Submission Guidelines & 1-1 Tutorials
Marking Rubric & Submission Guidelines
In our final lecture of our first year we briefly went over the marking rubric for our IXD103 Exploring Identity module and what is required when it comes to submitting our work, I had previously looked at the marking rubric at the start of the project as this has become a habit for me to refer to the design brief or marking rubric in this sense to ensure I stay on track with what is being asked.
The grading system and how final grades are determined in university is completely new to me as I’m sure it is with the rest of my class so we went through how the grading system works and how it relates to the marking rubric for each module. The “Poor” category is not even an option for me so I am going to pretend that this category doesn’t even exist as I will be ensuring I aim for the higher grading brackets. The “Adequate” category would be considered as a 3rd which would be between 40-49, the “Satisfactory” category would be considered as a 2:2 which would be between 50-59 and the “Good” category would be considered as a 2:1 which would be between 60-69. Anything above the 70 would be considered as a 1st which would be between 70-100 which is ideally what I will be aiming towards for each module.
- Fail – “Poor” (0-39)
- 3rd – “Adequate” (40-49)
- 2:2 – “Satisfactory” (50-59)
- 2:1 – “Good” (60-69)
- 1st – “Excellent/Outstanding” (70-100)
I found this lecture extremely useful as I was a little unsure on how the whole grading system worked in university in addition to covering what was required for submitting our projects, especially just before we break up for the Easter holiday. I think I am on top of my projects and have plenty of time to polish up what I’ve created before the hand in date on the 6th of May but I will still be working on my projects over the easter break to ensure I am utilising the last of my time of this module.
I have included a list of what is required when submitting my work for this module:
- Link to Research Blog
- Link to Medium Article
- Module Reflection & Self Assessment
- Commercial Brand Project (Modern Bank Brand)
- Brand Guidelines
- Wordmark & Logomark
- Colours
- App Screens
- Link to Landing Page
- Personal Brand Project
- Brand Guidelines
- Logomark
- Colours
Feedback Session
As I missed the Week 11 – 1-1 Tutorials lecture last week due to having work done at the house I wanted to try and get some feedback on my projects and get some extra opinions on what I have created, I felt like my modern bank brand project was up-to-date and I was happy with the outcome of the project so I wanted to focus on my personal branding project and see what my lecturer Daniel thought. The initial thought Daniel had when he saw my logo was the fact that it had some similarities to the Apple News logo which I could definitely see in the first version of my logo, I considered these similarities when I was designing the logo which is why I decided to use sharp corners as opposed to rounded corners. I think my logo is more abstract and geometric in comparison to the Apple News logo so I’m not overly worried about this and I think this would be a bit subjective anyway. Another comment Daniel made was the fact that the typeface I had chosen for my personal brand did not fit the style of the logomark as it was too thin, initially I wanted to go with a typeface that was thin and light-weight but after sitting down and getting other opinions I saw where they were coming from – it didn’t fit the brand at all. I still knew what sort of typeface I wanted which was almost an extended grotesque sans-serif typeface but I think I need to go back to the drawing bored in terms of typography to try and find a typeface that suits my personal brand and the logomark a little better.