Evaluation System

Overview

The Evaluation System in RuedaPro UNIPAZ provides a standardized, rubric-based assessment framework for engineering projects. Multiple evaluators can independently score projects across 9 comprehensive criteria, with automatic averaging to calculate final grades.

Evaluation Criteria

9-Point Rubric

Projects are assessed using a detailed rubric with 9 evaluation criteria:

1. Planteamiento del problema (Problem Statement)

Evaluates how clearly and precisely the problem is defined.Scoring Guide:

1.0-2.9: Problem not clearly defined, lacks context and delimitation
3.0-3.9: General description with limited context and partial delimitation
4.0-4.4: Clear, contextualized, and delimited problem with technological need
4.5-5.0: Highly precise formulation with rigorous delimitation and solid technical context

2. Justificación (Justification)

Assesses the importance and relevance of the project.Scoring Guide:

1.0-2.9: Weak or non-existent arguments for project importance
3.0-3.9: General justification with basic relevance arguments
4.0-4.4: Clear justification with academic support and technological relevance
4.5-5.0: Solid and convincing justification showing academic, technological, and social impact

3. Objetivo general (General Objective)

Reviews the main goal’s formulation and alignment with the problem.Scoring Guide:

1.0-2.9: Incorrectly formulated or unrelated to the problem
3.0-3.9: Comprehensible but weak wording or partial alignment
4.0-4.4: Clear, well-written, and aligned with the problem
4.5-5.0: Precise, measurable, perfectly aligned with rigorous technical writing

4. Objetivos específicos (Specific Objectives)

Evaluates the specific goals’ quality and contribution to the general objective.Scoring Guide:

1.0-2.9: Not presented or don’t contribute to general objective, inadequate verbs
3.0-3.9: Present but with weaknesses in wording or logical sequence
4.0-4.4: Clear, measurable, and coherent with general objective
4.5-5.0: Well-structured, measurable, methodologically coherent, defines clear path

5. Estado del arte / Antecedentes (State of the Art)

Assesses the literature review and background research.Scoring Guide:

1.0-2.9: No background or irrelevant, without academic support
3.0-3.9: Basic background with little depth or few sources
4.0-4.4: Adequate review of previous relevant work
4.5-5.0: Critical analysis of scientific and technological background with updated sources

6. Metodología de desarrollo propuesta (Development Methodology)

Reviews the technical development approach.Scoring Guide:

1.0-2.9: Does not define how the technological solution will be built
3.0-3.9: Generally describes the development process
4.0-4.4: Clear methodology with defined phases coherent to project type
4.5-5.0: Rigorous, structured methodology aligned with standards (agile or traditional)

7. Metodología de investigación propuesta (Research Methodology)

Evaluates the research approach and design.Scoring Guide:

1.0-2.9: Does not identify approach or methodological design
3.0-3.9: Basic approach with limited description
4.0-4.4: Adequately defines approach, type, and research design
4.5-5.0: Solid methodological foundation, coherent and fully justified

8. Viabilidad del proyecto (Project Viability)

Assesses technical, economic, and operational feasibility.Scoring Guide:

1.0-2.9: Does not analyze technical, economic, or operational feasibility
3.0-3.9: Superficial viability analysis with little evidence
4.0-4.4: Clear viability in technical and operational terms
4.5-5.0: Comprehensive evaluation of technical, economic, operational, and temporal viability

9. Claridad de la presentación (Presentation Clarity)

Evaluates the quality and professionalism of the presentation.Scoring Guide:

1.0-2.9: Disorganized, unclear exposition without logical structure
3.0-3.9: Comprehensible but with order or clarity failures
4.0-4.4: Clear, organized presentation with good argumentative structure
4.5-5.0: Fluid, professional, well-structured presentation with topic mastery

Scoring Mechanism

Score Range

1.0 - 2.9

No cumpleDoes not meet requirements

3.0 - 3.9

Cumplimiento básicoBasic compliance

4.0 - 4.4

Buen nivelGood level

4.5 - 5.0

ExcelenteExcellent

Each criterion is scored independently on a scale from 1.0 to 5.0 with 0.1 precision:

evaluacionView.js:44

<input type="number" min="1" max="5" step="0.1" class="rubric-input" value="0.0">

Input Validation

The system automatically clamps scores to valid ranges:

evaluacionView.js:213-226

function updateFinalScore() {
    const inputs = document.querySelectorAll('.rubric-input');
    let sum = 0;
    let count = 0;
    inputs.forEach(i => {
        let val = parseFloat(i.value) || 0;
        if(val > 5) { val = 5; i.value = 5; } // Clamp max
        if(val < 0) { val = 0; i.value = 0; } // Clamp min
        sum += val;
        count++;
    });
    const avg = sum / count;
    document.getElementById('final-score').innerText = avg.toFixed(1);
}

Scores are clamped between 0.0 and 5.0, and the minimum submittable score is 1.0 per the validation logic.

Evaluation Interface

Evaluation Header

When a docente starts an evaluation, they see:

evaluacionView.js:10-22

<div class="eval-header">
    <div class="eval-info">
        <h2>Sistema IoT para Invernaderos Inteligentes</h2>
        <p><strong>Categoría:</strong> <span class="badge badge-info">Desarrollo</span></p>
        <p><strong>Integrantes:</strong> Ana López, Luis Perez</p>
        <p><strong>Evaluador:</strong> Prof. Carlos Martínez</p>
        <p><strong>Periodo:</strong> 2026-1</p>
    </div>
    <div class="timer-box">
        <p>Tiempo Restante</p>
        <div class="time" id="eval-timer">15:00</div>
    </div>
</div>

Key Features:

Project name and category
Student team members
Current evaluator name
Academic period
15-minute countdown timer

Countdown Timer

A 15-minute timer helps evaluators manage their time:

evaluacionView.js:189-204

clearInterval(evalTimerInterval);
let timeRemaining = 15 * 60; // 15 mins in seconds
const timerEl = document.getElementById('eval-timer');

evalTimerInterval = setInterval(() => {
    timeRemaining--;
    if(timeRemaining < 0) {
        clearInterval(evalTimerInterval);
        timerEl.style.color = "var(--status-danger)";
        return;
    }
    let m = Math.floor(timeRemaining / 60);
    let s = timeRemaining % 60;
    timerEl.innerText = `${m.toString().padStart(2, '0')}:${s.toString().padStart(2, '0')}`;
}, 1000);

The timer is informational only - evaluators can still submit after time expires. However, the timer turns red when it reaches zero to signal the recommended time limit.

Real-Time Score Calculation

Automatic Average

The final score updates automatically as evaluators enter criterion scores:

evaluacionView.js:207-211

const inputs = document.querySelectorAll('.rubric-input');
inputs.forEach(input => {
    input.addEventListener('input', updateFinalScore);
});

The final score is the arithmetic mean of all 9 criteria:

\text{Final Score} = \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{9} \text{Criterion}_i}{9}

Score Display

evaluacionView.js:121-129

<div class="final-score-box">
    <div>
        <h3>Calificación Final</h3>
        <p>Promedio automático de los criterios evaluados</p>
    </div>
    <div class="score-display" id="final-score">0.0</div>
    <button class="btn btn-primary" onclick="showConfirmModal()">
        <i class="fa-solid fa-paper-plane"></i> Enviar calificación
    </button>
</div>

Observations and Feedback

Feedback Text Area

Evaluators can provide written feedback:

evaluacionView.js:117-119

<label>Observaciones y Retroalimentación:</label>
<textarea class="observations" placeholder="Escriba aquí los comentarios, sugerencias de mejora y observaciones generales sobre el proyecto..."></textarea>

Observations Include:

Strengths and areas for improvement
Specific suggestions for enhancement
General comments on project quality
Constructive criticism

This text is stored in the evaluaciones.observaciones field and can be reviewed later by students and administrators.

