Dear Industrial Advisors:
Thank you for volunteering to help evaluate and provide feedback for students of EE499, our capstone design experience. You will ultimately be asked to provide feedback on 3 documents the student teams will produce:
1.
White paper (pre-proposal): General description of project the students intend to work on.
2.
Proposal: A more formal problem statement presenting the relevance of the project goals with design constraints and performance targets explicitly stated.
3.
Final Report: A complete description of the design solution along with an evaluation based on the original design objectives.
For each report we ask that you rate the categories according to attached rubric and provide feedback that may help the students improve their project and design skills, thereby enhancing the quality of their final product and enriching their capstone experience.
We understand that some projects may not line up with your areas of expertise. In that case, please do your best to provide general comments and ratings. There will be several industrial advisors (3 this semester) looking at these reports, and the students will receive a composite evaluation and comments from all the advisors.
It would be best if you just put your comments directly on the attached rubric and send them back to us. We will process the information and distribute them to the students for use in the development and design of their projects.
Enclosed in this packet are the white papers with their rubric sheets. If you have any questions, please contact us via phone or email (Vijay Singh: vsingh@engr.uky.edu
,
Kevin Donohue: donohue@engr.uky.edu
, or the course coordinator Larry Hassebrook: lgh@engr.uky.edu
)
Sincerely,
Kevin D. Donohue
Director of Undergraduate Studies
Vijay Singh
Department Chair

Evaluation Rubric for White Paper Assignment (general project/problem description):
Project: Hybrid Wildcat (Group A)
Advisor: Dr. Arthur Radun
Group Members: Christopher Jenkins, Vishal Patel, Vashista de Silva and Taylor Begley
Please rate the project categories on a scale from 0 to 5 where:
0 – unacceptable
1 – Poor
2 – Acceptable
3 – Good (average work for entry level engineers)
4 – Excellent (top 25% for entry level engineers)
5 – Outstanding (top 5% for entry level engineers)
Category
1.
Quality of writing
2.
Appropriate use of figures and diagrams
3.
Clarity of project/problem description
4.
Relevance/importance of problem/project
5.
Feasibility of project’s scope
Rating
Provide comments and suggestion that can help the students in writing their formal proposal and in formulating realistic design constraints: