Project Plan Grading Template

Team: Yakka ...

Grade: (92 out of 100) regraded to (101 out of 100)

Document presentation (9/10 pts) (regraded to 13/10)

• Organization - OK, nice re-organization of the template I gave you. The link to sponsor is bad.
• Name/logo - I like both!
• Document author - not indicated on project plan; should be included for all documents.
• project team members/roles - OK, but should be accessible from all documents. And who is the manager!
• use of English - misspelled Explanation, browsable. Check spelling on documents.

• Innovation - Good additional parts to the project, such as the history and revision sections. Not entirely clear what is contained in those sections, so a brief explanation would be good.

  This is a truly outstanding notebook, with lots of things I never asked for done in a very intelligent and aesthetically pleasing manner. I would like to explore the possibility of understanding what automation you have involved with the development of this Web notebook for use in the future.

  Question: How difficult would it be to add an automated status report mechanism to this notebook? I would like to provide each team member with a form they can fill out and submit to a central processing program that would then tabulate how much time was spent on the project activities and compare it to the predicted schedule.

Project Description (20/20 pts)

• length (approx one page) - good
• clarity (use of English) -OK
• specificity (Can I tell what you are going to do?) OK

Comments: To what extent are you coordinating with CoC graduate student Anind Dey. He is doing a similar project and should be mentioned explicitly in your project description. Also, you should put in explicit links to other work as you become aware of it.

Please put the project description at the top of the project plan. I would also like for there to be an explicit link to the project schedule from the notebook page and I would like to know how to follow how the schedule is revised over time. I can possibly see this in the revision history, but I'm not sure.

Project Schedule (30/35 pts) changed to (33/35 pts)

• clarity (Can I interpret the table?) too much use of tables in this project plan; makes it hard to read.
• completeness (enough activities indicated?) - OK, when considering the breakdown, but high-level set of tasks seems light. Your schedule table should go down to the level of the breakdown activities.
• indication of milestones -good.

• innovative use of table to indicate schedule information - a bit too much, I think, but extremely good effort.
• good use of links - used for table of contents, but not to link deliverables to milestones in schedule. Could also link high-level tasks to their descriptions/breakdowns.

I explicitly mentioned in class that you should not list something like "Requirements Document" as an activity. That is a deliverable. The activities associated with it are things like scenario determination and storyboarding and writing and document reviewing. I would rather see activities like that in your schedule. You could think of breaking the schedule down into parts or phases, such as Concept development, Requirements, Design and Prototyping. Then you can further subdivide those activities into smaller activities. Activities such as writing and document review would be in a separate category that spans across these phases. And the phases will overlap in time because you will start designing before you are finished with requirements gathering, etc.

Also, you can adjust your schedule table and replace the "x"'s with actual number of hours scheduled for that activity that week. Then you can accumulated number of hours for a week (sum the columns) and number of hours for an activity (sum the rows)

Activities description (33/35 pts) changed to (35/35)

• completeness (all scheduled activities described; descriptions are detailed enough to indicate what work is done) - OK
• time estimates for activities - I want this done in terms of hours, since it's not clear to me what a man-day means for a student.
• role assignment - OK
• clarity of descriptions of activities - this could be done a bit more clealy with less reliance on tables and using some other format, such as the description lists suggested in the project plan template.