Grading rubrics

Below are grading rubrics for some courses.

Introduction to Voice Technology

This section is dedicated to describing how scoring in the Intro to Voice Tech course is performed.

Wiki pages

The Wiki pages will be assessed according to the criteria below. A total score will be given assigned as an average.

Criteria	Points
Topic	10
Presentation	10
Underlying research	10
Content	10
Internal linking	10
LLM review	10

Topic: Appropriateness and relevance

• 0 = Inappropriate
• 5 = Somewhat Appropriate
• 7 = Good
• 10 = Completely Appropriate

Presentation: Adherence to layout, clarity of language

• 0 = Unacceptable
• 5 = Sufficient but rushed (lots of language may be difficult to understand or the flow may be incoherent)
• 7 = Good
• 10 = Excellent

Underlying Research: Evidence of scholarly research

• 0 = No citations
• 5 = Citations only to popular content and/or citations are incorrect / missing
• 7 = Some Citations, mainly reporting outcomes
• 10 = Excellent, evidence of synthesis of complex ideas and reflection

Content

• 0 = Incoherent
• 5 = Coherent but superficial
• 7 = Good, some depth
• 10 = Excellent

Internal linking to other Wiki articles produced by peers

• 0 = No Links
• 5 = Some links missing
• 7 = Well-linked to other articles
• 10 = Well-linked to other articles in an enriching way which demonstrates a deep understanding

LLM Review

• 0 = No effort made
• 5 = Minimal effort, but not transparent, insufficient detail
• 7 = LLM used productively and reported well
• 10 = LLM used in a highly productive or interesting way and reported very well

Talking clock

This assignment is assessed along the following 4 criteria, each of which is described under the table.

Criteria	Maximum points
Recording quality	3
User experience	3
Non-tech doc	3
Extra functionalities	1
TOTAL	10

• Recording quality:
  • 1 = The time is expressed in a glitchy or unpleasant way.
  • 2 = The time is expressed in a reasonably clear way.
  • 3 = The time is expressed in a natural, lifelike (or purposefully creative) way.
• User experience
  • 0 = The interface is not functional
  • 1 = The interface is mostly functional, minor issues notwithstanding
  • 2 = The interface is completely functional
  • 3 = The interface is completely functional and there is evidence of some creative flourish
• Non-Technical Documentation (including team organization and project workflow, GUI user manual, and Licensing statement / reflection FAIR data):
  • 0 = Absent
  • 1 = Very incomplete
  • 2 = Complete, but lacking detail
  • 3 = Complete, all expected information is provided
• Are there any extra functionalities?
  • 0 = No
  • 1 = Yes

Participation activities

For the most part, participation activities are scored on a three-point scale:

• 0 = incomplete
• 1 = minimal attempt to deliver
• 2 = rushed or incomplete delivery
• 3 = complete delivery

Some activities are worth 2 points:

• 0 = incomplete
• 1 = minimal or incomplete delivery
• 2 = complete delivery