Assessment Type:

Investigative Report

Weighting:

30%

Due Date:

Week 9, Sunday, 22 September 2024
11:59 pm AWST or 01:59 pm AEST

Criteria

Excellent (10 pts)

Good (8 pts)

Satisfactory (6 pts)

Needs Improvement (4 pts)

Failed (0 pts)

Structure and Clarity

Creates a well-defined, hierarchical WBS that clearly breaks down the project into manageable deliverables.

Creates a WBS that generally breaks down the project, but may lack clarity or logical hierarchy.

Creates a basic WBS, but may be incomplete or lack clear breakdown of deliverables.

WBS is poorly defined, illogical, or missing entirely. 

WBS is not included.

Level of Details

The WBS clearly aligns with the deliverables, tasks, and resources identified in the project plan.

The WBS generally aligns with the project plan, but may have some inconsistencies.

Alignment between WBS and project plan is limited or unclear. 

WBS significantly contradicts or does not support the project plan.

WBS is not included.

Criteria

Excellent (20 pts)

Good (16 pts)

Satisfactory (12 pts)

Needs Improvement (8 pts)

Failed (0 pts)

Structure and Clarity

Tasks are clearly defined and easy to understand. Each task has a specific, measurable outcome.

Tasks are mostly clear, but some could benefit from further definition. Outcomes are generally measurable.

Tasks are somewhat clear, but some lack detail or specific goals. Measurable outcomes may be missing.

Tasks are unclear or poorly defined. Outcomes are difficult or impossible to measure.

Project Plan Task is not included. 

Task Dependency

Dependencies between tasks are clearly identified and well-sequenced. The project schedule reflects these dependencies.

Dependencies are identified, but sequencing could be improved. The project schedule may not fully reflect dependencies.

Some dependencies are identified, but sequencing may be unclear. The project schedule may not adequately consider dependencies.

Dependencies are not identified or sequencing is illogical. The project schedule does not reflect dependencies.

Project Plan Task is not included. 

Task Duration, Resources & Monitoring

Estimated durations for tasks are realistic and consider resource availability. Resource allocation (e.g., personnel, equipment) is clearly defined.

Tasks include clear methods for monitoring progress (e.g., milestones, checkpoints).

Estimated durations are mostly realistic, but some may need adjustment. Resource allocation is identified, but details may be lacking. 

Some methods for monitoring progress are included, but could be improved.

Estimated durations may not be fully realistic, or resource allocation is unclear. 

Methods for monitoring progress are minimal or missing entirely.

Estimated durations are unrealistic or missing. Resource allocation is absent or poorly defined.

No plan for monitoring task progress is evident.

Project Plan Task is not included. 

Overall Quality

Project plan tasks demonstrate strong understanding of project management principles. The plan is comprehensive, well-organised, and tailored to the specific IT project.

Project plan tasks demonstrate a good understanding of project management. The plan is mostly organised and relevant to the project.

Project plan tasks demonstrate a limited understanding of project management. The plan may be disorganised or lack relevance to the project.

Project plan tasks demonstrate a weak understanding of project management. The plan is poorly organised and may not be functional.

Project Plan Task is not included. 

Assessment Type:

Investigative Report

Weighting:

30%

Full Name

Student ID

Due Date: