CEBU INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY - UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURE

RESEARCH DESIGN EVALUATION

Course Title Methods of Research / Design Project Team Code EEZW17
Thesis SOLAR-POWERED BIRD DETERRENT SYSTEM USING PIR SENSOR AND TWEETER SPEAKER
Term Cluster 2, 2nd Semester | A.Y. 2020-2021 OV Date June 26
Evaluator Yeore Clyde J.Retada
Designation

Individual Criteria Group Criteria

Command of Command of
Straightforwardness Flow of Appropriate
Members English Language
of Ideas
Self-Confidence English Language
Presentation Presentation
(elocution) (written)

0.1667 0.1667 0.1667 0.1667 0.1667 0.1667

ESPERANZA, SHEM P. 7 7 7 8 9 9
GORDE, DALE CLANE S. 7 7 7 8 9 9
OROPEL, MAXINE DOMINIQ 7 7 7 8 9 9
SANGGA, LORALIE L. 8 8 8 8 9 9
SARMIENTO, JOHN STEPHI 9 9 9 8 9 9

Evaluation Criteria Description of Target Competency Weight Rating

COMMUNICATION PROFICIENCY
Command of English Language Uses a clear voice and correct voice and correct, precise 0.1667 9
(elocution) pronunciation of terms so that all audience members can
Straightforward Ideas Demonstrates full knowledge by answering all questions 0.1667 8
with explanations and elaborations.
Self Confidence Displays relaxed, self-confident nature about self, with no 0.1667 8
mistakes.
THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE (Chapter I)
Rationale of the Study Topic is concisely introduced; provides a brief and 0.0750 7
Introduction

persuasive rationale for selection of the problem.

Conceptual Framework Clearly identifies the problem and its boundaries 0.0750 9
Clearly situates the problem through an analysis of its 0.0750 8
historical, social, and/or cultural context(s)
Draws upon multiple sources of information to substantiate 0.0750 8
the existence of the problem
Flow of Research Process There is detailed and complete identification of inputs, 0.0600 8
The Problem

processes and outputs involved in the research.

Statement of the Problem Statement of the research purpose and the overall reasons 0.0600 8
for the study are compelling, apt and precise, and closely
Statement of Assumptions Identifies and questions the validity of the assumptions 0.0600 8
and/or ethical dimensions that underlie the study.
Scope and Limitations of the Delimitation of the subject, place and timeline of study is 0.0600 6.5
Study specified which provides a very clear understanding of how
Significance of the Study Clearly delineates the educational significance of the 0.0600 7
problem, including issues of equity.
Research Environment Distinctly expounded the former studies and interrelate 0.0750 7
Research
Methodology

them, and ascertains how undertaken study is different

Research Respondents
Research Instruments
Research Procedures
Definition of Terms
Clearly identifies participants in the study and provides 0.0750 7
compelling rationale for their selection; describes sampling
Data collection instruments are correctly, completely and 0.0750 8
correspondingly identified to the needed data.
Introduces methods briefly but clearly describes methods. 0.0750 8
Lists researchable question(s). Makes a clear and
Clearly defines and explains the key concepts and terms 0.1000
and their relevance to the problem

TEAM SUMMATIVE PERFORMANCE

Subcriteria Weight % Performance Equiv. Grade

Communication Proficiency 4.0667
Command of English Language 0.1667 76.00% 3.8
(elocution)
Straightforwardness of Ideas 0.1667 76.00% 3.8
Self-Confidence 0.1667 76.00% 3.8
Command of English Language 0.1667 80.00% 4.0
(written)
Flow of Presentation 0.1667 90.00% 4.5
Appropriate Presentation 0.1667 90.00% 4.5
Problem and Its Scope 3.4500
Introduction 0.3000 80.00% 4.0
The Problem 0.3000 75.00% 3.8
Research Methodology 0.3000 75.00% 3.8
Definition of Terms 0.1000 0.00% 0.0
 0
ER
6, 2021

Communication
Proficiency

1.0000
3.9167
3.9167
3.9167
4.1667
4.4167
CEBU INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY - UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURE

HUMAN-CENTERED DESIGN EVALUATION

Course Title Methods of Research / Design Project Team Code EEZW17
Thesis SOLAR-POWERED BIRD DETERRENT SYSTEM USING PIR SENSOR AND TWEETER SPEAKER
Term Cluster 2, 2nd Semester | A.Y. 2020-2021 OV Date June 26
Evaluator Kristan Ian D. Cabana
Designation IE Faculty / Human Centered Design Expert

Individual Criteria Group Criteria

Command of Command of
Straightforwardness Flow of Appropriate
Members English Language
of Ideas
Self-Confidence English Language
Presentation Presentation
(elocution) (written)

