DTE401 Design Thinking Assessment 1 Brief: Reflection Individual | Torrens University Australia

Assessment

Attributes

Fail

(Yet to achieve minimum standard) 0–

49%

Pass

(Functional) 50–64%

Credit

(Proficient)

65–74%

Distinction

(Advanced)

75–84%

High Distinction

(Exceptional) 85–100%

Knowledge of design thinking concepts and processes

Total Percentage for this Assessment Attribute = 20%

Demonstrates a limited knowledge of the design thinking process by:

●  not meeting minimum standard as outlined in the format and structure for this assessment

●  providing limited or incomplete explanation of the design thinking process and the underlying concepts.

Demonstrates a functional knowledge of the design thinking process by:

●  describing the design thinking process and concepts, but further elaboration is required

●  focusing on strategies/tools without acknowledging overarching dispositions

●  explaining the concepts underpinning the design thinking process, but further elaboration is required.

Demonstrates proficient knowledge of the design thinking process by:

●        clearly describing the design thinking process and concepts

●        making connections between

strategies/tools and dispositions.

Demonstrates advanced knowledge of the design thinking process by:

●        clearly and consistently describing the design thinking process and concepts in depth

●        clearly and consistently explaining the relationship between strategies/tools and dispositions in the achievement of insights in depth.

Demonstrates exceptional knowledge of the design thinking process by:

●        clearly, consistently, systematically and critically describing design thinking processes and concepts

●        consistently and comprehensively explaining the relationship between processes experienced and the development of insight.

Understanding of complex problems within a range of professional contexts

Total Percentage for this Assessment Attribute = 30%

Demonstrates a partially developed understanding of complex problems within own professional context and those of others by:

●    not meeting minimum standard as outlined in the format and structure for this assessment

●    articulating a limited or weak relation of innovation and creativity to complex problems in one’s own professional context and others.

Demonstrates a functional understanding of complex problems within own professional context and those of others by:

●   articulating minimally the relation of innovation and creativity to complex problems in one’s own professional context formed through experiences

●   articulating minimally the relation of innovation and creativity to complex problems in the professional contexts of others gained from relevant literature

●  making limited claims regarding issues or complexities within these contexts.

Demonstrates proficient understanding of complex problems within own professional context and those of others by:

●        articulating a thorough relation of innovation and creativity to one’s own professional context and those of others, including some awareness of the complexities of problems within these settings

●        giving a detailed discussion of the conditions that may support or hinder innovation.

Demonstrates advanced understanding of complex problems within own professional context and those of others by:

●        articulating a highly developed relation of innovation and creativity to one’s own professional context and those of others, going beyond direct experience and showing a nuanced understanding of the factors influencing complex problems within these settings

●        providing a highly developed discussion of the conditions that may support or hinder innovation.

Demonstrates exceptional understanding of complex problems within own professional context and those of others by:

●        articulating a wide range and sophisticated relation of innovation and creativity to professional contexts, both experienced and drawn from literature, that provide clear insights into the complexities of problems within these settings

●        providing a sophisticated and compelling discussion of the conditions that may support or hinder innovation.

Depth and analysis of reflection

Total Percentage for this Assessment Attribute = 25%

Demonstrates a partially developed analysis and reflection by:

●  presenting description (i.e. recounting experience) with no attempt to analyse or draw meaning from this experience

●     not attempting to move beyond own experience or to extend understanding through other positions or points of view.

Demonstrates a functional analysis and reflection by:

●     presenting description of experiences related to the topic and drawing out some key learnings

●   focusing primarily on deepening understanding of own position or experience with limited analysis of positions/points of view of others beyond own context.

Demonstrates proficient analysis and reflection by:

●        presenting experiences related to the topic as a basis for identifying and discussing key developments in thinking about innovation

●        acknowledging others’ points of view in contexts beyond one’s own.

Demonstrates advanced

analysis and reflection by:

●        drawing on past and current experiences to engage with abstract concepts relating to innovation and change

●        articulating fundamental changes in disposition and knowledge, taking into account the complexities of the issue(s) and a range of other points of view gained from literature.

Demonstrates exceptional analysis and reflection by:

●        identifying developments in thinking and formulating conclusions and a substantial position regarding innovation in professional settings

●        supporting this position with relevant experiences and insightful analysis of own and others’ points of view.

Clarity of communication and integration of ideas

Total Percentage for this Assessment Attribute = 15%

Demonstrates a partially developed communication and integration of ideas by:

●     repeatedly obscuring meaning through errors in the communication of ideas, including errors in structure, sequence, spelling, grammar, punctuation and/or the acknowledgement of sources

●    rarely or inaccurately employing specialised language and terminology relating to design thinking.

Demonstrates a functional communication and integration of ideas by:

●  using a mode of communication that is generally coherent; expression that is usually clear, with persistent errors in spelling, punctuation or grammar

●    generally employing specialised language and terminology relating to design thinking with accuracy.

Demonstrates proficient communication and integration of ideas by:

●        providing a precise meaning that is easy to follow; information, arguments and evidence are structured and sequenced clearly and logically

●        communicating ideas with occasional minor errors in spelling, grammar and/or punctuation

●        accurately employing specialised language and terminology relating to design thinking.

Demonstrates advanced communication and integration of ideas by:

●        engaging the audience’s interest; information, arguments and evidence are structured and sequenced in a way that is clear and persuasive

●        accurately employing a wide range of specialised language and terminology relating to design thinking

●        ensuring spelling, grammar and punctuation are free from errors.

Demonstrates exceptional communication and integration of ideas by:

●        communicating

eloquently, expressing meaning coherently, concisely and creatively within the given format

●        discerningly selecting and precisely employing a wide range of specialised language and terminology relating to design thinking

●        engaging and sustaining the audience’s interest

●        outlining information, arguments and evidence that are insightful, persuasive and expertly presented

●        ensuring spelling, grammar and punctuation are free from errors.

Citation and referencing of key resources and evidence

Total Percentage for this Assessment Attribute = 10%

Demonstrates a limited knowledge of citation and referencing of key resources and evidence by:

● the inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas

●    omitting the references or not using APA 7^th referencing style.

Demonstrates a functional knowledge of citation and referencing of key resources and evidence by:

●        using credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas, but use is not always explicit or well- developed

●        providing references in a format resembling APA

7^th referencing style, with frequent or repeated errors.

Demonstrates proficient knowledge of citation and referencing of key resources and evidence by:

●        using credible resources to support and develop ideas

●        providing references in a format resembling APA 7^th referencing style, with occasional errors.

Demonstrates advanced knowledge of citation and referencing of key resources and evidence by:

●        using good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and statements

●        showing a broad range of references sources within the organisation

●        providing APA 7^th

referencing that is free from errors.

Demonstrates exceptional knowledge of citation and referencing of key resources and evidence by:

●        demonstrating the use

of high-quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and position statements

●        showing a wide scope of references sources within and beyond the organisation

●        providing APA 7^th

referencing that is free from errors.

The
following Subject Learning Outcomes are addressed in this assessment

SLO a)

Articulate and apply the
concepts and processes of Design Thinking.

SLO b)

Identify and evaluate
complex problems in a professional context.

SLO c)

Analyse and critique own
capacities and dispositions in relation to processes of innovation.

SLO d)

Apply high-level research
and communication skills to investigate, synthesise, and analyse information from
multiple perspectives (including users and scholarship).