1 | P a g e

CAMPUS CONNECT
Foundation Program 3. 0



Integrated Project
Assessment



2 | P a g e

Objective
This document is written to help Campus
Connect partner colleges understand and
effectively implement the Integrated Project as
a part of Foundation Program (FP) 3.0.

Target Readers
The target readers of this document are
Campus Connect College Single Point of
Contact (s), College Core Team members and
Faculty members associated with FP rollout
and hence Integrated Project development.
Background
Campus Connect is an Infosys industry-
academia partnership program aimed at
enhancing the IT talent in College Campuses.
Foundation Program 3.0 is the latest version
released under Campus Connect. Integrated
Project Development is an essential and
integral part of Foundation Program 3.0
Rollout.
Campus Connect has introduced usage of
Rubrics Methodology for Integrated Project
Assessments. Rubrics are a well known tool to
set up grading criteria for assignments. A rubric
chart is a scoring tool that lists the criteria for
the varying levels of performance on a task, or
program characteristic where more objective
methods of rating are not appropriate.
Campus Connect team has used Rubrics to
generate a customized evaluation chart for
assessing the Integrated Project Development
under Foundation Program.

Rubrics Methodology for
Integrated Project Evaluation
Campus Connect has used two different
aspects in evaluating the students
performance in Integrated Project
Development. These two aspects are namely,
Project Development and Soft Skills. The
Project development aspect focuses on the
deliverables, quality of development work and
the technology features. On the other hand,
Soft Skills aspect concentrates on the life skills
of the team members and demonstration of the
same during Integrated Project development.
The rubric methodology has four levels:
Excellent, Competent, Scope for Improvement
and Needs Efforts. These levels apply to the
several evaluation parameters and expected
deliverables in the Integrated Project
Development. For each parameter there is a
brief written description of the different levels of
performance based on performance criteria.
They are constructed by combining
descriptions of different qualities of
performance. Each set of descriptions reflects
a different level of performance on that
evaluation parameter. The Project assessors
and / or Faculty members use these
descriptions to determine their level of
accomplishment on each evaluation parameter.
The scale ratings are as
Needs Efforts ( No Efforts taken)
Scope for Improvement (0-50 percent
results achieved)
Competent (50-75 percent results
achieved)
Excellent (75-100 percent results
achieved)
ELEVEN evaluation parameters for Project
Development and FIVE evaluation parameters
for Soft skills aspects have been formulated.
These evaluation parameters are categorized
in FOUR different buckets - Design Work, Code
Development, Project Deployment and Soft
Skills. The consolidated list of these
parameters with the weight-age associated with
each is described in the following section.
Integrated Project development carries 100
Marks.



3 | P a g e

The break up of the same is given in the below table.



Integrated Project Evaluation
Evaluation Buckets Weight-age
D
e
s
i
g
n

W
o
r
k

Requirement Analysis Document 10
Design Documents - Low Level & High Level 10
Test Plans - UTP & ITP 10
C
o
d
e


D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

Source Code Development 10
Coding Standards 5
Code Review - Self & Peer 5
Testing - Unit & Integration 10
P
r
o
j
e
c
t


D
e
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
Integration and built 5
Project Execution 5
Bugs and Crashes 5
Meets SRS 5
S
o
f
t

S
k
i
l
l
s

Team Work 4
Leadership Quality 4
Team Interaction 4
Tracking Team Activities 4
Project Presentation 4

Total 100




4 | P a g e




Using Rubrics
The Rubrics methodology is used for Integrated
Project assessment.
1. Rubrics chart is to be used for three
different types of evaluations
a. Self Evaluation Each student will
self assess the scores as per the
evaluation parameters
b. Peer Evaluation One student in a
project group assesses the
performance of other student in the
same group.
c. Expert Evaluation Faculty
members assess the students as
per the Rubrics
2. The Self and Peer evaluation is to be done
to understand how individuals work has
contributed to Integrated Project
development.
3. Final Score to be calculated as per the
Expert/Faculty Assessment scores.


Rubrics for performing
evaluation

MS Excel 97-2003 version has been used for
designing project evaluation template. It has
pre-defined evaluation parameters and scale
ratings defined as per the tabular
representation above. The evaluation contains
some calculated cell as per the evaluation
parameter weight-ages and student ratings.
Below is a snapshot of evaluation sheet for
quick understanding.

The evaluation sheet has following columns:
Evaluation Parameter, Scale Description,
Parameter Description, Parameter Weight-age,
Student Rating and Student Score. Out of
these, Evaluation Parameter, Scale
Description, Parameter Description, Parameter
Weight-age contain pre-defined values as per
the evaluation parameter. The Student Score
column is auto calculated and hence is non-
editable. The evaluator has to select the rating
from the drop down list for the respective
evaluation parameter on the basis of the match
with Parameter Description. The possible scale
ratings are
Needs Efforts
Scope for Improvement
Competent
Excellent
The evaluator has to rate each student for all
the evaluation parameters as per the above
scale. The chart auto-calculates the final score
at the bottom of the sheet only after all
parameters are rated. Refer to the picture
below to understand how the ratings can be
recorded.













5 | P a g e


Steps to record Student ratings


1. Enter the Students roll number in the top cell.




2. Select the rating for each evaluation parameter by selecting the appropriate option using the
drop-down.
Note: Refer to the evaluation guidelines sheet to understand the expected deliverables and its
mapping to ranks.



1
2


6 | P a g e


3. Complete the rating process for all evaluation parameters. This will auto-calculate the total
scoring for the student assessed



4. Repeat the steps 1-3 for every student to be assessed.
3


7 | P a g e



Extending the chart for large
number of students

This can be done by simply adding the
additional number of columns after column Q.
Please follow the steps below:
1. Select Column D to Column Q
2. Right-Click on selection and Press
Ctrl+C
3. Now move cursor to column R and
Press Ctrl+V

This will create evaluation columns for
additional FIVE students. Following the above
steps ensures that the auto calculation is
enabled for the newly created columns. These
steps can be repeated to facilitate evaluation
for more number of students in one sheet.
Note: Another way of extending the chart for
large number of students is to use one sheet
per Project Group.


Points to Remember
1. The Integrated Project Evaluation is to be
carried out by using the pre-defined
parameters only.
2. It has to be done in Soft Copy only (NO
Prints please). This evaluation sheet is a
part of closure report to be submitted at the
completion of a batch.
3. The evaluation process includes Self, Peer
and Expert/Faculty evaluation.
4. Only Expert/Faculty evaluation is
considered for calculating the final scores.
Advantages of using Rubrics
for Project Evaluation

There are comprehensive advantages of
using Rubric methodology for Integrated
Project Evaluation chart. These are as
follows:
The sheet is designed in such a way
that it provides minimum key-presses.
Hence provides Ease of Usage.
Auto-calculation of score is provided.
This reduces the time required to
generate final report significantly.
The User Interface is clean and
extensible.
The sheets can be easily extended to
accommodate large number of scores.
Usage of these sheets
ensures appropriate usage of
evaluation framework.




References
Campus Connect Portal
http://campusconnect.infosys.com
Foundation Program 3.0 Program
Announcement Document
Introduction to rubrics: an assessment
tool to save grading time, convey
effective feedback and student
learning By Dannelle D. Stevens,
Antonia Levi [Also on Google Books]



8 | P a g e


Program Contacts
Infosys Development Center Infosys Point of Contact Email ID
Bangalore Anoop Singh Anoop_Singh@infosys.com
Trupthi A Narayan TrupthiA_Narayan@infosys.com
Swati Jain Swati_Jain06@infosys.com
Bhubaneswar Bhupesh Deka Bhupesh_Deka@infosys.com
Nirmalya Chaudhuri Nirmalya_Chaudhuri@infosys.com
Sumesh Khatua Sumesh_Khatua@infosys.com
Chandigarh Manisha Manisha@infosys.com
Neeraj Garg Neeraj_Garg02@infosys.com
Anuradha Verma Anuradha_thakur@infosys.com
Renu Vadhvani Renu_Vadhvani@infosys.com
Chennai Veerappaji Bittanakurike Shivanna Veerappaji_S@infosys.com
Abhishek V Paul Abhishek_Paul01@infosys.com
Hyderabad Srinagesh Chatarajupalli Srinagesh_C@infosys.com
Sudheer Reddy K. SudheerReddy_K@infosys.com
Bhanu Prasad TV Venkata_Tolety@infosys.com
Mangalore Rithesh Kumble Rithesh_Kumble@infosys.com
Mysore Vani K N Vani_kn@infosys.com
Pune Soudamini Patil Soudamini_Patil@infosys.com
Swapnil Diwakar Pande Swapnil_Pande01@infosys.com
Trivandrum Hari S. Hari_S@infosys.com