0.1667 0.1667 0.1667 0.1667 0.1667 0.1667

ESPERANZA, SHEM P. 8 7 7 9 9 9
GORDE, DALE CLANE S. 9.5 9 8.5 9 9 9
OROPEL, MAXINE DOMINIQ 9.5 8.5 8.5 9 9 9
SANGGA, LORALIE L. 9.5 9 9.5 9 9 9
SARMIENTO, JOHN STEPHI 9.5 9.5 9.5 9 9 9

Evaluation Criteria Description of Target Competency Weight Rating

COMMUNICATION PROFICIENCY
Command of English Language Uses a clear voice and correct voice and correct, precise 0.1667 9
(elocution) pronunciation of terms so that all audience members can
Straightforward Ideas Demonstrates full knowledge by answering all questions 0.1667 9
with explanations and elaborations.
Self Confidence Displays relaxed, self-confident nature about self, with no 0.1667 9
mistakes.
CREATIVE THINKING TOOLS, AND DESIGN & SPECIFICATIONS
Utilization of Creative Thinking Tools Superior concepts generated closely according to the 0.1250 9
design requirements in the design specifications through
Concept Evaluation & Refinement Thorough explanations on the strengths and weaknesses of 0.1250 9
concepts generated and decision on the best concepts, and
Application of Design Knowledge Evidence of a very high level of application of design 0.1250 9
knowledge learnt throughout the project.
Understanding of Design Project Candidate is able to effectively describe design factors 0.1250 9
relevant to the project in a very consistent manner, and is
Design Thinking Principles Explanations are consistently thorough. Covers all key 0.1250 9
methods and processes. Knowledge on optimization of
Research & Specifications Detailed research and utilization of information to produce 0.1250 9
the design specifications.
Final Design Output The contents of the final design output are highly detailed 0.1250 9
and integrated. There is evidence of very well organized
Final Design Quality The final design meets the users' needs to a very high 0.1250 9
degree, with clearly identified new features, and the design

TEAM SUMMATIVE PERFORMANCE

Subcriteria Weight % Performance Equiv. Grade

Communication Proficiency 4.4500
Command of English Language 0.1667 92.00% 4.6
(elocution)
Straightforwardness of Ideas 0.1667 86.00% 4.3
Self-Confidence 0.1667 86.00% 4.3
Command of English Language 0.1667 90.00% 4.5
(written)
Flow of Presentation 0.1667 90.00% 4.5
Appropriate Presentation 0.1667 90.00% 4.5
Creative Thinking Tools, and Design & Specifications 4.5000
Utilization of Creative Thinking Tools 0.1250 90.00% 4.5
Concept Evaluation & Refinement 0.1250 90.00% 4.5
Application of Design Knowledge 0.1250 90.00% 4.5
Understanding of Design Project 0.1250 90.00% 4.5
Design Thinking Principles 0.1250 90.00% 4.5
Research & Specifications 0.1250 90.00% 4.5
Final Design Output 0.1250 90.00% 4.5
Final Design Quality 0.1250 90.00% 4.5
 0
ER
6, 2021

Communication
Proficiency

1.0000
4.0833
4.5000
4.4583
4.5833
4.6250
CEBU INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY - UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURE

TECHNOLOGY DESIGN EVALUATION

Course Title Methods of Research / Design Project Team Code EEZW17
Thesis SOLAR-POWERED BIRD DETERRENT SYSTEM USING PIR SENSOR AND TWEETER SPEAKER
Term Cluster 2, 2nd Semester | A.Y. 2020-2021 OV Date June 26
Evaluator Maria Celsa Tabar
Designation Technology Design Expert

Individual Criteria Group Criteria

Command of Command of
Straightforwardness Flow of Appropriate
Members English Language
of Ideas
Self-Confidence English Language
Presentation Presentation
(elocution) (written)

0.1667 0.1667 0.1667 0.1667 0.1667 0.1667

ESPERANZA, SHEM P. 8 6 6 9 9 9
GORDE, DALE CLANE S. 9 9 9 9 9 9
OROPEL, MAXINE DOMINIQ 9 8 9 9 9 9
SANGGA, LORALIE L. 9 9 9 9 9 9
SARMIENTO, JOHN STEPHI 8 9 9 9 9 9

Evaluation Criteria Description of Target Competency Weight Rating

COMMUNICATION PROFICIENCY
Command of English Language Uses a clear voice and correct voice and correct, precise 0.1667 9
(written) pronunciation of terms so that all audience members can
Flow of Presentation Demonstrates full knowledge by answering all questions 0.1667 9
with explanations and elaborations.
Appropriate Presentation Displays relaxed, self-confident nature about self, with no 0.1667 9
mistakes.
PATENT SEARCH REPORT, and PRODUCT CONCEPT
List of Sources Used All available sources were used. 0.1000 9
Patent
Search

Keywords & Classifications Extensive keywords and classifications searched. 0.1000 9

Searched
Similar / Existing Granted No existing granted patents or patent applications found. 0.2000 9
Patents
Knowledge / Understanding Models or prototypes demonstrate thorough research and 0.1600 9
Engineerin

Prototype
g Model /

(Identify concerns in technical evaluation of technical features.

