Outco Outco
Outco Outco
me me Week
Task me me
Achie Achie -wise
Week to be Achie Achie
veme veme Total
No Asses veme veme
nt – nt – Mark
sed nt – nt –
Mode Excell s
Poor Good
rate ent
Mini Mode Exten
Good
mal rate sive
Know
Know Know Know
ledge
ledge ledge ledge
of
of of of
Depar
Depar Depar Depar
tment
tment tment tment
s,
s, s, s,
proces
proces proces proces
Intro ses,
ses, ses, ses,
ducti produ
produ produ produ
1 on of cts 5
cts cts cts
Indus and
and and and
try work
work work work
cultur
cultur cultur cultur
e of
e of e of e of
the
the the the
comp
comp comp comp
any
any any any
(Mar
(Mar (Mar (Mar
ks –
ks – ks – ks –
3/4)
1) 2) 5)
2 Prese Mini Mode Good Exten 5
ntatio mal rate w.r.t. sive
n of w.r.t. w.r.t. tasks w.r.t.
Layo tasks tasks (Mar tasks
ut of (Mar (Mar ks – (Mar
Indus ks – ks – 3/4) ks –
try, 1) 2) 5)
Specif
icatio
ns of
Mach
ines,
raw
mater
ials,
comp
onent
s
3
4
5
Week-
Outcome Outcome Outcome Outcome
Week Task to be wise
Achievement – Achievement – Achievement – Achievement –
No Assessed Total
Poor Moderate Good Excellent
Marks
Minimal Moderate Extensive
Good Knowledge
Knowledge of Knowledge of Knowledge of
of Departments,
Departments, Departments, Departments,
processes,
Introduction processes, processes, processes,
1 products and work 5
of Industry products and work products and work products and work
culture of the
culture of the culture of the culture of the
company
company company company
(Marks – 3/4)
(Marks – 1) (Marks – 2) (Marks – 5)
Good
Presentation of Layout of Industry, Minimal Moderate Extensive
w.r.t. tasks
2 Specifications of Machines, raw w.r.t. tasks w.r.t. tasks w.r.t. tasks 5
(Marks –
materials, components (Marks – 1) (Marks – 2) (Marks – 5)
3/4)
Good Extensive
Minimal Moderate
Participation Participation
Participation in setup Participation Participation
with poor with poor
3 and manufacturing with poor with poor 20
understanding understanding
processes/platforms understanding understanding
(Marks – 13– (Marks – 18–
(Marks – 1–8) (Marks – 9–12)
17) 20)
4 Execution of given Minimal Moderate Good Extensive 20
to project/work, Participation Participation Participation Participation
10 Follow safety and with poor with lower level with Good with excellent
understanding understanding
maintenance understanding understanding
(Marks – 13– (Marks – 18–
procedures (Marks – 1–8) (Marks – 9–12)
17) 20)
Good
Minimal Moderate Extensive
Validation by Participation
Participation Participation with Participation with
industry mentor with Good
11 with poor acceptable excellent 25
regarding project performance
performance performance performance
or work allocated (Marks – 16–
(Marks – 1–10) (Marks – 11–15) (Marks – 21–25)
20)
Results are not presented Results are presented Results are presented
Diary writing, properly, summary & casually, conclusion well, conclusion to a
Project summary, conclusion not casual, future good level, future
12
Conclusion & acceptable, future extensions casually extensions well
Future extension extensions not specified specified specified
(Marks – 1–10) (Marks – 11–15) (Marks – 16–20)
Task to be Moderate
Week Poor (Marks) Good (Marks) Excellent (Marks)
Assessed (Marks)
Participation in Partial setup Installs tools Independently sets
Struggles to
software setup, with help; properly; up complete dev
install or use
3 IDE installation, limited understands environment;
development
toolchain understanding basic usage (9– mentors peers (13–
tools (1–4)
configuration (5–8) 12) 15)
Writes
Writing basic Unable to write Writes code with Writes optimized
syntactically
programs (syntax, valid code or syntax errors; and modular code
4 and logically
loops, conditions, lacks logic (1– logic partially with good structure
correct code
functions) 4) works (5–8) (13–15)
(9–12)
Fails to Identifies some Correctly Efficiently debugs,
Debugging and identify or errors but identifies and uses tools
5
Error Handling correct errors struggles to fix fixes common (breakpoints, logs,
(1–4) (5–8) bugs (9–12) etc.) (13–15)
Uses Git with Proficient in version
No or minimal Uses Git for
Use of Version commits, control: merges,
6 use of Git (1– basic commits
Control (e.g., Git) branches, and branches, resolving
4) only (5–8)
pushes (9–12) conflicts (13–15)
7 Mini-project Lacks Module works Module is Highly functional,
module structure; but lacks functional and reusable, and
Task to be Moderate
Week Poor (Marks) Good (Marks) Excellent (Marks)
Assessed (Marks)
development poorly written logic/design well-coded (9– documented code
(Phase 1) module (1–4) quality (5–8) 12) (13–15)
Leads discussions,
Does not Participates but Actively
Team gives and
collaborate or limited contributes and
8 collaboration and implements
ignores contribution (5– responds to
code review constructive
feedback (1–4) 8) reviews (9–12)
feedback (13–15)
Testing & Uses automated
No testing or Minimal testing Applies basic
Validation of code testing tools &
9 random inputs with manual unit testing &
(unit test, test multiple test cases
(1–4) inputs (5–8) inputs (9–12)
cases, inputs) (13–15)
Code not
Final module Partial Module works Well-integrated
integrated or
10 integration and integration with on integration with error-free
errors on run
execution issues (5–8) (9–12) execution (13–15)
(1–4)
Poor code Professional-quality
Evaluation by Functional code
quality & Acceptable code, structured,
industry mentor with acceptable
11 logic; lacks performance & reusable, excellent
(project & coding logic/design
progress (1– effort (11–15) performance (21–
quality) (16–20)
10) 25)
Clear and
Comprehensive,
Documentation & No or poorly complete
Basic report with well-formatted
Reporting (code written reporting; code
12 gaps and missing report with future
comments, report report/diary is well-
logic (11–15) scope and review
writing, diary) (1–10) commented
(21–25)
(16–20)