6000 Words - Capstone Project Report on Data Warehousing role on Information Systems
jabdrover 
MarkingRubricFinalReport.docxMarking Criteria Final Report - Capstone Project
DATA WAREHOUSING: WHAT ROLE DOES IT PLAY ON INFORMATION SYSTEMS
· Abstract
10% of total grade
High Distinction
The abstract accurately and concisely captures the project motivation or Problem statement, objective of the project, methodology/approach, results/findings, implications and limitation
85 - 100%
Distinction
The abstract accurately captures the project motivation or Problem statement, objective of the project, methodology/approach, results/findings, implications and limitation
75 - 84%
Credit
The abstract captures the project motivation or Problem statement, objective of the project, methodology/approach, results/findings, implications and limitation but lacks some details
65 - 74%
Pass
The abstract satisfactory captures important components such as motivation or problem statement, objective of the project, and outcomes but missing other elements.
50 - 64%
Fail
The abstract does not satisfactorily capture important components/Missing abstract altogether.
0 - 49%
· Introduction
5% of total grade
High Distinction
• Exceptional introduction that grabs interest of reader and states topic clearly. • Excellent description of research question, problem (including statement of purpose and relevance). • Scope includes context, boundaries and assumptions
85 - 100%
Distinction
• Very good introduction that grabs interest of reader and states topic. • Very good description of research question, problem (including statement of purpose and relevance). • Scope includes context, boundaries and assumptions.
75 - 84%
Credit
• Proficient introduction that is interesting and states topic. • Good description of research question, problem (including statement of purpose and relevance). • Scope includes context and boundaries
65 - 74%
Pass
• Basic introduction that states topic but lacks interest • Satisfactory definition of basic project topic problem • Scope is included but not complete.
50 - 64%
Fail
• Weak or no introduction of topic. • Project’s purpose is unclear • Unsatisfactory definition of project • Scope is unsatisfactory /insufficient.
0 - 49%
· Literature Review
10% of total grade
High Distinction
• Chooses a variety of information sources appropriate to the scope and discipline of the research question. Selects sources after considering the importance (to the researched topic) of all criteria used (such as relevance to the research question, currency, authority, audience, and bias or point of view). • Synthesizes in-depth information from relevant sources representing various points of view/approaches
85 - 100%
Distinction
• Chooses a variety of information sources appropriate to the scope and discipline of the research question. Selects sources using most criteria • Presents in-depth information from relevant sources representing various points of view/approaches.
75 - 84%
Credit
• Chooses a variety of information sources. Selects sources using multiple criteria • Presents information from relevant sources and adequately representing points of view/approaches
65 - 74%
Pass
• Chooses satisfactory information sources. Selects sources using basic criteria • Presents information from relevant sources representing limited points of view/ approaches.
50 - 64%
Fail
• Chooses a few information sources. Selects sources using only one or two criteria • Presents information from irrelevant sources representing limited points of view/ approaches.
0 - 49%
· Methodology/Approach
10% of total grade
High Distinction
• All elements of the methodology or theoretical framework are skilfully developed. Appropriate methodology or theoretical frameworks may be synthesised from across disciplines or from relevant sub disciplines.
85 - 100%
Distinction
• All elements of the methodology or theoretical framework are appropriately developed. Appropriate methodology or theoretical frameworks was synthesised appropriately.
75 - 84%
Credit
• Critical elements of the methodology or theoretical framework are appropriately developed; however, more subtle elements are ignored or unaccounted for.
65 - 74%
Pass
• Critical elements of the methodology or theoretical framework are missing, incorrectly developed, or unfocused.
50 - 64%
Fail
• Inquiry design demonstrates a misunderstanding of the methodology or theoretical framework.
0 - 49%
· Execution & Results or Analysis & Discussion
30% of total grade
High Distinction
• Organizes and synthesizes evidence excellently to reveal insightful patterns, differences, or similarities related to focus. • Proposes one or more solutions/ hypotheses that indicate a deep comprehension of the problem. Solution/ hypotheses are sensitive to contextual factors as well as all of the following: ethical, logical, and cultural dimensions of the problem. • Evaluation of solutions is deep and elegant (for example, contains thorough and insightful explanation) and includes, deeply and thoroughly, all of the following: considers history of problem, reviews logic/ reasoning, examines feasibility of solution, and weighs impacts of solution. • Implements the solution in a manner that addresses thoroughly and deeply multiple contextual factors of the problem. • Reviews results relative to the problem defined with thorough, specific considerations of need for further work.
85 - 100%
Distinction
• Organizes and synthesizes evidence to reveal important patterns, differences, or similarities related to focus. • Proposes one or more solutions/ hypotheses that indicate comprehension of the problem. Solutions/ hypotheses are sensitive to contextual factors as well as the one of the following: ethical, logical, or cultural dimensions of the problem. • Evaluation of solutions is good (for example, contains thorough explanation) and includes the following: considers history of problem, reviews logic/ reasoning, examines feasibility of solution, and weighs impacts of solution. • Implements the solution in a manner that addresses multiple contextual factors of the problem in a surface manner. • Reviews results relative to the problem defined with some consideration of need for further work.
