Proj586 WEEK 7: SIGNATURE ASSIGNMENT #3 - COURSE PROJECT PRESENTATION

20.0 to >16.9 pts

Excellent

Student provided a full summary overview of project description with a clear and consistent focus that develops a strong central idea as it presents how the project continues to be planned, monitored, and executed.

16.9 to >14.9 pts

Competent

Student generally provided a summary overview of project description that focuses on the central idea of addressing the topic but somewhat vaguely presents how the project continues to be planned, monitored, and executed.

14.9 to >10.9 pts

Fair

Student partially provided a summary overview of project description that somewhat distorts or neglect significant issues as the student presents how the project continues to be planned, monitored, and executed.

10.9 to >0.9 pts

Poor

Student seems somewhat unaware as they provided the summary overview of project description that presents little evidence as to how the project continues to be planned, monitored, and executed.

0.9 to >0 pts

Unacceptable

The deliverable does not meet this requirement

10.0 to >8.9 pts

Excellent

Student provided a complete communication plan that has a clear and consistent focus by providing stakeholders with information that expound upon a strong presentation that fully defines who should be given specific information, when that information should be delivered, and what communication channels will be used to deliver the information.

8.9 to >7.9 pts

Competent

Student generally provided a communication plan that mostly provides stakeholders with information that expound upon a presentation that mostly defines who should be given specific information, when that information should be delivered, and what communication channels will be used to deliver the information.

7.9 to >5.9 pts

Fair

Student partially provided a communication plan somewhat distorts or neglect significant issues as the student presents who should be given specific information, when that information should be delivered, and what communication channels will be used to deliver the information.

5.9 to >0.9 pts

Poor

Student seems somewhat unaware as they provided a communication plan that presents little evidence who should be given specific information, when that information should be delivered, and what communication channels will be used to deliver the information.

0.9 to >0 pts

Unacceptable

The deliverable does not meet this requirement

18.0 to >16.0 pts

Excellent

The summary fully provides enough information to present a clear picture of the project and the status including project's quality and performance levels.information should be delivered, and what communication channels will be used to deliver the information.

16.0 to >14.0 pts

Competent

The summary generally provides enough information to present a somewhat vague picture of the project and the status including project's quality and performance levels.

14.0 to >11.0 pts

Fair

The summary partially provides the necessary information which somewhat distorts or neglect significant issues of the project and the status including project’s quality and performance levels.

11.0 to >0.9 pts

Poor

The student seems somewhat unaware as they attempt to provide the necessary information which presents little evidence as to the project and the status including project’s quality and performance levels.

0.9 to >0 pts

Unacceptable

The deliverable does not meet this requirement

10.0 to >8.9 pts

Excellent

The milestones fully present a clear, concise, and complete timeline with all major benchmark and deliverable items identified and explained. The milestones presented were logically organized and structured and strongly presents to mark specific points along a project timeline.

8.9 to >7.9 pts

Competent

The milestones generally present a central idea of the project timeline but at times, it is vague in some places with respect to all major benchmark and deliverable items. The milestones presented were overall organized and structured as it presents specific points along a project timeline.

7.9 to >5.9 pts

Fair

The milestones partially presents the project timeline but generates at times some distortion or may neglect significant major benchmark and deliverable items. It may also be illogical, reflects simplistic approach to milestones, or even omit some important items.

5.9 to >0.9 pts

Poor

The student appears to be unaware of purpose, audience, or organization as they present the project milestones within the project timeline. There is little evidence as to the presentation of the specific points along a project timeline.

0.9 to >0 pts

Unacceptable

The deliverable does not meet this requirement

10.0 to >8.9 pts

Excellent

The schedule on the MS Project file fully present a clear, concise, and complete work breakdown structure (WBS) that is well organized, structured, and logical to the order of tasks which are at reflected in least three levels (Project, task, sub-tasks). The start and finish dates, task description, duration, and predecessors are reflected properly on the schedule. All tasks appear to be fully identified within the WBS schedule.

8.9 to >7.9 pts

Competent

The schedule on the MS Project file generally present most of the tasks on the work breakdown structure (WBS) and is mostly well organized, structured, and logical to the order of tasks which are at reflected in least three levels (Project, task, sub-tasks). For the most part, the start and finish dates, task description, duration, and predecessors are reflected properly on the schedule. Most of the tasks appear to be identified within the WBS schedule.

7.9 to >5.9 pts

Fair

The schedule on the MS Project file partially present the tasks on the work breakdown structure (WBS) and is mostly well organized, structured, and logical to the order of tasks. The project schedule may be missing some of the start and finish dates, task description, duration, and predecessors are reflected properly on the schedule. Some important tasks may be missing within the schedule.

