1. An ability to analyze a problem, and identify and define the computing requirements appropriate to its solution.
2. An ability to design, implement, and evaluate a computer-based system, process, component, or program to meet desired needs.
3. An ability to function effectively on teams to accomplish a common goal.
4. An ability to communicate effectively with a range of audiences.
5. An ability to use current techniques, skills, and tools necessary for computing practice.
6. An ability to apply mathematical foundations, algorithmic principles, and computer science theory in the modeling and design of computer-based systems in a way that demonstrates comprehension of the tradeoffs involved in design choices.
7. An ability to apply design and development principles in the construction of software systems of varying complexity.

and these outcome components are evaluated over the various required deliverables and activities in CS 448:

• Requirements Specification Assessment Criteria:
  1. Problem description is clear and complete (OC 1)
  2. Problem domain model is accurate (OC 1)
  3. Problem environment and operating constraints are clear (OC 1)
  4. User capabilities and expectations are clear (OC 1)
  5. System functional requirements are well defined and complete (OC 1)
  6. System non-functional requirements are well defined and complete (OC 1)
  7. Overall flow and organization of document is effective. (OC 3,4)
  8. Document is well written (has correct grammar, spelling, punctuation, and is understandable). (OC 4)
• Design Specification Assessment Criteria:
  1. System architecture is clear and well documented. (OC 2,4,7)
  2. Design is appropriate for the problem. (OC 2,6,7)
  3. Design choices are evident. (OC 6,7)
  4. Design patterns and/or architectural styles are used where appropriate. (OC 5,6,7)
  5. UML diagrams are used appropriately and are explained (OC 5,7)
  6. Appropriate data structures and algorithms are used. (OC 6)
  7. Overall flow and organization of document is effective. (OC 3,4)
  8. Document is well written (has correct grammar, spelling, punctuation, and is understandable). (OC 4)
• Test Plan Assessment Criteria:
  1. Test plan is appropriate for system type. (OC 2,5,7)
  2. Test plan is complete and comprehensive. (OC 2,7)
  3. Evidence is given that testing proceeded according to plan. (OC 5,7)
  4. Plan includes testing of individual components. (OC 7)
  5. Plan includes regression testing. (OC 7)
  6. Plan includes testing of nonfunctional requirements (e.g., performance, usability). (OC 2)
  7. Appropriate testing and analysis tools were used (e.g., JUnit, a profiler, etc.). (OC 5)
  8. Test plan is clear and readable. (OC 4)
• Project Implementation Assessment Criteria:
  1. Project successfully implements requirements. (OC 2,3,5,7)
  2. Implementation is robust. (OC 2,7)
  3. Implementation adheres to system design. (OC 2,6,7)
  4. Source code is well organized. (OC 5,7)
  5. Source code is clear and well commented. (OC 7)
  6. Source code adheres to project coding standards. (OC 5,7)
  7. Appropriate build tools were used in project implementation (e.g., make, ant). (OC 5)
  8. Appropriate testing and analysis tools were used (e.g., JUnit, profiler, etc.). (OC 5)
  9. Other appropriate tools were used. (OC 5)
• Student Presentation Assessment Criteria:
  1. Presentation was organized effectively (OC 4)
  2. Presentation content was appropriate for audience (OC 4)
  3. Presenter was clear and articulate (OC 4)
  4. Presenter effectively used slides and/or other visual aids (OC 4)
  5. Presenter engaged with the audience (OC 4)
  6. Presenter answered questions effectively (OC 4)
  7. Presenter managed time appropriately (OC 4)
• Peer & Project Evaluations :
  The categories of peer evaluation are:
  • contribution, the volume and the quality of work that the student contributed to the project; and
  • attitude, the student's contribution to a cooperative team environment, willingness to work on a team, treatment of other team members.
  Rules:
  • List all students on the team including yourself. Let N be the number of students you listed.
  • Distribute N*8 points in the Contribution column among the students you listed.
  • Distribute N*8 points in the Attitude column among the students you listed.
  • Check that each column totals to exactly N*8 points; adjust if necessary.
  Plus you will provide this feedback:
  • Is your project behind, on, or ahead of schedule?
  • Is your team functioning effectively as a team?
  • 2-3 sentence summary of your team performance to date.