Urgent 4

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

Systems Analysis and Redesign Project: Phase 3 Grading Rubric | BMIS530_D01_202230

Criteria Ratings Points

Systems analysis and design comparison results

40 to >36.0 pts

Advanced

Systems analysis and design results compare key benchmarks including cloud computing capabilities, high-availability, scalability, and level of security of the old and newly designed information systems using relevant graphs, tables, and figures. A detailed process that follows the selected computing methodology, framework, and uses the appropriate standards exists. There are scholarly supported comparison methods to contrast the systems. Financial analysis is included that compares the two system designs from a managerial standpoint. Over 1,500 words and 10 unique scholarly journal articles from the literature review that justify the results and validity of the comparative analysis.

36 to >33.0 pts

Proficient

Systems analysis and design results compare some benchmarks including cloud computing capabilities, high-availability, scalability, and level of security of the old and newly designed information systems using relevant graphs, tables, and figures and/or processes that follow the selected computing methodology exist with some scholarly supported comparison methods to contrast the systems and/or financial analysis is included that compares the two system designs from a managerial standpoint and/or there is a minimum of 1,500 words and 10 unique scholarly journal articles from the literature review that justify the results and validity of the comparative analysis.

33 to >0.0 pts

Developing

Systems analysis and design results miss benchmarks including cloud computing capabilities, high-availability, scalability, and level of security of the old and newly designed information systems using relevant graphs, tables, and figures and/or processes do not follow the selected computing methodology and/or there is insufficient scholarly supported comparison methods to contrast the systems and/or financial analysis does not adequately compare the two system designs from a managerial standpoint and/or there is not a minimum of 1,500 words and 10 unique scholarly journal articles from the literature review that justify the results and validity of the comparative analysis.

0 pts

Not Present

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

40 pts

Systems Analysis and Redesign Project: Phase 3 Grading Rubric | BMIS530_D01_202230

Criteria Ratings Points

Systems analysis and design

90 to >82.0 pts

Advanced

ER data model (2), class diagrams (2), UIs (2), and architecture 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. ER data model diagrams meet 3NF, have at least 5 tables each, have accurate primary and foreign keys, accurate field types, and proper cardinality. Minimum of 5 classes and 15 functions and methods exist in each class diagram. UIs follow industry HCI standards. Architecture diagrams include accurate routers, switches, firewalls, load balancers, servers, databases, storage area networks, middleware, and other appropriate systems for cloud computing.

82 to >75.0 pts

Proficient

ER data model (2), class diagrams (2), UIs (2), and architecture diagrams (2) are as detailed as the textbook examples, mostly follow appropriate and advanced UML techniques, and meet comparative industry best practices and standards and/or diagrams show an knowledge of the system being designed and/or ER data model diagrams meet 3NF, have at least 5 tables each, have mostly accurate primary and foreign keys, accurate field types, and proper cardinality and/or a minimum of 5 classes and 10 functions and methods exist in each class diagram and/or UIs follow some industry HCI standards and/or architecture diagrams include mostly accurate routers, switches, firewalls, load balancers, servers, databases, storage area networks, middleware, and other appropriate systems for cloud computing.

75 to >0.0 pts

Developing

ER data model (2), class diagrams (2), UIs (2), and architecture diagrams (2) are not as detailed as the textbook examples and/or do not follow appropriate UML techniques and/or meet comparative industry best practices and standards and/or diagrams do not show knowledge of the system being designed and/or ER data model diagrams fail to meet 3NF, have at least 5 tables each, have mostly accurate primary and foreign keys, accurate field types, and/or proper cardinality and/or less than a minimum of 5 classes and 10 functions and methods exist in each class diagram and/or UIs do not follow industry HCI standards and/or architecture diagrams do not include accurate routers, switches, firewalls, load balancers, servers, databases, storage area networks, middleware, and other appropriate systems for cloud 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

90 pts

Systems Analysis and Redesign Project: Phase 3 Grading Rubric | BMIS530_D01_202230

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 2,000 words and 8 diagrams exist of original student authorship that shows excellent mastery and knowledge of systems analysis and design. Over 10 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 2,000 words and 8 diagrams exist of original student authorship that shows mastery and knowledge of systems analysis and design and/or a minimum of 10 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 2,000 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 10 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 3 Grading Rubric | BMIS530_D01_202230