Skills Video Scoresheet

Judges will review the teams' required skills video(s) outlining approach and know-how of one of the following technical topics: 1) Hull Design, 2) Power Management, 3) Propulsion System, 4) Sensor Optimization. Teams were required to submit one video on one topic or had the option to submit two videos each on separate topics. 

The video may or may not include graphics, vehicle performance and/or simulation. These elements themselves will not affect scoring but may be utilized as tools. This visual effort is meant to showcase the team’s approach, decision and challenges while evaluating ability to communicate effectively.

Question Title

* What is your first and last name?

Question Title

* What RoboSub team are you judging?

Question Title

* What topic did the team choose for their Skills Video?

TECHNICAL REVIEW

Question Title

* Team Introduction
(5 points)

Rubric:

Team members who are presenting on the video, should introduce themselves (name, academic discipline and level of education) and highlight their role and relevance to the topic. All team members are not required to make an appearance.

Excellent (3-5): Team members who are presenting on the video, should introduce themselves (name, academic discipline and level of education) and highlight their role and relevance to the topic. All team members are not required to make an appearance.

Good (1-2): Team members presenting on the video have introduced themselves (names only).

Question Title

* Judge Comments for the Team
Team Introduction

Question Title

* Sub-System Overview
(15 points)

Rubric:

This section should contain a brief overview of the Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) sub-system requirements of the topic selected. Topics allowed: 1) Hull Design, 2) Power Management, 3) Propulsion System, 4) Sensor Optimization.

Excellent (11-15): Clear and Concise overview of the Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) sub-system requirements of the topic selected. Includes explanation of the role/function of the sub-system in the overall AUV and the major requirements needed for the sub-system to perform.
 
Good (6-10): Clear and concise overview of the sub-system is provided, but no requirements discussed.

Fair (1-5): General overview of the sub-system is provided.

Question Title

* Judge Comments for the Team
Sub-System Overview

Question Title

* Competition Strategy
(30 points)

Rubric:

Teams should discuss their competition strategy, based on the topic they have selected. This section should also discuss rationales for design and assign a confidence rating (for successful completion) for tasks the team is planning on attempting.

Exceptional (21-30): Detailed competition strategy clearly exhibits a comprehensive design approach. Teams should discuss their competition strategy, based on the topic they have selected. This section should also discuss rationales for design and assign a confidence rating (for successful completion) for tasks the team is planning on attempting.

Excellent (11-20): Exhibits a comprehensive design approach. Design decisions/rationale are briefly discussed (as they pertain to sub-system and overall vehicle performance).
 
Good (6-10): Shows evidence of a comprehensive design approach. Design decisions/rationale is evident but not discussed.

Fair (1-5): Competition strategy is briefly discussed.

Question Title

* Judge Comments for the Team
Competition Strategy

Question Title

* Development Testing
(30 points)

Each team has experienced different ripples of COVID-19.
Teams may or may not have been able to physically test their vehicles.
The intent of this category is to award points for testing efforts planned, but may also include implementation.

Rubric:

Realizing that teams may or may not have been able to test their vehicles, this section should address the efforts that teams have safely exercised to continue development of their system. Describe the types of testing efforts planned and/or implemented during your development cycle (component, software, and simulation).

Exceptional (21-30): Clearly and concisely addresses the efforts that teams have safely exercised to continue development of their system - virtually or in-person. Outlines the iterative design process including testing plan, implementation (or approach and timeline for implementation), test evaluation and analysis. Testing could include component, software, and simulation.

Excellent (11-20): Exhibits a development testing plan and approach. Iterative design process related to testing plan and timeline are discussed as it pertains to the sub-system and overall vehicle performance.

Good (6-10): Shows evidence of a development testing plan and approach. Iterative design process related to testing plan and timeline are discussed as it pertains to the sub-system and overall vehicle performance.

Fair (1-5): Testing is briefly discussed.

Question Title

* Judge Comments for the Team
Development Testing

NON-TECHNICAL REVIEW

Question Title

* Video Format
(5 points)

Rubric:

Video is no more than eleven (11) minutes in length and includes all required topics: Introduction, Sub-system overview, Competition strategy, Development and testing.
 
Excellent (3-5): Video length is no more than eleven (11) minutes and includes all required topics.

Good (1-2): Video is more than eleven (11) minutes in length and includes all required topics: Introduction, Sub-system Overview, Competition Strategy, Development and Testing.

Question Title

* Judge Comments for the Team
Video Format

Question Title

* Visual Quality
(30 points)

Rubric:

Through use of visuals and text, video showcases different aspects of sub-system development in a compelling, cohesive way.

Excellent (21-30): Through use of both visuals/images and text, video clearly showcases different aspects of sub-system development in a compelling, cohesive way. 

Good (11-20): Use of visuals/images and/or text showcases aspects of the system development factually and effectively.

Fair (1-10): Use of visuals/images and text does not convey the sub-system development or does not accurately convey or match information being visually displayed.

Question Title

* Judge Comments for the Team
Visual Quality 

Question Title

* Effective Communication
(45 points)

Rubric:

Strong communication skills are critical to bringing projects to life and garnering support. Whether presenting in person or through video, ideas must be delivered in a clear and convincing manner. Project supporters, such as supervisors, sponsors, or advisors must understand ideas, and be convinced of their potential. Successful teams will use the video medium to effectively communicate the sub-system they chose and the associated competition strategy and testing plan for that sub-system.

Exceptional (31-45): Effective and compelling use of video medium to communicate the sub-system chosen and the associated competition strategy and testing plan for sub-system selected. Easy for non-technical viewer to understand and support. [You would fund this project]

Excellent (21-30): Exhibits moderately compelling use of video medium to communicate the sub-system chosen, competition strategy and testing plan. Strong potential, moderately compelling, mostly understandable to non-technical viewer. [You would strongly consider funding this project]

Good (11-20): Exhibits some ability to use video to attempt to convey sub-system chosen, competition strategy and test plan. Difficult for non-technical viewer to understand OR was not compelling.

Fair (1-10): Poorly used video medium to convey information about the chosen sub-system. Information was as not clearly understood and was not compelling.

Question Title

* Judge Comments for the Team
Effective Communication

____________________________________________________________________________________

Question Title

* Any additional comments for the team?

These comments will be shared with the RoboSub team you are evaluating.

Question Title

* Any comments for RoboNation?

These comments will only be shared with RoboNation.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Thank you for your evaluation!

Ready to submit? Click the blue button below.

All evaluations are due on July 25.

T