5.9 to >0.9 pts

Poor

The student appears to be unaware how to work with MS Project as they present the schedule. There is little evidence as to the presentation of the complete scheduled tasks required or necessary for the project.

0.9 to >0 pts

Unacceptable

The deliverable does not meet this requirement

10.0 to >8.9 pts

Excellent

The resources have been identified in the MS Project in a clear, concise, and complete manner and have been properly assigned to the tasks in an orderly fashion. All tasks requiring resources have resources assigned.

8.9 to >7.9 pts

Competent

The resource assignment page on the MS Project file generally identify and present most of the resources required for the project tasks identified on the work breakdown structure (WBS). The resources have mostly been assigned to the proper tasks.

7.9 to >5.9 pts

Fair

The resources are partially identified and generates at times some distortion or may neglect resources necessary for the project schedule. The tasks are only somewhat assigned to the specific tasks.

5.9 to >0.9 pts

Poor

The student appears to be unaware of purpose, audience, or organization as they present the resources. There is little evidence as the tasks being assigned to the resources for the project.

0.9 to >0 pts

Unacceptable

The deliverable does not meet this requirement

10.0 to >8.9 pts

Excellent

The budget have been identified in the MS Project in a clear, concise, and complete manner and have been properly assigned to the tasks in an orderly fashion.

8.9 to >7.9 pts

Competent

The budget on the MS Project file have been generally identified and presented and generally assigned to the project tasks identified on the work breakdown structure (WBS).

7.9 to >5.9 pts

Fair

The budget is partially identified and generates at times some distortion or may neglect some costs necessary for the project schedule.

5.9 to >0.9 pts

Poor

The student appears to be unaware of purpose, audience, or organization as they present the budget. There is little evidence of the costs being assigned to the resources for the project.

0.9 to >0 pts

Unacceptable

The deliverable does not meet this requirement

4.0 pts

Excellent: Develops a strong central idea and explores the issues fully and insightfully the use of such tools to plan project task, budget and resource requirements. It is logically organized with concrete details that directly support major points in the utilization of the two tools in the process of developing precedence relationships among activities, a network diagram and critical path, and schedule.

3.0 pts

Competent: Central idea addresses the topic but is vaguely realized in places regarding the use of such tools to plan project task, budget and resource requirements. Generally well organized, with adequate support in the process of developing precedence relationships among activities, a network diagram and critical path, and schedule. However, there are some misplaced details or logical inconsistencies.

2.0 pts

Fair: Development of central idea produces some distortion or may neglect significant issues regarding the use of such tools to plan project task, budget and resource requirements. The plan of organization is undermined by omission of ideas and details, and illogical or simplistic reasoning in the process of developing precedence relationships among activities, a network diagram and critical path, and schedule.

1.0 pts

Poor: There is little evidence of a controlling idea. The student fails to respond to the situation or explore the issues.

0.0 pts

Unacceptable: Student deliverable did not meet the requirements of the outcome

10.0 to >8.9 pts

Excellent

The student fully presents how they developed the project financial and performance objectives by presenting the comparison of the actual cost vs budgeted costs.

8.9 to >7.9 pts

Competent

The student mostly presented how they developed the project financial and performance objectives by presenting the comparison of the actual cost vs budgeted costs.

7.9 to >5.9 pts

Fair

The student partially presented how they developed the project financial and performance objectives by presenting the comparison of the actual cost vs budgeted costs.

5.9 to >0.9 pts

Poor

The student shows little evidence as to how they developed the project financial and performance objectives by presenting the comparison of the actual cost vs budgeted costs.

0.9 to >0 pts

Unacceptable

The deliverable does not meet this requirement

10.0 to >8.9 pts

Excellent

The student demonstrates the use of the Earned Value methodology in fully presenting the explanation of the schedule variances in a clear, concise manner.

8.9 to >7.9 pts

Competent

The student using Earned Value methodology by generally presenting the explanation of the Schedule variances but at times tends to be somewhat vague.

7.9 to >5.9 pts

Fair

The student using Earned Value methodology by partially presenting the explanation of the schedule variances but it appears the student is somewhat unaware as to the earned value process regarding schedule variances.

5.9 to >0.9 pts

Poor

The student appears to be unaware to the Earned Value methodology by showing little or no evidence of presenting the explanation of the schedule variances based upon earned value concepts.

0.9 to >0 pts

Unacceptable

The deliverable does not meet this requirement

10.0 to >8.9 pts

Excellent

Develops a strong central idea and explores the issues fully and insightfully as to how they developed and communicated the project financial and performance objectives. It is logically organized with concrete details that directly support major points in the utilization of the two tools in the process of developing precedence relationships among activities, a network diagram and critical path, and schedule. The distinctive voice of the students emerges through superior command of language. Sources are used, if required, to support and develop concepts and ideas, and are properly cited (in-text) and documented (reference page or works cited). Exhibits stylistic variety and energy. Essentially free from mechanical errors.