75 - 84%
Credit
• Organizes evidence to reveal some patterns, differences, or similarities related to focus. • Proposes one solution/hypothesis that is “off the shelf” rather than individually designed to address the specific contextual factors of the problem. • Evaluation of solutions is brief (for example, explanation lacks depth) and includes the following: considers history of problem, reviews logic/ reasoning, examines feasibility of solution, and weighs impacts of solution. • Implements the solution in a manner that addresses the problem statement but ignores relevant contextual factors. • Reviews results in terms of the problem defined with little, if any, consideration of need for further work.
65 - 74%
Pass
• Organizes evidence, but the organization is not effective in revealing important patterns, differences, or similarities. • Proposes a solution/hypothesis that is difficult to evaluate because it is vague or only indirectly addresses the problem statement. • Evaluation of solutions is superficial (for example, contains cursory, surface level explanation) and includes the following: considers history of problem, reviews logic/ reasoning, examines feasibility of solution, and weighs impacts of solution. • Implements the solution in a manner that does not directly address the problem statement. • Reviews results superficially in terms of the problem defined with no consideration of need for further work
50 - 64%
Fail
• Lists evidence, but it is not organized and/ or is unrelated to focus. • Proposes a solution/hypothesis but the connection to the theory is not clear • Evaluation of solutions is incomplete. • Solutions were not specific. • Future work was not identified.
0 - 49%
· Implications & Limitations
10% of total grade
High Distinction
• Insightfully discusses in detail relevant and supported limitations and implications.
85 - 100%
Distinction
• Discusses relevant and supported limitations and implications in good details.
75 - 84%
Credit
• Discusses relevant and supported limitations and implications.
65 - 74%
Pass
• Presents relevant and supported limitations and implications.
50 - 64%
Fail
• Presents limitations and implications, but they are possibly irrelevant and unsupported.
0 - 49%
· Lessons Learnt
10% of total grade
High Distinction
• Meaningfully synthesizes connections among experiences from the project (including life experiences and academic experiences) to deepen understanding of fields of study and to broaden own points of view. • Makes explicit references to previous learning and applies in an innovative (new and creative) way that knowledge and those skills to demonstrate comprehension and performance in novel situations. • Envisions a future self (and possibly makes plans that build on past experiences) that have occurred across multiple and diverse contexts.
85 - 100%
Distinction
• Effectively selects and develops examples of experiences, drawn from a variety of contexts in the project to illuminate concepts/ theories/ frameworks of fields of study. • Makes references to previous learning and shows evidence of applying that knowledge and those skills to demonstrate comprehension and performance in novel situations. • Evaluates changes in own learning over time, recognizing complex contextual factors (e.g., works with ambiguity and risk, deals with frustration, considers ethical frameworks).
75 - 84%
Credit
• Compares experiences and academic knowledge to infer differences, as well as similarities, and acknowledge perspectives other than own. • Makes references to previous learning and attempts to apply that knowledge and those skills to demonstrate comprehension and performance in novel situations. • Articulates strengths and challenges (within specific performances or events) to increase effectiveness in different contexts (through increased self-awareness).
65 - 74%
Pass
• Identifies connections between experiences and those academic texts and ideas perceived as similar and related to own interests. • Somewhat makes references to previous learning and attempts to apply that knowledge and those skills to demonstrate comprehension and performance in novel situations. • Describes own performances with general descriptors of success and failure with future plan to improve
50 - 64%
Fail
• Failed to connect between experience and academic concept learnt • Makes vague references to previous learning but does not apply knowledge and skills to demonstrate comprehension and performance in novel situations. • Describes own performances with general descriptors of success and failure/Not relevant
0 - 49%
· Conclusion
5% of total grade
High Distinction
Clearly and excellently states a conclusion that is a logical extrapolation from the inquiry findings.
85 - 100%
Distinction
States a conclusion that is a logical extrapolation from the inquiry findings.
75 - 84%
Credit
States a conclusion focused solely on the inquiry findings. The conclusion arises specifically from and responds specifically to the inquiry findings
65 - 74%
Pass
States a general conclusion that, because it is so general, also applies beyond the scope of the inquiry findings.
50 - 64%
Fail
States an ambiguous, illogical, or unsupportable conclusion from inquiry findings.
0 - 49%
· Presentation & References
10% of total grade
High Distinction
85 - 100%
Distinction
- Very good physical layout and logical structure. - Very good attention to detail. - The work is presented in an accurate, concise and coherent fashion, with very few errors. - Very good technical style, avoiding excessive jargon. - Very few spelling mistakes or grammatical errors. - Few errors in the acknowledgement of the work of others and a correctly formatted reference section. - Correct use of formatting
75 - 84%
Credit
- Good logical structure and physical layout. - The work is presented in an accurate, concise and coherent fashion with good attention to detail in most areas and few errors. - Good technical style. - Few spelling mistakes or grammatical errors. - Few errors in the acknowledgement of the work of others or the reference section. - Correct use of formatting
65 - 74%
Pass
- Satisfactory logical structure and physical layout. - Satisfactory attention to detail. - The work is presented in a satisfactory fashion. - Satisfactory technical style. - Generally spelling and grammar are correct. - Occasional errors in the acknowledgement of the work of others, satisfactorily formatted reference section. - Missing some formatting
50 - 64%
Fail
Unsatisfactory structure and physical layout. - The work is presented in an unsatisfactory fashion. - Unsatisfactory technical style. - Frequent spelling mistakes and/or grammatical errors. - Errors in the acknowledgement of the work of others and an unsatisfactorily formatted reference section. - Missing many elements of formatting
0 - 49%
