| |
|---|
| C1. Description of Systems Engineering Approach | Situation, idea or moment is contextualized and described clearly and concisely through writing, figures and embedded evidence. The impact of individual action (or inaction) on the team situation and its outcome is well-explained and supported by evidence. | Situation, individual actions, and outcome are described using objective (nonjudgmental) language. However, the links between these components are not always explicit and clear. | Situation is vaguely described, confusing, or described with judgmental language. Individual actions and outcome are identified but not explained. Reader has questions about what happened. | Situation description is confusing, contradictory, or seemingly random. No discussion of individual actions or outcome, or how the idea changed the views of the author. |
| | 10 points | 7 points | 4 points | 0 points |
| C2. Evidence | Use of evidence shows careful and deliberate intention and its inclusion in the report is designed to meet communicative needs. Evidence supports the meaning provided in the written description, and the evidence itself helps describe the situation clearly. | Use of evidence is well suited (apt) to communicative purpose. Evidence is clearly linked to the situation and supports the written description. | Evidence included but only has a tenuous relationship with the situation being described. Some evidence may be hard to understand or link to the written description. | Fails to use two different pieces of evidence, or they are used such that they confuse or contradict meaning. Evidence is not relevant to situation. |
| | 5 points | 4 points | 2 points | 0 points |
| C3. Analysis of Systems Engineering Approach | Precise and insightful
analysis of the situation, its
causes, and their
relationship to systems
engineering.
Motivation to change
systems engineering
approach is clear from the
analysis, and change will
address current and future
situations of this type.
| Analysis of situation
identifies relevant and
specific causes. Change to
systems engineering
processes responds to
these causes but may not
expand beyond this
specific situation. | Analysis lacks focus or
learning.
Change to systems
engineering processes
discussed but not
explained, or not explained
clearly. | Missing analysis or analysis
of situation is very unclear.
Individual involvement not
discussed in analysis.
May be confusing or
contradictory. |
| | 10 points | 7 points | 4 points | 0 points |
| C4. Strategy and Recommendations | Identifies and insightfully
explains a practical
strategy for dealing with
similar events in the future
and developing
professional skills that help
with similar situations. | Identifies and clearly
explains a practical
strategy for dealing with
similar events in the future
and developing
professional skills that help
with similar situations. | Identifies and somewhat
explains a practical
strategy for dealing with
similar events in the future
and developing
professional skills that help
with similar situations. | Does not identify and/or
adequately explain a
practical strategy for
dealing with similar events
in the future and
developing professional
skills that help with similar
situations. |
| | 10 points | 7 points | 4 points | 0 points |
| C5. Next Steps | Succinct: clear
understanding of the
impact of systems
engineering processes.
Plan for future systems
engineering approach is
wise. | Includes identified learning
and plan for future
systems engineering
processes.
However, the conclusion is
inconsistent: some good
points, but somewhat
unclear about the impact
of changes to systems
engineering processes. | Lacks identified “learning”:
discussion of the effect of
systems engineering
processes, or moment or
idea unclear.
Vague or general plan for
future systems engineering
activities. | Missing “learning”: no
discussion of the effect of
the change (or lack of
change), or moment and
idea discussed; no
discussion on how this will
influence systems
engineering in the future. |
| | 5 points | 4 points | 2 points | 0 points |
| C6. Link to Systems | Engineering
Knowledge Areas
Life cycle stage of incident
is discussed. The incident
is related to systems
engineering, systems
implementation
AND systems
management. | Life cycle stage of incident
is discussed. The incident
is related to systems
engineering, systems
implementation OR
systems management. | Life cycle stage of
incidence is clear, but
there is only minor
connection to systems
engineering, systems
implementation or systems
management. | No relevance to systems
engineering,
implementation and
management, or system
life cycle. |
| | 10 points | 7 points | 4 points | 0 points |