8.9 to >7.9 pts

Competent

Central idea addresses the topic but is vaguely realized in places regarding how they developed and communicated the project financial and performance objectives. Generally well organized, with adequate support in the process of developing precedence relationships among activities, a network diagram and critical path, and schedule. However, there are some misplaced details or logical inconsistencies. The students’ voice is apparent but occasionally inconsistent. Demonstrates competent use of language and a workable style. Mechanical errors do not significantly interfere with meaning.

7.9 to >5.9 pts

Fair

Development of central idea produces some distortion or may neglect significant issues regarding how they developed and communicated the project financial and performance objectives. The plan of organization is undermined by omission of ideas and details, and illogical or simplistic reasoning in the process of developing precedence relationships among activities, a network diagram and critical path, and schedule. Sources, if required, are used, but with frequent or pervasive inconsistencies in support and/or format. The students’ voice is weakly developed and use of language may be vague, imprecise, or awkward. Style is repetitive or plodding. Mechanical errors sometimes interfere with meaning.

5.9 to >0.9 pts

Poor

There is little evidence of a controlling idea. The students fail to respond to the situation or explore the issues. The students’ voice is not recognizable due to inadequate control of language. Style is undeveloped. Sources are required, but are not used thus ideas require support or sources are not cited or correctly documented throughout. Excessive grammatical and mechanical errors block meaning.

0.9 to >0 pts

Unacceptable

The deliverable does not meet this requirement

4.0 pts

Excellent: Develops a strong central idea and explores the issues fully and insightfully as to how they developed and communicated the project financial and performance objectives. It is logically organized with concrete details that directly support major points in the utilization of the two tools in the process of developing precedence relationships among activities, a network diagram and critical path, and schedule.

3.0 pts

Competent: Central idea addresses the topic but is vaguely realized in places regarding how they developed and communicated the project financial and performance objectives. Generally well organized, with adequate support in the process of developing precedence relationships among activities, a network diagram and critical path, and schedule. However, there are some misplaced details or logical inconsistencies.

2.0 pts

Fair: Development of central idea produces some distortion or may neglect significant issues regarding how they developed and communicated the project financial and performance objectives. The plan of organization is undermined by omission of ideas and details, and illogical or simplistic reasoning in the process of developing precedence relationships among activities, a network diagram and critical path, and schedule.

1.0 pts

Poor: There is limited evidence of a controlling idea. The student fail to respond to the situation or explore the issues.

0.0 pts

Unacceptable: The student does not meet the expectations

20.0 to >16.9 pts

Excellent

The student provides a full presentation of the needs and benefits in a clear, concise manner that shows how they are directly tied to the business strategic objectives of the organization.

16.9 to >14.9 pts

Competent

The student generally provides a presentation of the needs and benefits that focuses on the central idea of addressing the topic but somewhat vaguely presents how they are directly tied to the business strategic objectives of the organization.

14.9 to >10.9 pts

Fair

The student provides a somewhat partial presentation of the needs and benefits that in some manner distorts as to how they are directly tied to the business strategic objectives of the organization.

10.9 to >0.9 pts

Poor

The student seems somewhat unaware as they provided a presentation of the needs and benefits that presents little or no evidence as to how they are directly tied to the business strategic objectives of the organization.

0.9 to >0 pts

Unacceptable

The deliverable does not meet this requirement

10.0 to >8.9 pts

Excellent

In a motivational manner for promoting a positive environment manner, the presentation fully clarifies and clearly present an organizational management style utilized with effective, positive leadership skills that will result at the completion of this project.

8.9 to >7.9 pts

Competent

In a generally motivational manner for promoting a positive environment manner, the presentation focuses on the central idea of addressing the topic but somewhat vaguely presents present an organizational management style utilized with effective, positive leadership skills that will result at the completion of this project.

7.9 to >5.9 pts

Fair

In a partially motivational manner for promoting a positive environment manner, the presentation in some manner distorts as to how their organizational management style utilized will provide for an effective, positive leadership style that will result at the completion of this project.

5.9 to >0.9 pts

Poor

The student seems somewhat unaware as to the process of promoting a positive environment manner, as they provide little or no evidence as to how their organizational management style utilized will provide for an effective, positive leadership style that will result at the completion of this project.

0.9 to >0 pts

Unacceptable

The deliverable does not meet this requirement

4.0 pts

Excellent: Develops a strong central idea and demonstrates effective leadership skills for promoting a positive environment that will help motivate team members and resolve conflicts.

3.0 pts

Competent: Central idea addresses the topic but is vaguely realized in places regarding the demonstration of effective leadership skills for promoting a positive environment that will help motivate team members and resolve conflicts.

2.0 pts

Fair: Development of central idea produces some distortion or may neglect significant issues regarding the demonstration of effective leadership skills for promoting a positive environment that will help motivate team members and resolve conflicts.

1.0 pts

Poor: There is little evidence of a controlling idea. The student fails to respond to the situation or explore the issues.

0.0 pts

Unacceptable: Student deliverable did not meet the requirements of the outcome

10.0 to >8.9 pts

Excellent

The student provides a full conclusion that is clear, concise, and to the point. The audience should have a deep understanding as to the presenter’s conclusion and any recommendations.

8.9 to >7.9 pts

Competent

The student generally provides a conclusion that is strong but may be somewhat vague at times. The audience should mostly have a general understanding as to the presenter’s conclusion and any recommendations.

7.9 to >5.9 pts

Fair

The student partially provides a conclusion that but there may be some distortion or may neglect significant issues as to the conclusions. The audience should partially have some understanding as to the presenter’s conclusion and any recommendations.

5.9 to >0.9 pts

Poor

The conclusion reflects that the student is unware as to what the conclusion should be for the project presentation by showing little or no evidence of any conclusion or recommendations. The audience most likely will be confused as to the presenter’s conclusion and any recommendations.

0.9 to >0 pts

Unacceptable

The deliverable does not meet this requirement

20.0 to >16.9 pts

Excellent

The lessons-learned report presented by the student completely and effectively reflects strong project management leadership skills that demonstrates a positive environment that will help motivate team members and resolve conflicts in a future project. The presentation contains a full description on how these lessons will be implemented for the next project.

16.9 to >14.9 pts

Competent

The lessons-learned report presented by the student completely and effectively reflects strong project management leadership skills that demonstrates a positive environment that will help motivate team members and resolve conflicts in a future project. The presentation somewhat contains a description on how these lessons will be implemented for the next project.

14.9 to >10.9 pts

Fair

The lessons-learned report presented by the student completely and effectively reflects strong project management leadership skills that demonstrates a positive environment that will help motivate team members and resolve conflicts in a future project. However, the presentation does not contain a description on how these lessons will be implemented for the next project.

10.9 to >0.9 pts

Poor

The lessons-learned report presented by the student only somewhat reflects strong project management leadership skills that demonstrates a positive environment that will help motivate team members and resolve conflicts in a future project.

0.9 to >0 pts

Unacceptable

The deliverable does not meet this requirement

4.0 pts

Excellent: Develops a strong and complete closeout plan and completely developes best practices and lessons learned.

3.0 pts

Competent: Develops a mostly complete closeout plan and best practices and lessons learned.

2.0 pts

Fair: Develops a somewhat complete closeout plan with limited best practices and lessons learned.

1.0 pts

Poor: There is little evidence of a controlling idea. The student fails to respond to the situation or explore the issues.

0.0 pts

Unacceptable: Student deliverable did not meet the requirements of the outcome

8.0 to >6.9 pts

Excellent

PowerPoint or Video Presentation created that includes voice narrations where the voice automatically plays with automatic transitions of slides or frames, along with being structured well and very organized with virtually no errors made.

6.9 to >4.9 pts

Competent

PowerPoint or Video Presentation created that includes voice narrations where the voice automatically plays with automatic transitions of slides or frames, along with being structured and organized with some minor errors made.

4.9 to >3.9 pts

Fair

PowerPoint or Video Presentation created that includes voice narrations but the voice does not automatically play with automatic transitions of slides or frames, along with being structured and organized with some minor errors made. Either the slides are not automatic or the voice is not automatic, or both.

3.9 to >0.9 pts

Poor

PowerPoint or Video Presentation does not include any voice narration but still can be view self-sufficient without voice narration; or the voice narration exists but there are several errors or the presentation is poorly organized and structured.

0.9 to >0 pts

Unacceptable

The presentation does not meet the standards.

8.0 to >6.9 pts

Excellent

This presentation includes a reference listing with at least two scholarly resources that is peered reviewed and not from the textbook. The listing of references are listed near the end of the slide presentation and is in proper APA format.

6.9 to >4.9 pts

Competent

This presentation includes a reference listing with at least two scholarly resources that is peered reviewed and not from the textbook. The listing of references is not in proper APA format and/or not located at the end of the presentation.

4.9 to >3.9 pts

Fair

This presentation includes a reference listing with at least one scholarly resources that is peered reviewed and not from the textbook. The listing of references The listing of references may not in proper APA format and/or not located at the end of the presentation.

3.9 to >0.9 pts

Poor

This presentation includes a reference listing the references do not reflect scholarly resources that is peered reviewed and not from the textbook. The listing of references is may not in proper APA format and/or not located at the end of the presentation.

0.9 to >0 pts

Unacceptable

There is not any reference listing.