many things need to be fixed (wrong colormap, wrong mapping for size, wrong algorithms used, etc.) Overall OK, with only minor things to improve or add Very good impression, clean colormap choices, shapes, relevant layouts, etc. Additional aesthetics, almost close to professional graphics design Your comment here explaining why you assigned this score
Visualization (creativity) None really Combining existing viz was a good idea Unusual use of existing algorithm and/or customization Astute solution, demonstrate mastery of ideas and techniques Clearly exhibit a creative mind Your comment here explaining why you assigned this score
Visualization (relevancy) Didn't help much to solve the problem / answer questions Only gave a hint about a possible solution Was able to provide a non-surprising answer, with no real convincing arguments Clearly allowed to provide a firm answer to problem Brought additional insights on the problem Your comment here explaining why you assigned this score
Written document (wiki) Poor, hardly readable or usable Contains everything it should, but needs to be reworked to be usable Globally OK but could be improved Good job, reads well Extremely well crafted, could even be published as a blog as is Your comment here explaining why you assigned this score
Slideshow & Presentation Poor, confusing Wrong order of presentation, wrong time management could not present it all … Globally OK, could improved (showing better images, more lively, emphasizing the right things, etc.) Good show, well balanced, lively, got all the information in the right time frame Entertaining, attractive, intellectually challenging Your comment here explaining why you assigned this score
/net/html/perso/melancon/Visual_Analytics_Course/data/pages/chicoutimi_2016/grille_evaluation.txt · Last modified: 2016/05/02 13:13 by melancon