ud775 » project »

Project Rubric for How to Use Git and GitHub



This rubric is here to help you understand the specifications for your project. It is the same rubric that the person evaluating your project will use. We will refer to this person as the "project evaluator" in this document. You should look at the rubric before you begin following the project instructions and before you submit your project.

How to Use: before you begin

  1. Look at the sections of the rubric and make sure you understand what the major pieces of the project are and which criteria apply to each piece.
  2. Go through each criteria item to understand what the project evaluator will be looking for in your project.
  3. Familiarize yourself with what is required for your project to "meet specifications" or to be "completely Udacious." In order to gain a certificate, you need to "meet specifications", however, to gain the most benefit and learn most from the experience, we encourage you to aim for "completely Udacious".
  4. Get started following the project instructions to make your project ready for submission.

How to Use: before you submit

  1. Once your project is complete, go through each criteria item and do your best to honestly evaluate where you think your project falls.
  2. If you think your project "does not meet specifications" for any criteria item, then you should make appropriate updates to your project.
  3. Once you’re confident that your project "meets specifications" or is "completely Udacious" for each item, follow the project submission instructions to submit!

How Grading Works

  1. Your project evaluator will use this rubric to evaluate your project.
  2. Your grade will simply be "pass" or "doesn’t pass."
  3. You earn a "pass" by not having any criteria items in the "does not meet specifications" column.
  4. If any criteria item "does not meet specifications," you will not pass. You will be able to make changes and re-submit the project.

The Rubric

Criteria for the create-your-own-adventure contribution

Criteria Does Not Meet Specifications Meets Specifications Exceeds Specifications (Completely Udacious)
Has the student made a pull request from a non-master branch? Pull request is from the master branch of the forked repository. Pull request is from an appropriately-named non-master branch of the forked repository. N/A
Does the pull request have a good title? Pull request has no description, or an inaccurate description. Pull request has a good title indicating what changes it introduces. Pull request has a title that summarizes the changes and a description that describes the changes in more detail.
Is the submitted content correctly formatted? The submitted content does not adhere to the guidelines of the repository. The submitted content adheres to the guidelines of the repository. The submitted content is a correctly formatted and creative contribution to the story.
Are all comments on the pull request addressed? One or more comments left by the project evaluator on the pull request are not addressed. Pull request is updated to make all changes requested by the project evaluator. N/A

Criteria for the reflections repository

Criteria Does Not Meet Specifications Meets Specifications Exceeds Specifications (Completely Udacious)
Are the reflections technically accurate? The final commit of the student's main branch contains technically inaccurate statements about Git or GitHub. Everything in the final commit of the student's main branch is technically accurate. The reflections show the student’s insight into and mastery of Git and GitHub.
Are the reflections complete? Not all prompts have a response. All prompts have a well-thought-out response. Prompt responses have been refined over time, culminating in a solid understanding.
Does the main branch contain a merge commit? All work was done in a single branch, or none of the non-main branches were merged into the main branch. Work was done in another branch and merged into the main branch, resulting in a merge commit in the main branch's history. Many branches were created containing separate lines of thought, and these branches were merged back as those lines of thought were completed.
Are the changes at an appropriate level of granularity? There is only one commit or very few commits. There are many commits, and each represents a single logical change. The student revisits and updates prior reflections as they learn more about Git and GitHub, resulting in more than one commit per reflection prompt.

Criteria for both reflections and create-your-own-adventure

Both the reflections repository and the create-your-own-adventure contribution must meet the criteria in this section.

Criteria Does Not Meet Specifications Meets Specifications Exceeds Specifications (Completely Udacious)
Are the commits broken down into logical changes? Some commits have no clearly definable purpose or have multiple purposes. Each commit has a single purpose that can be clearly stated. The commit history is pristine and detailed.
Do the commits have descriptive commit messages? Some commits have vague commit messages (e.g. “made changes”) or inaccurate commit messages. Each commit has a descriptive message that describes what changed in that commit. When appropriate, commit messages have short summaries, followed by longer descriptions.
Does the content have a reasonable line length? Some lines contain more than 120 characters. All lines are at most 120 characters. N/A