Deliverables

Part A: Design Proposal: Wiki Document (50% for design proposal)
You will submit your team proposal in the form of a wiki page on the Learning Space Design Challenge Wiki created for this course; there, you can also find examples from the previous 2007 version of this course.

Your team’s proposal should include at least the following information: Is someone working on this proposal part? Do we need to have this done in a paper type format, or does the actual wiki take care of this? - Kelly > Is this made up, or how/why we each selected this group? - Kelly > I think it will be helpful to see slides during the pitch. - Kelly
 * Background
 * Brief description of your needs assessment (i.e., who you talked to, extant data you reviewed, what you found, etc.)
 * Design concept and recommendations (description of how the space is organized and a vision of how it would be used; a list of equipment, seating, surfaces, fixtures, and other elements)
 * A rough floor plan indicating proposed locations for hardware and seating.
 * NOTE: The idea here is on the concept. Do not spend a lot of time with meticulous floor plans and blueprints. For instance, you could scan a hand drawn “bubble” sketch, or use a program such as Inspiration, PowerPoint, Visio, etc. to create your floor plan.
 * Design rationale, including references to literature and design principles.
 * A rough description of how you plan to assess the effectiveness of the space.
 * A link to your accompanying electronic presentation “pitch.” Did we want to use slides for the presentation? -Robert 

Part B: In Class Client Presentation (10% for presentation)
Each team will have 30-minutes of class time on Aug 10th for the following activities:
 * First, your team will deliver a pithy 5-minute presentation to the class. Note: the presentation may be delivered by one or more of your team members. In this presentation, you will introduce us to your design concept. You may use slides or simply talk to us. Keep to your time limit please! Remember, this will be done live in the Wimba virtual classroom during our last class session.
 * Next, everyone will go to the wiki where we will spend 10 minutes reviewing your design proposal.
 * Finally, we'll all reconvene and have 10 minutes for comments and Q&A.

Part C: Teamwork Feedback Form (part of your participation grade)
Each individual is responsible for completing the Teamwork Feedback Form (found on Ning), regarding your own teammates' participation on the WebQuest project. = =

=Evaluation=
 * || **1-2**
 * Developing** || **3-4** **Accomplished** || **5-6** **Exemplary** ||
 * ** Wiki ** || || || ||
 * **Background** || Introduction does not make explicit reference to the challenge that is to be examined. || Introduction adequately presents the challenge, who is involved, and on what the effort will focus. || Introduction clearly and explicitly explains the challenge, who is involved (audience(s), and the focus of the effort). Introduction grabs attention of the reader; puts us in the middle of it. ||
 * **Needs Assessment** || Description of NA efforts is unclear or lacks necessary detail. Pertinent sources have been overlooked. Description of optimals, drivers, or priorities is insufficient or inappropriate. || Description is clear, concise and includes the necessary who, how, and what, but pertinent sources have been overlooked or description of optimals, drivers, or priorities is insufficient or inappropriate. || Description is clear, concise and includes who you talked to, how you proceeded, and what you found. Efforts included a variety of relevant, data, and literature, taking into account those sources best able to illuminate the problem. Optimals, drivers, and priorities are clearly identified and defined. ||
 * **Design Concept and Recommendations** || The design is not based on sound principles and concepts covered in class. Lacks of complexity or originality. || Design demonstrates general success in the endeavor. || A compelling design and recommendations clearly demonstrate an understanding of the concepts covered in class. Considers the needs and requirements of a variety of stakeholders. Considers a balance of cost, aesthetics, utility, pedagogy, implementation, support, and maintenance and upkeep. Includes a description and vision of how the space would be used; a list of equipment, furniture/seating, fixtures, and other elements. Design demonstrates success in conducting analysis of an intricate, complex problem. ||
 * **Design Rationale** || Little justification is given and/or is inappropriate. The design lacks any clear evidence of design principles. || Justification is given but is not strongly supported by data or design principles. || Rationale is clearly articulated, linked to data and design principles covered in class, and appropriate for the design concept. ||
 * **Clarity of Writing; Information Organization and Display** || It is hard to know what the writer is trying to say. Writing is convoluted. Misspelled words, incorrect grammar, and improper punctuation are evident and distracting. Information presentation lacks organization. || Writing is adequate, but unnecessary words are used. Meaning is sometimes unclear. Word(s) are either misused or misspelled. A few grammar and punctuation errors have been found. Passive voice prevails. Information displays could be improved, are improper, or are confusing. The document could profit from better organization. || Writing is crisp, clear, and succinct. The reader is guided from a general view of the situation to actionable specifics and recommendations. The writer incorporates the active voice when appropriate. No misspelling, grammar, or punctuation mistakes are evident. Paper is organized logically and effectively (headers, sections, etc.) based on content and recommendations. The writer takes advantage of information displays such as tables, flow charts, etc. when appropriate. ||
 * ** Presentation ** ||  ||   ||   ||
 * **Presentation Resources and Organization** || Presentation/Activity seems disorganized. No handout is given; no reference is made to the wiki. Time management is poor (presentation goes well under or over time the 15-20 minute limit). || Presentation/ activity is somewhat organized; participant handout is present but could be more helpful; wiki was mentioned. Time management is sufficient (presentation goes slightly under or over the 15-20 minute time limit). || The presentation/ activity is organized well; participant handout is useful and easy to read/follow; wiki was mentioned. Time management is highly effective (presentation finishes within the 15-20 minute time limit). ||
 * **Presentation Teamwork** || Presentation demonstrated low degree of cooperation among team members. || Presentation demonstrated a considerable degree of cooperation among team members. || Presentation demonstrated a high degree of cooperation among team members. ||
 * **Presentation Skills** || Presenters difficult to follow; opportunities for participation and questions are few, if any. || Presenters delivery is unclear at times; some opportunities given for participation and questions. || Presenters delivery is clear and compelling; participation and questioning is facilitated skillfully. ||