Evaluation — Creativity Techniques
Assessment weights, five deliverables, and studio evidence bands for Creativity Techniques (UEM Creative Campus).
Evaluation
Official weights come from the UEM guía (Design degree). Studio choreography and intra-rubrics live in How to Pass and the parallel session contract. This page stays contract-honest: weights unchanged; deliverables map onto them.
Final event theme: What is creativity for you?
Official weights (presencial)
| Instrument | Weight |
|---|---|
| Knowledge tests (Pruebas de conocimiento) | 60% |
| Delivery and/or presentation of work | 40% |
Session rhythm (every ordinary class)
- Analysis strip — sessions 1–2: professor models analysis; from session 3: 2 students × 15 min defence
- Masterclass — ideas + images
- Lab (Portfolio) — exercises + debates → portfolio index
- Workshop (Deliverable) — time on the next graded deliverable
Lab ≠ Workshop. Lab leaves traces; Workshop advances deliverables.
Five deliverables
| ID | Task | Maps toward |
|---|---|---|
| D1 Analysis | 15 min defence · slideshow support · 2 students/session from s3 | Delivery / presentation |
| D2 Transposition | Free format · discursive circulation / palimpsest (critical review) | Delivery / presentation |
| D3 Atrium | Tech script + live defence · What is creativity for you? | Delivery / presentation |
| D4 Portfolio index | Lab exercises + D1–D3 in one index | Both (process evidence) |
| D5 Exam | Test/questionnaire + final self-review of portfolio process | Knowledge tests (+ process) |
D1 intra-rubric
| Criterion | Share |
|---|---|
| Presentation | 70% |
| Deliverable support (slideshow) | 20% |
| Peer debate | 10% |
0–10 compatibility bands
| Band | Score | Studio evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Insufficient | 0–4.9 | Missing deliverable, undeclared AI help, no process trail, or cannot explain the work |
| Minimum pass | 5–6.9 | Required artefacts present with basic method explanation |
| Competent | 7–8.9 | Named techniques, coherent selection criteria, defensible iteration |
| Excellent | 9–10 | Reproducible method trail, precise critique, strong authorship under constraint |
Shared AI and oral defence
AI declarations, critiques, and oral defences use the same bands. Polish alone is not enough: students must show what they made, which techniques they used, what they discarded, and what they can still explain without the tool present.