Peer Feedback – Part 1 – Organizational System Problem Scenario
Exceptional Satisfactory
Scenario & Scenario is detailed and realistic, and
Background creates a vivid picture of the organizational
problem.
Description of the Writer thoroughly describes the
Collection collection/group of entities as a whole, its
context, and the typical items contained
within it. Writer provides graphics to
illustrate items where appropriate. Actual
and potential associative relationships
between items inside and outside the
collection are identified.
Description of Individual and groups of users, including
Users & Usage of those who maintain the system are
the Collection & described in detail, along with
System skill/knowledge requirements, and the
types of information
seeking/storing/retrieving behaviors that
are characteristic of each. Conflicting needs
among users that could impact design are
pinpointed. Potential future uses of the
collection and organizational system are
addressed.
Description of Writer clearly articulates what the
Ideal System requirements for an ideal system would be,
describing in detail how it would “work” for
all of the users defined. Successful
INLS 520 – Fall 2010
Needs improvement
Writer adequately describes the scenario
and the background of the organizational
problem.
Writer presents a solid summary of the
collection as a whole, its context, and the
typical items contained within it. The main
associative relationships between items
inside and outside the collection are
identified.
Writer outlines usage of the system,
covering typical users and those who
maintain the system. Their typical
skill/knowledge requirements and
information behaviors are described.
Writer describes an ideal system that fulfills
the needs of the users and adequately
matches the scenario.
Details about the scenario are missing or
unclear. Writer fails to adequately describe
the organizational problem.
Writer fails to provide a coherent overview
of the collection and the typical items
contained within it. Associative
relationships and the context of the
collection are not addressed or are unclear.
Writer fails to fully describe users and usage
of the collection and organizational system.
Typical Information needs and behaviors
are not addressed. Users/usage does not
match collection/system described.
Writer describes an ideal system that does
not match the scenario or user needs, or
fails to describe an ideal system.
p. 1
 Peer Feedback – Part 1 – Organizational System Problem Scenario
outcomes are defined and are consistent
with the user needs and information
behaviors. Ideal system is well-matched to
the scenario described.
Assessment of Writer thoroughly describes the challenges
Challenges related to the design effort – in terms of the
collection, the users, and the design. Writer
presents potential solutions where possible
and plans for addressing other challenges
where solutions are not yet apparent.
Organization, Report is structured in a logical, organized
Presentation, and format, with clearly labeled sections. Report
Style is presented professionally, in a visually
compelling manner. Graphics are used
creatively to highlight points. Writing style
is consistent with the white paper format
throughout the report. Writing is
exceptionally clear, concise, and
businesslike in tone.
INLS 520 – Fall 2010
Writer describes most of the challenges
related to the collection, users, or design of
the organizational system, and presents
plans for finding information on how to
address these challenges.
Report is structured in a logical, organized
format. Report is professionally presented.
Graphics are appropriately selected to
strengthen an argument or illustrate a
point. Writing style is consistent with the
white paper format through most of the
report. Writing is clear and businesslike in
tone.
Writer does not recognize obvious
challenges related to the collection, users,
or design of the organizational system, or
fails to present plans for addressing
particular challenges.
Report is disorganized and does not have a
logical structure. Report is not
professionally presented. Writing style is
muddled or inappropriate to the white
paper format – tone is too academic or too
informal.
p. 2