THINKING / INQUIRY (analysis Models and prototypes demonstrate thoroughly researched 0.1600 9
and evaluation by testing) and creative consideration of material properties, user
COMMUNICATION Uses model details, symbols, and visuals with a high 0.0800 9
(Presentation of ideas and degree of accuracy and effectiveness
Diagram and Sketches Diagrams and sketches are clear and easy to understand 0.1000 9
and adds greatly to the overall clarity of the project.
Neatness and Organization The work is neat, organized and can be easily read. 0.1000 10

TEAM SUMMATIVE PERFORMANCE

Subcriteria Weight % Performance Equiv. Grade

Communication Proficiency 4.3500
Command of English Language 0.1667 86.00% 4.3
(elocution)
Straightforwardness of Ideas 0.1667 82.00% 4.1
Self-Confidence 0.1667 84.00% 4.2
Command of English Language 0.1667 90.00% 4.5
(written)
Flow of Presentation 0.1667 90.00% 4.5
Appropriate Presentation 0.1667 90.00% 4.5
Patent Search Report, and Product Concept 4.5500
Patent Search 0.4000 90.00% 4.5
Engineering Model / Prototype 0.4000 90.00% 4.5
Diagram and Sketches 0.1000 90.00% 4.5
Neatness and Organization 0.1000 100.00% 5.0
 0
ER
6, 2021

Communication
Proficiency

1.0000
3.9167
4.5000
4.4167
4.5000
4.4167
CEBU INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY - UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURE

THESIS REVISION FORM (TRF)

Course Title Methods of Research / Design Project
Thesis SOLAR-POWERED BIRD DETERRENT SYSTEM USING PIR SENSOR AND TWEETE
Term Cluster 2, 2nd Semester | A.Y. 2020-2021

Panel of Experts
Research Design Yeore Clyde J.Retada
Human-Centered Design Kristan Ian D. Cabana
Technology Design Maria Celsa Tabar

Page Required Revisions

The Problem and Its Scope
Rationale of the study Shorten the Rationale of the study
Add Add Review of Related Lit. You may include information in your rationale
Statement of the problem Remove
BackgroundGender
as to how you come up with your respondents should be stated.
Research Respondents If possible,kindly show a computation of how you get the sample. If in your actual gathering, you were not

Creative Thinking Tools, and Design & Specifications

In your user profile, make sure to present the whole population.
In your problem analysis, revisit your diagram and check arrow arrangements.
make sure to discuss well the reasons of the problem statement

Patent Search
Product Design Report, and Product Concept
Specifications Include the angle/inclination of the product.
Patent Search Report Add more similarities, dissimalirities, and unique features onthe Prior Art Summary table
Patent Search Report Put signature and date on the certification table
 Team Code
OR AND TWEETER SPEAKER
OV Date

athering, you were not able to get the number of samples, explain it your limitation and state in your assumption that the information you ga

able
 EEZW17 0

June 26, 2021

Status
CEBU INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY - UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURE

OV REPORT
Course Title Methods of Research / Design Project Team Code EEZW17
Thesis SOLAR-POWERED BIRD DETERRENT SYSTEM USING PIR SENSOR AND TWEETER SPEAKER
Term Cluster 2, 2nd Semester | A.Y. 2020-2021 OV Date June 26
Chairperson
Designation

PROPONENTS
1 ESPERANZA, SHEM P.
2 GORDE, DALE CLANE S.
3 OROPEL, MAXINE DOMINIQUE R.
4 SANGGA, LORALIE L.
5 SARMIENTO, JOHN STEPHIN U.

TEAM PERFORMANCE
Criteria Panelist Weight Grade
Communication Proficiency ALL 0.3333 4.2889
Problem & Its Scope RES 0.2222 3.4500
Creative Thinking Tools, and Design & Specifications HCD 0.2222 4.5000
Patent Search Report, and Product Concept TECH 0.2222 4.5500
Overall Team Performance 4.2074

Interpretation The Team PASSED the oral validation based on the assessment of the Panel of Experts. However,
peer evaluation rating will still have to be integrated into the computation of the individual academic
performance.
ER
6, 2021