Submission Process

Evaluation Workflow

Complete Rubric

Evaluator scores all 9 criteria (minimum 1.0 per criterion)

evaluacionView.js:232-236

if (finalScore < 1.0) {
    alert("Debe calificar todos los criterios. El puntaje mínimo es 1.0");
    return;
}

Add Observations

Optional but recommended feedback text

Click Submit

Evaluator clicks “Enviar calificación” button

Confirmation Modal

System displays confirmation dialog:

evaluacionView.js:238-251

<div class="modal-overlay active" id="confirm-modal">
    <div class="modal-content">
        <i class="fa-solid fa-triangle-exclamation modal-icon"></i>
        <h3>Confirmar Envío</h3>
        <p>¿Está seguro de enviar esta calificación? Una vez enviada <strong>no podrá modificarse</strong>.</p>
        <div class="modal-actions">
            <button onclick="closeModal()">Cancelar</button>
            <button onclick="submitEvaluation()">Sí, enviar</button>
        </div>
    </div>
</div>

Database Insertion

System stores evaluation data:

evaluacionView.js:273-296

// Collect rubric data
const rubricData = [];
inputs.forEach((input, index) => {
    rubricData.push({
        criterioIndex: index + 1,
        puntaje: parseFloat(input.value) || 0
    });
});

const finalScore = parseFloat(document.getElementById('final-score').innerText);
const observaciones = document.querySelector('.observations').value.trim();

// Insert evaluation record
const { error: evalErr } = await supabaseClient
    .from('evaluaciones')
    .insert([{
        proyecto_id: currentEvaluationProjectId,
        evaluador_id: currentProfile.id,
        puntaje_final: finalScore,
        observaciones: observaciones,
        rubrica_detalle: rubricData
    }]);

Check Completion Status

System checks if ALL assigned evaluators have submitted evaluations

evaluacionView.js:300-318

// Count assigned evaluators
const { data: assignedData } = await supabaseClient
    .from('proyecto_evaluadores')
    .select('evaluador_id', { count: 'exact' })
    .eq('proyecto_id', currentEvaluationProjectId);
const totalEvaluators = assignedData.length;

// Count completed evaluations
const { data: evalsData } = await supabaseClient
    .from('evaluaciones')
    .select('evaluador_id', { count: 'exact' })
    .eq('proyecto_id', currentEvaluationProjectId);
const totalEvaluated = evalsData.length;

Update Project Status

If all evaluators have submitted, project status changes to “Evaluado”:

evaluacionView.js:320-327

if (totalEvaluated >= totalEvaluators && totalEvaluators > 0) {
    const { error: updErr } = await supabaseClient
        .from('proyectos')
        .update({ estado: 'Evaluado' })
        .eq('id', currentEvaluationProjectId);
}

Success Confirmation

Evaluator sees success message and returns to dashboard

evaluacionView.js:329-334

clearInterval(evalTimerInterval);
closeModal();
currentEvaluationProjectId = null;
alert("¡Evaluación enviada con éxito!");
navigateTo('dashboard-docente');

Important: Once an evaluation is submitted, it cannot be modified. This ensures fairness and prevents score manipulation after submission.

Multiple Evaluators

Independent Evaluations

Each assigned evaluator:

Completes the rubric independently
Cannot see other evaluators’ scores
Submits their own observations
Has their submission stored separately

Final Score Calculation

When a project has multiple evaluators, the final project score is calculated as:

\text{Project Final Score} = \frac{\sum_{j=1}^{n} \text{Evaluator}_j\text{Score}}{n}

Where

n

is the number of evaluators who have submitted evaluations.

resultsView.js:96-100

let avgScore = 0;
if (p.evaluaciones && p.evaluaciones.length > 0) {
    const totalScore = p.evaluaciones.reduce((acc, curr) => acc + parseFloat(curr.puntaje_final || 0), 0);
    avgScore = parseFloat((totalScore / p.evaluaciones.length).toFixed(1));
}

This averaging system ensures fair grading even if evaluators have slightly different scoring tendencies.

