IMPORTANT NOTE:

For sections that apply, marking levels indicate maximum marks.

For example, in the Social Impact section, there are 4 marking levels - 20, 15, 10, and 0
marks. However, this is only a range within which intermediate marks may be
assigned as appropriate.

Technical User Interface/Frontend Framework 35

Aspect - (15m): User Interface Design
Total marks: 50 - (12m) Visual Appeal: The app is clean and beautiful, and
exceeds expectations (consider: colour schemes, typography,
graphics, spacing, alignment, etc.)
AND
- (3m) Consistency: There is a consistent design theme
throughout the application.
AND
- (15m) User Experience
- (8m) Navigation: It is easy and intuitive to navigate through the
app (i.e. someone who has not used the app before may
navigate through it with no difficulty).
AND
- (7m) Interactivity: The user interface is very interactive and
engaging.
AND
- (5m) Code Quality: Users can fully understand the frontend logic (code
that handles the presentation and user interface aspect of the app) by
reading the code. Any explanations may be commented on in the code.

Backend Framework 10
- (6m) Functionality and Features
- (3m) Interaction: The app can interact with the database to
perform data storage and retrieval.
- (3m) Data Handling: The backend manages and processes
data well.
AND
- (2m) Testing: Well-defined and meaningful test cases were included.
AND
- (2m) Code Quality: Users can fully understand the backend logic (code
for API and database calls, and data sanitisation) by reading the code.
Any explanations may be commented in the code.

GitHub Repository 5
- (5m): The repository is logically organised into folders and follows a
clear structure. Files are aptly named. All necessary source code is
included in a readable manner.
OR
- (0m): The repository is incomplete or empty.

Presentation Social Impact 20

Total marks: 40 - (20m): The solution aligns with the problem statement through either a
UN SDG or reasonable research on sustainability in a unique, feasible
manner. The solution has the potential to effectively address the
problem statement.
OR
 - (15m): The solution aligns with the problem statement through either a
UN SDG or reasonable research on sustainability and is feasible, but
does not value-add compared to similar existing apps.
OR
- (10m): The solution is implemented, but has little to no relation to
sustainability nor any of the UN SDGs. It is a relatively feasible solution.
OR
- (0m): No clear solution is presented.

Pitch 6
- (6m): Slides are neat and organised, highly readable, and the font size
is appropriate. The pitch is highly captivating. The speaker(s) is/are
engaging.
OR
- (3m): Slides are so-so and sometimes difficult to read. The pitch is
plain. The speaker(s) is/are not convincing enough.
OR
- (0m): The group did not present with any slides.

Demo 6
- (6m): Demonstration of the solution (live or recorded) was succinct and
demonstrated the app’s functionalities well.
OR
- (3m): Demonstration was presented but only managed to present a
portion of the app’s functionalities.
OR
- (0m): Demonstration was not done.

Q&A 5
- (5m) The answer was concise and effective, and directly answered the
question. No waffling (i.e. giving the answer in a roundabout way, or
avoiding answering the question by diverging from it) by the speaker.
OR
- (2m) The answer is incomplete, but coherent.
OR
- (0m) The question was not answered at all.

Time Limit 3
- (3m) The pitch is done within the allocated time (4 minutes)
OR
- (0m) The pitch went over the time limit.

Punctuality of Punctuality 10
Submission - (10m): Team submits their code in a .zip format before the deadline.
Total marks: 10 OR
- (5m): Team submits their code late (<1 hour).
OR
- (0m): Team submits their code >=1 hour from the deadline.