Design Document Rubric

Use this rubric when reviewing design documents (Week 6).

Total Points: 100

Point Conversion

Score	Points (per criterion)	Description
5	100% of weight	Excellent
4	80% of weight	Good
3	60% of weight	Satisfactory
2	40% of weight	Needs Work
1	20% of weight	Incomplete

Scoring Scale

Score	Meaning
5	Excellent - Ready for implementation
4	Good - Minor clarifications needed
3	Satisfactory - Some gaps to address
2	Needs Work - Significant redesign required
1	Incomplete - Not ready for implementation

Criteria

1. System Architecture (25% = 25 points)

Is the overall system design clear and appropriate?

Score	Description
5	Elegant architecture; components well-defined; clear interfaces
4	Good architecture; appropriate component breakdown
3	Architecture understandable but some ambiguity
2	Architecture unclear or inappropriate for the problem
1	No coherent architecture

Guiding Questions:

Is there a clear system diagram?
Are the major components and their responsibilities defined?
Are the interfaces between components specified?
Is the technology stack justified?

2. Data Pipeline (25% = 25 points)

Is the data flow well-defined and appropriate?

Score	Description
5	Complete data flow; appropriate transformations; handles edge cases
4	Good data pipeline; clear transformations
3	Pipeline understandable but some steps unclear
2	Data flow unclear or problematic
1	No data pipeline defined

Guiding Questions:

What data sources are being used?
How is data extracted, transformed, and loaded?
How are data quality issues handled?
Is the data pipeline reproducible?

3. Implementation Plan (20% = 20 points)

Is there a realistic plan to complete the project?

Score	Description
5	Detailed plan; realistic milestones; risk mitigation
4	Good plan with clear milestones
3	Plan present but lacks detail or realism
2	Vague plan or unrealistic timeline
1	No implementation plan

Guiding Questions:

Are tasks broken down into manageable pieces?
Is the timeline realistic given the remaining weeks?
Are responsibilities assigned (for team projects)?
What are the risks and how will they be mitigated?

4. Preliminary Results (20% = 20 points)

Is there evidence of progress and feasibility?

Score	Description
5	Substantial progress; demonstrates feasibility; interesting findings
4	Good progress; basic functionality working
3	Some progress; proof of concept exists
2	Minimal progress; feasibility uncertain
1	No evidence of implementation work

Guiding Questions:

Is there working code or a prototype?
Have key technical challenges been addressed?
Are preliminary experiments/results shown?
Does the work so far suggest the project is feasible?

5. Presentation Quality (10% = 10 points)

Is the document clear, well-organized, and professional?

Score	Description
5	Excellent diagrams; clear explanations; professional quality
4	Good visuals; well-organized
3	Adequate presentation; some improvements possible
2	Poor organization or confusing presentation
1	Unprofessional or incomprehensible

Guiding Questions:

Are diagrams clear and informative?
Is the document well-organized?
Can someone unfamiliar with the project understand it?

Review Template

## Design Review: [Team Name]

**Reviewer:** [Your Name]
**Overall Assessment:** [Ready to Implement / Minor Revisions / Major Revisions / Redesign Needed]

### Scores

| Criterion | Score (1-5) | Weight | Points |
|-----------|-------------|--------|--------|
| System Architecture | | 25% | /25 |
| Data Pipeline | | 25% | /25 |
| Implementation Plan | | 20% | /20 |
| Preliminary Results | | 20% | /20 |
| Presentation Quality | | 10% | /10 |
| **Total** | | 100% | **/100** |

### Architecture Feedback
[Comments on system design, component breakdown, technology choices]

### Data Pipeline Feedback
[Comments on data flow, transformations, quality handling]

### Implementation Concerns
[Risks, timeline issues, missing details]

### Strengths
1.
2.
3.

### Areas for Improvement
1.
2.
3.

### Questions for Authors
1.
2.

### Specific Recommendations
-

back