Grading Criteria: Final Report

Standard Exceeded

Standard met

Standard not met

Marks

 

P1: Training model

P2: Intro &

overview

P2: Creating a product

P2: Business

strategy and

ethical

considerations

P2: Referencing and structure

15-12 marks

The video uploaded clearly shows how the model works with good narration of what has been recorded. There is a clear connection of the scenario selected and the model.

The model works well 90% of the time.

4 Marks

Good introduction that sets the stage for use of AI.

Problem that needs an AI solution using teachable machines is well described and justified.

12-10 Marks

Value proposition is very clearly explained using principles of the BMC. Model has been well described with what data has been used to create it. Makes a very good connection to the scenario presented in the previous section. Uses an example / scenario to explain the functionality of the model including the full business case. All possible customers are clearly explained. The disruption is well established.

5-4 Marks

An appropriate business strategy has been suggested with good justification, with role of data well explained.

Two or more ethical issues have been well articulated.

4 marks

Uses the template and good

presentation with limited

gaps. Draws reader through

document with ease. Minimal

amount of spelling and/or

format errors.

Locates, evaluates and

integrates a range of relevant

information (or data) into the

construction of a response to

the task, and uses the discipline

sanctioned APA7 Referencing

Style at

(https://latrobe.libguides.com/a

pa7) to cite sources in a timely

and appropriate fashion.

11-7.5 marks

The video uploaded shows how the model works, though unclear at times with an acceptable narration of what has been recorded. There is an acceptable connection of the scenario selected and the model. The model is unclear at times and works well between 80-90% of the time.

3-2 Marks

An introduction has been provided but can use better inclusion of why AI is required. Problem has been presented but it’s not very clear why it needs a solution through teachable machines.

9-6 Marks

Value proposition is present but can be presented better. The model has been described. There seems to some connection to the scenario presented in the previous section. Example / scenario used, is somewhat appropriate but does not provide a full picture of the business case. Some customers are identified. Disruption is presented but may benefit from a better explanation.

3-2.5 Marks

Somewhat appropriate business strategy has been suggested with some justification, with role of data explained adequately.

At least 1 ethical issue has been included.

3-2 marks

Uses the template to some extent acceptable presentation, but with gaps. Reader can get through document with some effort. Moderate amount of

spelling and/or format errors.

Uses a range of prescribed

information sources (or data) to

inform the response to the task,

and uses the discipline

sanctioned APA7 Referencing

Style at

(https://latrobe.libguides.com/a

pa7) to cite sources in a timely

and appropriate fashion, but

with some errors.

7-0 Marks

Difficult to understand what the model is accomplishing based on the uploaded video, and narration is not clear. The connection between the model and the selected scenario is not clear.

1-0 Marks

Introduction not well crafted with leaving room for lot improvement. The problem and the justification both unclear.

5-0 Marks

Value proposition is unclear. Unclear description with very little to no connection to the scenario. Example / scenario if used has a description that does not serve the purpose. Customers and disruption is not provided or not clear.

4-0 Marks

Unclear or no business strategy has been suggested with no real justification, with role of data hasn’t been explained well.

Inclusion of ethical issues unclear or missing.

1-0 marks

Does not use the template and/or poorly presented. Confusing. Significant spelling and/or format errors Irrelevant sources and data selected to inform the response to the task, or used inappropriately, with little or no attribution.