Electronics & Comm. Engg.

Student Evaluation and OBE

Evaluation Scheme for B. Tech.
    • Theory (100 Marks)
      • Continuous Internal Assessment (25 Marks)
        • Sessional Tests (15 Marks)
        • Attendance (5 Marks)
        • Assignments (5 Marks)
      • End Semester University Examination (75 Marks)
    • Practicals (100 Marks)
      • Continuous Internal Assessment (40 Marks)
        • Attendance Marks (12 Marks)
        • Lab Performance (8 Marks)
        • Lab Records (8 Marks)
        • Viva (12 Marks)
      • End Semester University Examination (60 Marks)
    • Project: Rubric based evaluation
    • Seminar on Internship: Rubric based evaluation
Course Outcomes and CO-PO/PSO Mapping
Project: Rubric based evaluation

RUBRICS FOR PROJECT STAGE 1 & 2 EVALUATION

Rubrics Review

Review # Agenda Assessment Review Assessment Weightage Over all Weightage
Review 1 Project Synopsis/ Proposal Evaluation Rubric R1

(9)

 (40)

Review 2 Mid-Term Project Evaluation Rubric R2

(10)

Review 3 End Semester Project Evaluation Rubric R3

(12)

Review 4 Project Report Evaluation Rubric R4

(9)

External Evaluation

(60)

 (60)

Total

(100)

 (100)

 

Rubric #R1: Project Synopsis/ Proposal Evaluation

Maximum Marks*: 9

Level of Achievement
   

Good (3)

Average (2)

 Poor (1)

Score
a Identification of Problem Domain and Detailed Analysis Detailed and extensive explanation of the purpose and need of the project Average explanation of the purpose and need of the project Minimal explanation of the purpose and need of the project
b Study of the Existing Systems and Feasibility of Project Proposal Detailed and extensive explanation of the specifications and the limitations of the existing systems Moderate study of the existing systems; collects some basic information Minimal explanation of the specifications and the limitations of the existing systems; incomplete information
c Objectives and Methodology of the Proposed Work All objectives of the proposed work are well defined; Steps to be followed to solve the defined problem are clearly specified Incomplete justification to the objectives proposed; Steps are mentioned but unclear; without justification to objectives Objectives of the proposed work are either not identified or not well defined; Incomplete and improper specification

 

Rubric #R2: Mid-term Project Evaluation

Maximum Marks*: 10

Level of Achievement
   

Excellent (4)

Good (3) Average (2)

Poor (1)

Score
a Design Methodology · Divison of problem into modules and good selection of computing framework

· Appropriate design methodology and properly justification

· Divison of problem into modules but inappropriate selection of computing framework

· Design methodology not defined properly

·  Modular approach not adopted

·  Design methodology not defined

 

b Planning of Project Work and Team Structure

 

· Time frame properly specified and being followed

· Appropriate distribution of project work

· Time frame properly specified, but not being followed

· Distribution of project work un-even

· Time frame not properly specified

· In-appropriate distribution of project work

c Demonstration and Presentation · Objectives achieved as per time frame

· Contents of presentations are appropriate and well arranged

·  Proper eye contact with audience and clear voice with good spoken language

· Objectives achieved as per time frame

· Contents of presentations are appropriate but not  well arranged

· Satisfactory demonstration, clear voice with good spoken language but eye contact not proper

· Objectives achieved as per time frame

· Contents of presentations are appropriate but not well arranged

· Presentation not satisfactory and average demonstration

· No objectives achieved

· Contents of presentations are not appropriate and not well delivered

· Poor delivery of presentation

 

Rubric #R3: End Semester Internal Project Evaluation

Maximum Marks*: 12

Level of Achievement
   

Excellent (4)

Good (3) Average (2)

Poor (1)

Score
a Incorporation of Suggestions Changes are made as per modifications suggested during mid term evaluation and new innovations added Changes are made as per modifications suggested during mid term evaluation and good justification Few changes are made as per modifications suggested during mid term evaluation Suggestions during mid term evaluation are not incorporated
b Project

Demonstration

· All defined objectives are achieved

· Each module working well and properly demonstrated

· All modules of project are well integrated and system working is accurate

· All defined objectives are achieved

· Each module working well and properly demonstrated

· Integration of all modules not done and system working is not very satisfactory

· Some of the defined objectives are achieved

· Modules are working well in isolation and properly demonstrated

·  Modules of project are not properly integrated

·  Defined objectives are not achieved

·  Modules are not in proper working form that further leads to failure of integrated system

c Presentation · Contents of presentations are appropriate and well delivered

·   Proper eye contact with audience and clear voice with good spoken language

· Contents of presentations are appropriate and well delivered

· Clear voice with good spoken language but less eye contact with audience

· Contents of presentations are not appropriate

·  Eye contact with few people and unclear voice

· Contents of presentations are not appropriate and not well delivered

·  Poor delivery of presentation

 

Rubric #R4: Project Report Evaluation

Maximum Marks*: 9

   

Good (3)

Average (2)

Poor (1)

Score
a Project Report ·Project report is according to the specified format

·References and citations are appropriate and well mentioned

·Project report is according to the specified format but some mistakes

·In-sufficient references and citations

·Project report not prepared according to the specified format

·References and citations are not  appropriate

 

 

 

b Description of Concepts and Technical Details ·   Complete explanation of the key concepts

·   Strong description of the technical requirements of the project

·   Complete explanation of the key concepts but little relevance to literature

·   In-sufficient description of the technical requirements of the project

·   Inappropriate explanation of the key concepts

·   Poor description of the technical requirements of the project

 

c Conclusion and Discussion · Results are presented in very appropriate manner

· Project work is well summarized and concluded

· Future extensions in the project are well specified

· Results presented are not much satisfactory

· Project work summary and conclusion not very appropriate

· Future extensions in the project are specified

· Results are not presented properly

· Project work is not  summarized and concluded

·  Future extensions in the project are not  specified

Internship: Rubric based evaluation
Knowledge of training project

(25)

Knowledge of technology

(25)

Communication Skills

(25)

Report

(25)

Total (100)
 Beginning (13) Developing (19) Accomplished (25) Beginning (13) Developing (19) Accomplished (25) Beginning (13) Developing (19) Accomplished (25) Beginning (13) Developing (19) Accomplished (25)
© PIET 2022 Developed and Maintained by City Innovates Pvt. Ltd.
Skip to content
Downloads
PMSSS (J&K)
Panipat Institute of Engineering & Technology (PIET)