This is intended to be filled out by staff members of DPI Tech Apprenticeship program. If you do not feel qualified to score a section, feel free to leave it blank.
- Date/Time
- Trainee Name
- Project Name
- Reviewer Name
- Does the README.md give users a detailed description of the project?
- May include title, description, install steps, contribution guidelines and anything else that might be helpful.
- Should be formatted using Markdown
- May include screenshots or diagrams if applicable
[ ] No - (0 pts) [ ] Needs improvement - (1-4 pts) [ ] Yes - (5 pts)
Reviewer comments/suggestions:
Score:
- Repository in GitHub (with name of your project)
- Using git-flow (branching and pull requests)
- Should have regular commits with clear, descriptive messages
- Bonus for issue tracking connected to pull requests
[ ] No - (0 pts) [ ] Needs improvement - (1-4 pts) [ ] Yes - (5 pts)
Reviewer comments/suggestions:
Score:
- Is there a significant amount of commented out code?
- Are variables, classes, methods, etc. named appropriately? Descriptive?
- Consistent casing? (especially variables)
- Is the logic easy to follow?
- Consistent indentation? (especially in view templates)
- Could another developer easily/quickly ramp into this project? (eg has a sample_data rake task, follows standard CRUD pattern, etc.)
[ ] No - (0 pts) [ ] Needs improvement - (1-4 pts) [ ] Yes - (5 pts)
Reviewer comments/suggestions:
Score:
- Uses semantic HTML (HTML elements clearly describe their meaning in a human- and machine-readable way)
- Uses CSS and/or a library (eg Bootstrap)
- Uses partial templates when appropriate (eg navbar, forms, cards, lists, etc.)
- Bonus for mobile responsive design.
- Bonus of accessibility (alt tags on images, aria tags, etc.)
[ ] No - (0 pts) [ ] Needs improvement - (1-4 pts) [ ] Yes - (5 pts)
Reviewer comments/suggestions:
Score:
- Runs without major errors.
- Is the data model clear and efficient?
- Securely stores API keys
- Usage of helpers such as
link_to
,button_to
,form_with
, etc. - Defines authorization policy using Pundit (or similar framework).
- Bonus for using concerns, service objects, or jobs
[ ] No - (0 pts) [ ] Needs improvement - (1-4 pts) [ ] Yes - (5 pts)
Reviewer comments/suggestions:
Score:
- Your app should be successfully deployed to a cloud hosting site such as Fly.io or Render.com
- Bonus for using a custom domain name
[ ] No - (0 pts) [ ] Needs improvement - (1-4 pts) [ ] Yes - (5 pts)
Reviewer comments/suggestions:
Score:
- Should have a functional specification document with:
- a description of the problem
- proposed solution
- user stories
- possibly some sketches
- Does the app satisfy these requirements?
[ ] No - (0 pts) [ ] Needs improvement - (1-4 pts) [ ] Yes - (5 pts)
Reviewer comments/suggestions:
Score:
Landing Page - Does the landing page clearly articulate who the app is for and what problem it solves?
- Should have a call to action (sign up, get started, etc.)
- May have a video or how it works section.
- Should have a professional/appealing look and feel
[ ] No - (0 pts) [ ] Needs improvement - (1-4 pts) [ ] Yes - (5 pts)
Reviewer comments/suggestions:
Score:
- Is the target user clearly identified somewhere in the app?
- Could you imagine someone using this?
- Should have some evidence of market research or validation of the problem being solved.
- Is this a compelling/exciting solution?
[ ] No - (0 pts) [ ] Needs improvement - (1-4 pts) [ ] Yes - (5 pts)
Reviewer comments/suggestions:
Score:
- Deck should be easily understood by the general public
- Deck may include screencasts
- Text should be minimal
- Bullet points should be concise
[ ] No - (0 pts) [ ] Needs improvement - (1-4 pts) [ ] Yes - (5 pts)
Reviewer comments/suggestions:
Score:
- Narration should be concise and consistent with the slides
- Should adhere to the time limit
- Speaking should be clear and have proper pacing
[ ] No - (0 pts) [ ] Needs improvement - (1-4 pts) [ ] Yes - (5 pts)
Reviewer comments/suggestions:
Score:
- Should clearly explain how to use the app
- Should jump straight into the unique parts of the app (ie don't bother including sign-up/sign-in steps)
[ ] No - (0 pts) [ ] Needs improvement - (1-4 pts) [ ] Yes - (5 pts)
Reviewer comments/suggestions:
Score:
Some projects may excel in unique ways not captured by the rubric. Feel free to grant up to 5 points for exceptional creativity or problem solving.
Reviewer comments/suggestions:
Score:
- Technical (/30):
- Business (/15):
- Presentation (/15):
- Bonus
Overall: (/60)