Grading Rubric: RTT Two‑Node vs N‑Node Lab 📊
(Insight Over Correctness)
Total: 100 points
This rubric emphasizes observational quality, reasoning, and reflection.
Students are not graded on system correctness, performance, or stability.
1️⃣ Assumption & Coherence Corridor (20 points)#
What we’re looking for:
A clear, honest statement of what the system believes to be true.
| Level | Description |
|---|---|
| Excellent (18–20) | Assumption is precise, realistic, and clearly time‑dependent. Corridor is well‑defined and measurable. |
| Good (14–17) | Assumption is clear but corridor is loosely defined or partially implicit. |
| Adequate (10–13) | Assumption is vague or corridor is underspecified. |
| Needs Work (0–9) | Assumption is unclear, trivial, or not related to distributed behavior. |
2️⃣ Instrumentation Quality (20 points)#
What we’re looking for:
Observation without interference.
| Level | Description |
|---|---|
| Excellent (18–20) | Instrumentation is minimal, well‑placed, and does not alter system behavior. |
| Good (14–17) | Instrumentation is correct but slightly intrusive or overly broad. |
| Adequate (10–13) | Observation works but mixes in unnecessary logic. |
| Needs Work (0–9) | Instrumentation changes system behavior or enforces outcomes. |
3️⃣ Badge Design & Signal Clarity (20 points)#
What we’re looking for:
Badges that make drift legible.
| Level | Description |
|---|---|
| Excellent (18–20) | Badges clearly communicate what happened, where, when, and why it matters. |
| Good (14–17) | Badges are useful but missing some contextual detail. |
| Adequate (10–13) | Badges exist but are hard to interpret. |
| Needs Work (0–9) | Badges are unclear, inconsistent, or absent. |
4️⃣ Two‑Node vs N‑Node Comparison (20 points)#
What we’re looking for:
Recognition of non‑linear coherence effects.
| Level | Description |
|---|---|
| Excellent (18–20) | Clear, thoughtful comparison showing how scale changes drift behavior. |
| Good (14–17) | Differences are identified but not deeply analyzed. |
| Adequate (10–13) | Comparison is mostly descriptive with limited insight. |
| Needs Work (0–9) | Little or no meaningful comparison. |
5️⃣ Reflection & Insight (20 points)#
What we’re looking for:
Understanding, not solutions.
| Level | Description |
|---|---|
| Excellent (18–20) | Reflection shows deep insight into time, drift, and assumptions. Avoids “fixing” mindset. |
| Good (14–17) | Reflection is thoughtful but leans toward solution‑thinking. |
| Adequate (10–13) | Reflection summarizes results without deeper reasoning. |
| Needs Work (0–9) | Reflection focuses on correctness or performance. |
Bonus: Restraint Award (+5 points)#
Awarded if the student:
- explicitly notes the temptation to “fix” the system
- explains why they chose not to
- demonstrates RTT’s separation of observation and control
What Will Not Affect Your Grade 🚫#
- Whether the system “works”
- Whether drift is eliminated
- Whether consistency is achieved
- Whether performance improves
Failure is acceptable.
Unobserved failure is not.
Instructor Summary#
A strong submission answers:
What changed as the system scaled — and how did time make it visible?
A weak submission answers:
How could we fix this?
This rubric rewards the former.