Evaluation Data Structure

Database Schema

evaluaciones table:

Field	Type	Description
`id`	UUID	Unique evaluation identifier
`proyecto_id`	UUID	Foreign key to proyectos table
`evaluador_id`	UUID	Foreign key to perfiles table (docente)
`puntaje_final`	Float	Average score (1.0-5.0)
`observaciones`	Text	Evaluator’s written feedback
`rubrica_detalle`	JSONB	Array of criterion scores
`created_at`	Timestamp	Submission timestamp

rubrica_detalle structure:

[
  { "criterioIndex": 1, "puntaje": 4.5 },
  { "criterioIndex": 2, "puntaje": 4.2 },
  { "criterioIndex": 3, "puntaje": 4.0 },
  { "criterioIndex": 4, "puntaje": 4.3 },
  { "criterioIndex": 5, "puntaje": 3.8 },
  { "criterioIndex": 6, "puntaje": 4.1 },
  { "criterioIndex": 7, "puntaje": 3.9 },
  { "criterioIndex": 8, "puntaje": 4.4 },
  { "criterioIndex": 9, "puntaje": 4.6 }
]

This structure preserves individual criterion scores for potential detailed analysis.

Error Handling

Validation Errors

Incomplete Rubric

If final score is below 1.0:

"Debe calificar todos los criterios. El puntaje mínimo es 1.0"

Session Errors

If user is not authenticated or project ID is missing:

"Error de sesión o proyecto no seleccionado."

Database Errors

If evaluation insertion fails:

"Ocurrió un error al enviar la calificación."

Error details are logged to console for debugging.

Best Practices

Fair Evaluation

Read full rubric descriptors before scoring
Use the full 1.0-5.0 scale range
Be consistent across criteria
Provide constructive feedback

Detailed Feedback

Write specific, actionable observations
Highlight both strengths and improvements
Reference specific project aspects
Keep feedback professional and constructive

Project Management

See how projects are created and assigned to evaluators

Results Gallery

View how evaluated projects appear in public rankings

Get Started

User Guides

Features

Deployment

Overview

Evaluation Criteria

9-Point Rubric

Scoring Mechanism

Score Range

1.0 - 2.9

3.0 - 3.9

4.0 - 4.4

4.5 - 5.0

Input Validation

Evaluation Interface

Evaluation Header

Countdown Timer

Real-Time Score Calculation

Automatic Average

Score Display

Observations and Feedback

Feedback Text Area

Submission Process

Evaluation Workflow

Multiple Evaluators

Independent Evaluations

Final Score Calculation

Evaluation Data Structure

Database Schema

Error Handling

Validation Errors

Best Practices

Fair Evaluation

Detailed Feedback

Project Management

Results Gallery

Build docs developers (and LLMs) love

Get Started

User Guides

Features

Deployment

Documentation Index

​Overview

​Evaluation Criteria

​9-Point Rubric

​Scoring Mechanism

​Score Range

1.0 - 2.9

3.0 - 3.9

4.0 - 4.4

4.5 - 5.0

​Input Validation

​Evaluation Interface

​Evaluation Header

​Countdown Timer

​Real-Time Score Calculation

​Automatic Average

​Score Display

​Observations and Feedback

​Feedback Text Area

​Submission Process

​Evaluation Workflow

​Multiple Evaluators

​Independent Evaluations

​Final Score Calculation

​Evaluation Data Structure

​Database Schema

​Error Handling

​Validation Errors

​Best Practices

Fair Evaluation

Detailed Feedback

​Related Features

Project Management

Results Gallery

Build docs developers (and LLMs) love

Overview

Evaluation Criteria

9-Point Rubric

Scoring Mechanism

Score Range

Input Validation

Evaluation Interface

Evaluation Header

Countdown Timer

Real-Time Score Calculation

Automatic Average

Score Display

Observations and Feedback

Feedback Text Area

Submission Process

Evaluation Workflow

Multiple Evaluators

Independent Evaluations

Final Score Calculation

Evaluation Data Structure

Database Schema

Error Handling

Validation Errors

Best Practices

Related Features