Download Z PROJECT CAPSTONE TASK 2 LATEST UPDATED VERSION.docx and more Exams Biology in PDF only on Docsity!
Z PROJECT CAPSTONE TASK 2
LATEST UPDATED VERSION
Unsatisfactory Does Not Meet Standard Minimally Competent Competent Highly Competent Score/Level Articulation of Response (clarity, organization, mechanics) The candidate provides unsatisfactory articulation of response. The candidate provides weak articulation of response. The candidate provides limited articulation of response. The candidate provides adequate articulation of response. The candidate provides substantial articulation of response. A1. Abstract Summary The candidate does not provide a logical summary of the most important points of the project that includes the given points. The candidate provides a logical summary, with no detail, of the most important points of the project that includes the given points. The candidate provides a logical summary, with limited detail, of the most important points of the project that includes the given points. The candidate provides a logical summary, with adequate detail, of the most important points of the project that includes the given points. The candidate provides a logical summary, with sufficient detail, of the most important points of the project that includes the given points. B1. Capstone Highlights The candidate does not provide a logical summary of the capstone’s highlights that includes the given points. The candidate provides a logical summary, with no detail, of the capstone’s highlights that includes the given points. The candidate provides a logical summary, with limited detail, of the capstone’s highlights that includes the given points. The candidate provides a logical summary, with adequate detail, of the capstone’s highlights that includes the given points. The candidate provides a logical summary, with substantial detail, of the capstone’s highlights that includes the given points. C1. Needs Analysis The candidate does not provide a logical explanation of the needs analysis that occurred prior to the project design and The candidate provides a logical explanation, with no detail, of the needs analysis that occurred prior to the The candidate provides a logical explanation, with limited detail, of the needs analysis that occurred prior to the The candidate provides a logical explanation, with adequate detail, of the needs analysis that occurred prior to The candidate provides a logical explanation, with substantial detail, of the needs analysis that occurred prior
Unsatisfactory Standard Competent Competent Highly Competent development phase that includes the given points. project design and development phase that includes the given points. project design and development phase that includes the given points. the project design and development phase that includes the given points. to the project design and development phase that includes the given points. D1. Problem Resolution The candidate does not provide a logical explanation of the candidate’s approach to solving the problem. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with no detail, of the candidate’s approach to solving the problem. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with limited detail, of the candidate’s approach to solving the problem. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with adequate detail, of the candidate’s approach to solving the problem. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with substantial detail, of the candidate’s approach to solving the problem. D1a. Justification of Approach The candidate does not provide a logical justification of the candidate’s approach. The candidate provides a logical justification, with no support, of the candidate’s approach. The candidate provides a logical justification, with limited support, of the candidate’s approach. The candidate provides a logical justification, with adequate support, of the candidate’s approach. The candidate provides a logical justification, with substantial support, of the candidate’s approach. D2a. Quantitative and Qualitative Risks The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of quantitative and qualitative risks associated with the solution. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of quantitative and qualitative risks associated with the solution. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of quantitative and qualitative risks associated with the solution. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of quantitative and qualitative risks associated with the solution. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of quantitative and qualitative risks associated with the solution. D2b. Cost/Benefit Analysis The candidate does not provide a cost/benefit analysis for each risk. The candidate provides a cost/benefit analysis, with no detail, for each risk. The candidate provides a cost/benefit analysis, with limited detail, for each risk. The candidate provides a cost/benefit analysis, with adequate detail, for each risk. The candidate provides a cost/benefit analysis, with substantial detail, for each risk. D3. Risk The candidate does The candidate The candidate The candidate The candidate
Unsatisfactory Standard Competent Competent Highly Competent project. project. developing the project. developing the project. developing the project. F2b. Resource Justification The candidate does not provide a logical justification of the resources used. The candidate provides a logical justification, with no support, of the resources used. The candidate provides a logical justification, with limited support, of the resources used. The candidate provides a logical justification, with adequate support, of the resources used. The candidate provides a logical justification, with substantial support, of the resources used. F2c. Final Output The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of the final output. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of the final output. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of the final output. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of the final output. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of the final output. F3a. Implementation Plan The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of how the project was implemented that includes the given points. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of how the project was implemented that includes the given points. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of how the project was implemented that includes the given points. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of how the project was implemented that includes the given points. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of how the project was implemented that includes the given points. G1. Quality Assurance The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of how the candidate approached formative evaluation, that includes the given point. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of how the candidate approached formative evaluation, that includes the given point. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of how the candidate approached formative evaluation, that includes the given point. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of how the candidate approached formative evaluation, that includes the given point. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of how the candidate approached formative evaluation, that includes the given point.
Unsatisfactory Standard Competent Competent Highly Competent G2. Solution Testing The candidate does not provide a logical explanation of how the solution was tested that includes the given points. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with no detail, of how the solution was tested that includes the given points. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with limited detail, of how the solution was tested that includes the given points. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with adequate detail, of how the solution was tested that includes the given points. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with substantial detail, of how the solution was tested that includes the given points. G3. Revisions The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of any revisions the candidate made based on the formative evaluation results. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of any revisions the candidate made based on the formative evaluation results. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of any revisions the candidate made based on the formative evaluation results. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of any revisions the candidate made based on the formative evaluation results. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of any revisions the candidate made based on the formative evaluation results. G4. Summative Evaluation Plan The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of the candidate’s plan for summative evaluation. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of the candidate’s plan for summative evaluation. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of the candidate’s plan for summative evaluation. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of the candidate’s plan for summative evaluation. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of the candidate’s plan for summative evaluation. G5. Disseminating Results The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of how the candidate will disseminate evaluation results. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of how the candidate will disseminate evaluation results. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of how the candidate will disseminate evaluation results. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of how the candidate will disseminate evaluation results. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of how the candidate will disseminate evaluation results. H1. Post- The candidate does The candidate The candidate The candidate The candidate
Unsatisfactory Standard Competent Competent Highly Competent I1b. Outcomes The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of the outcomes. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of the outcomes. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of the outcomes. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of the outcomes. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of the outcomes. I2. Reflection The candidate does not provide a relevant reflection of what the candidate learned from the process. The candidate provides a relevant reflection, with no detail, of what the candidate learned from the process. The candidate provides a relevant reflection, with limited detail, of what the candidate learned from the process. The candidate provides a relevant reflection, with adequate detail, of what the candidate learned from the process. The candidate provides a relevant reflection, with substantial detail, of what the candidate learned from the process. J. Sources When the candidate uses sources, the candidate does not provide in-text citations and references. When the candidate uses sources, the candidate provides only some in-text citations and references. When the candidate uses sources, the candidate provides appropriate in-text citations and references with major deviations from APA style. When the candidate uses sources, the candidate provides appropriate in-text citations and references with minor deviations from APA style. When the candidate uses sources, the candidate provides appropriate in-text citations and references with no readily detectable deviations from APA style, OR the candidate does not use sources.
