brief 2: surveillance/documentation machine (rubric)
The version of the browser you are using is no longer supported. Please upgrade to a supported browser.Dismiss

View only
brief 2: surveillance/documentation machine
Assessment Scale01234
N/AIneffectiveProgressingEffectiveHighly Effective
Corresponding Detailed DescriptionsDid not demonstrate, either through absence or serious deficiencies, the described criteria.Struggles to demonstrate practices described in the key grading criteria.Performs within the described key grading criteria. Showing some improvement over time.Consistently demonstrates competency regarding the practices described in the key grading criteria.Consistently innovative, integrated, nuanced, and sophisticated demonstration of elements in the key grading criteria.
Proposals: Did the weekly proposals lead to a clear and comprehensible written document that could give a reader the general sense of what the idea is?No Proposals were turned in.Some, but not all, of the proposals were turned in. In general the project proposal format was not observed from week to week.The project proposals were turned in on time but were vague and did not show any evidence of forward development towards completion of the project.The project proposals were turned in on time and provide a written record of the progression of the project from start to finish. The final version would suffice to convey the overall effect of the project as a pdf.The project proposals show a vivid portrayal of the development of the project. The final version closely resembles an informal one-sheet suitable for an open call for works.
Raspberry Pi: how resolved is the functionality of this video recording machine? Does the script autorun on login? Does it work?No Raspberry Pi usedVideo was not recorded, scripts dont workScript does not autorun on boot but works once launched manually from the terminalScript autoruns and allows for video recording with no errorsThe functionality of this project is so seamless that the focus is exclusively on the recorded content and the procedures used therein
Video: does the resulting video demonstrate seamless integration with the chosen location? can the surveillance/documentation machine be used without calling attention to itself/interrupting the surrounding flow of activity?No video was created from the surveillance/documentation machineA methodology for video recording was created but the technology does not workVideo recording works but is clunky and interrupts the surrounding flow of activity (requiring a restart or some other work-around)Video was covertly recordedThe surveillance/documentation machine is so seamless that it can be deployed repeatedly, and reliably, with desired effects
Deployment: was the project deployed in public? in a unique location other than ArtCenter? does the final location indicate multiple deployments or simply seem like a random choice?Surveillance/documentation machine was not deployed publiclySurveillance/documentation machine was deployed at ArtCenter onlySurveillance/documentation machine was deployed at a location of the student's choosing onceSurveillance/documentation machine was deployed more than once to compare between sites and recording strategiesFollowing extensive deployment and reflection, a public location was chosen for deployment that benefits from the design of the surveillance/documentation machine
Documentation: Did the student document the final version of their project? Did the student document any of the deployment attempts? Are these presented in a manner that does not rely on extensive verbal description?No documentation of deployments or the final versionDocumentation of final version onlySimple documentation of deployments and final version that require an extensive amount of verbal description in order to be comprehensibleDeployments and documentation illustrate the various attempts around designing a recording machine for the selected public locations and require minimal additional verbal descriptionDocumentation clearly presents the development of the project and the selection of the outdoor location and leads to a productive discussion inspired by the contents of the recording and their presentation
Originality: How unique is the student's idea and its implementation both conceptually and technologically?This project is simply a copy of our lab note examples, written by someone else, or from another classThe project is original not in its technological implementation but only in its accompanimental verbal description.The project is a good representation of the individual's interests conceptually but is not developed further, technologically, than in-class lab examples.The project represents a unique perspective towards the brief via hardware and software implementation, as well as a satisfying and unique conceptual viewpoint.The project exemplifies the brief while maintaining a unique point of view. The overall experience with the project is unique and memorable.