Phase 2

Criteria Ratings Points

Introduction and conclusion

10 to >9.0 pts

Advanced

The introduction is succinct and embodies the project’s primary objectives and outcomes. The introduction constructs the purpose of the system. A compelling and justifiable conclusion is developed that supports the key outcomes. More than 5 scholarly sources and 500 words combined.

9 to >7.0 pts

Proficient

The introduction and conclusion are succinct and embody most of the project’s primary objectives and outcomes, and/or the introduction constructs an unclear purpose of the system. Justified conclusion developed. Minimum of 5 scholarly sources and 500 words.

7 to >0.0 pts

Developing

The introduction and/or conclusion are generalized and embody some of the project’s primary objectives and outcomes and/or has less than the minimum of 5 scholarly sources and 500 words and/or is not defensible.

0 pts

Not Present

Substantially unmet or not present

10 pts

Literature review and systems design methods

50 to >45.0 pts

Advanced

Systems analysis and design literature review and methodology is accurate, feasible, and addresses the key deliverables of the project including a highly innovative, available, scalable, and secure information systems cloud solution. Literature results and methods are properly contrasted and are specific and relevant to the problem. They detail the standards used and how these will benchmark the systems. Over 2,000 words and 15 unique scholarly journal articles that justify the methodology, its reliability, and its validity in comparing and contrasting the information systems.

45 to >41.0 pts

Proficient

Systems analysis and design literature review and methodology is mostly accurate, feasible, and addresses the key deliverables of the project including a highly innovative, available, scalable, and secure information systems cloud solution and/or literature results and methods are contrasted and somewhat specific and relevant to the problem and/or detail some standards used and how these will benchmark the systems and/or minimum of 2,000 words and 15 unique scholarly journal articles that justify the methodology, its reliability, and its validity in comparing and contrasting the information systems.

41 to >0.0 pts

Developing

Systems analysis and design literature review and methodology is not always accurate, feasible, and/or is missing the key deliverables of the project including a highly innovative, available, scalable, and secure information systems cloud solution and/or literature results and methods are not contrasted and/or not specific and/or relevant to the problem and/or benchmarking is inadequate and/or less than 2,000 words and 15 unique scholarly journal articles that justify the methodology, its reliability, and its validity in comparing and contrasting the information systems.

0 pts

Not Present

Substantially unmet or not present and/or quotes more than 5% of the writing or use of existing information system

50 pts

Systems Analysis and Redesign Project: Phase 2 Grading Rubric | BMIS530_D01_202130

Criteria Ratings Points

Systems analysis and design

80 to >73.0 pts

Advanced

Use case diagrams (2), written use cases / use case descriptions (2), activity diagrams (2), and sequence diagrams (2) are more thorough and detailed than the textbook examples, follow appropriate and advanced UML techniques, and meet comparative industry best practices and standards. Diagrams show an extensive knowledge of the system being designed. Minimum of 5 success scenarios and 10 extensions exist in each use case along with proper sub-flows and alternatives. Minimum of 10 activities exist with accurate associated decisions, swim lanes, guards, parallel activities, and proper object-oriented strategies to address distributed computing. Minimum of 5 objects exist in each sequence diagram with accurate associated lifelines, execution occurrences, messages, frames, guards, functions, loops, and proper object-oriented strategies to address distributed computing.

73 to >66.0 pts

Proficient

Use case diagrams (2), written use cases / use case descriptions (2), activity diagrams (2), and/or sequence diagrams (2) are as detailed as the textbook examples, follow appropriate and advanced UML techniques, and meet comparative industry best practices and standards and/or diagrams show knowledge of the system being designed. Most minimums are met including 5 success scenarios and 10 extensions in each use case along with proper sub-flows and alternatives and/or 10 activities exist with accurate associated decisions, swim lanes, guards, parallel activities, and proper object-oriented strategies to address distributed computing and/or the minimum of 5 objects exist in each sequence diagram with mostly accurate associated lifelines, execution occurrences, messages, frames, guards, functions, loops, and proper object-oriented strategies to address distributed computing.

66 to >0.0 pts

Developing

Use case diagrams (2), written use cases / use case descriptions (2), activity diagrams (2), and/or sequence diagrams (2) are not as detailed as the textbook examples and/or do not follow appropriate UML techniques and/or do not meet comparative industry best practices and standards and/or diagrams fail to show knowledge of the system being designed and/or minimums are not met including 5 success scenarios and 10 extensions in each use case along with proper sub-flows and alternatives and/or 10 activities exist with accurate associated decisions, swim lanes, guards, parallel activities, and proper object-oriented strategies to address distributed computing and/or the minimum of 5 objects does not exist in each sequence diagram with associated lifelines, execution occurrences, messages, frames, guards, functions, loops, and proper object-oriented strategies to address distributed computing.

0 pts

Not Present

Substantially unmet or not present or proper screenshots do not exist for each diagram or use of existing information system

80 pts

Systems Analysis and Redesign Project: Phase 2 Grading Rubric | BMIS530_D01_202130

Criteria Ratings Points

APA, Grammar, and Spelling

20 to >17.0 pts

Advanced

Properly formatted APA paper with table of contents and references pages. Correct spelling and grammar used. Contains fewer than 2 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content and/or minimal errors (1-2) noted in the interpretation or execution of proper APA format. Excellent organization, headings, and flow of the main concepts exist.

17 to >16.0 pts

Proficient

Paper contains fewer than 5 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content and/or some errors (3-7) noted in the interpretation or execution of proper APA format and/or inadequate organization, headings, and flow of the main concepts exist and/or notable absences in required APA formatting elements such as: Title page, running head, font type and size (Times New Roman 12 point), and line spacing.

16 to >0.0 pts

Developing

Paper contains fewer than 10 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content and/or numerous errors (7+) noted in the interpretation or execution of proper APA format and/or inadequate organization, headings, and flow of the main concepts exist and/or notable absences in required APA formatting elements such as: Title page, running head, font type and size (Times New Roman 12 point), and line spacing.

0 pts

Not Present

Paper contains more than 10 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content and/or numerous errors (10+) noted in the interpretation or execution of proper APA format and/or inadequate organization, headings, and flow of the main concepts exist.

20 pts

Overall Requirements

40 to >36.0 pts

Advanced

Over 2,500 words and 8 diagrams exist of original student authorship that shows excellent mastery and knowledge of systems analysis and design. Over 15 unique scholarly peer reviewed journal articles from well-respected IT journals exist that directly relate to and sufficiently support an operational systems analysis and design.

36 to >33.0 pts

Proficient

Minimum of 2,500 words and 8 diagrams exist of original student authorship that shows mastery and knowledge of systems analysis and design. 15 unique scholarly peer reviewed journal articles from well-respected IT journals exist that relate to and sufficiently support an operational systems analysis and design.

33 to >0.0 pts

Developing

Less than 2,500 words and 8 diagrams exist of original student authorship that shows mastery and knowledge of systems analysis and design and/or there are less than 15 unique scholarly peer reviewed journal articles from well-respected IT journals that relate to and sufficiently support an operational systems analysis and design.

0 pts

Not Present

Substantially unmet or not present or proper screenshots do not exist for each diagram or use of existing information system

40 pts

Total Points: 200

Systems Analysis and Redesign Project: Phase 2 Grading Rubric | BMIS530_D01_202130