RTM (Tuesday) — Summary of Performance and Common Writing Issues
This page is published to support learning and transparency. The goal is not only to show scores, but to help every student identify what worked, what didn’t, and how to improve the quality of academic writing and project-based analysis in future assignments.
Below is the final recap table (RTM 1–RTM 3 and Total Score). After the table, you will find a general evaluation of recurring strengths and mistakes found across the submitted reports/projects.
Final Recap Table (RTM 1–RTM 3 + Total)
| No | NIM | Nama | RTM 1 | RTM 2 | RTM 3 | Nilai Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 64250070 | NABILLA MARSYA | 86,45 | 86,00 | 88,00 | 86,82 |
| 2 | 64250381 | FANI ANGRRAINI SAFITRI ANINGSIH | 84,85 | 88,00 | 78,00 | 83,62 |
| 3 | 64250387 | KHALIZA FATHIA ACHMAD | 82,15 | 0,00 | 90,00 | 57,38 |
| 4 | 64250594 | MUAMAR NABIL DWI SAPUTRO | 78,20 | 82,00 | 0,00 | 53,40 |
| 5 | 64250795 | ALSYAFHAN DANI RAMADHAN | 81,85 | 86,00 | 88,00 | 85,28 |
| 6 | 64250885 | NAJWA AULIA | 84,80 | 88,00 | 88,00 | 86,93 |
| 7 | 64250907 | ASYILA NAILA ALIFAH | 85,45 | 85,00 | 92,00 | 87,48 |
| 8 | 64250919 | NADIA SAFIRA | 84,80 | 88,00 | 88,00 | 86,93 |
| 9 | 64250926 | NABILA SALSABILA | 82,15 | 0,00 | 90,00 | 57,38 |
| 10 | 64250972 | MUHAMMAD OKAN KHADAFI PUNY | 0,00 | 82,00 | 85,00 | 55,67 |
| 11 | 64251004 | MARGARETA VERONIKA SIMALANGO | 86,45 | 86,00 | 88,00 | 86,82 |
| 12 | 64251075 | MUHAMMAD RAHMAN HIDAYAT | 83,05 | 86,00 | 88,00 | 85,68 |
| 13 | 64251118 | MUHAMMAD RIDHO NAUFAL | 0,00 | 75,00 | 70,00 | 48,33 |
| 14 | 64251125 | ANDINNA DESWITA | 83,90 | 80,00 | 86,00 | 83,30 |
| 15 | 64251158 | FAUZIAH NUR MUTMAINAH | 83,05 | 0,00 | 0,00 | 27,68 |
| 16 | 64251162 | CUT DESI | 81,85 | 0,00 | 84,00 | 55,28 |
| 17 | 64251196 | AZAHRA NANDA AULIA | 83,05 | 0,00 | 0,00 | 27,68 |
| 18 | 64251205 | VITA TAMALA PUTRI | 84,85 | 88,00 | 78,00 | 83,62 |
| 19 | 64251277 | YOSUA NATANAEL PARDOMUAN SIMBOLON | 86,45 | 86,00 | 88,00 | 86,82 |
| 20 | 64251322 | JEANNY OLIVIA | 85,45 | 85,00 | 92,00 | 87,48 |
| 21 | 64251326 | SYABRINA RAISYA KUMALA DEWA | 81,85 | 0,00 | 84,00 | 55,28 |
| 22 | 64251374 | JENSEN ALDIANO | 79,95 | 75,00 | 70,00 | 74,98 |
| 23 | 64251424 | ELGA ARUM ANJANI | 82,15 | 0,00 | 90,00 | 57,38 |
| 24 | 64251497 | MARSHANDA | 83,90 | 80,00 | 86,00 | 83,30 |
| 25 | 64251552 | YUSUF APRILIANO P SIHITE | 78,20 | 82,00 | 0,00 | 53,40 |
| 26 | 64251588 | INTAN NURAENI | 84,80 | 88,00 | 88,00 | 86,93 |
| 27 | 64251590 | RAJIB MUHAMMAD LATIF | 79,95 | 75,00 | 70,00 | 74,98 |
| 28 | 64251593 | FAARUQ KHODAFI | 83,05 | 82,00 | 85,00 | 83,35 |
| 29 | 64251642 | NAYLA TSABITHA DAMAYANTI | 84,85 | 88,00 | 78,00 | 83,62 |
| 30 | 64251743 | SASKIA PUTRI | 83,90 | 80,00 | 86,00 | 83,30 |
| 31 | 64251838 | RICO DAMARA | 0,00 | 82,00 | 85,00 | 55,67 |
| 32 | 64252032 | NGISOMUDIN | 78,20 | 0,00 | 84,00 | 54,07 |
| 33 | 64252088 | SAHLA NABIL | 85,45 | 85,00 | 92,00 | 87,48 |
| 34 | 64252109 | FARHAN HIDAYAT | 83,05 | 86,00 | 88,00 | 85,68 |
General Evaluation (What the Projects Did Well & What Must Improve)
1) Strengths seen in higher-scoring projects
Projects with consistently high scores usually show these features:
- Clear problem framing: the problem is specific (who/where/what process), not generic.
- Structured analysis: ideas follow a logical flow (context → evidence/data → alternatives → decision → conclusion).
- Measurable outputs: the report includes KPI/targets, not only opinions.
- Actionable closing: conclusions include steps, timeline, responsibilities, and risks/mitigation, not just summaries.
2) Most common mistakes that lowered scores
Across many submissions, the same issues appeared repeatedly:
- Too narrative / descriptive: reports explain the topic well but don’t translate it into measurable indicators or a decision framework.
- Weak evidence: claims are written without strong sources, or sources are not clearly cited.
- Inconsistent format: headings, tables/figures, citations, and references are not standardized (often mixed styles).
- Placeholders / unfinished parts: some sections still contain “template text,” incomplete tables, or missing attachments.
- Missing submission impacts: a “0” in one RTM drastically reduces the total score, regardless of good performance in other tasks.
3) How to learn from this (simple checklist for next projects)
Before submitting, check these six items:
- Is the problem statement specific (organization + process + symptoms)?
- Did you include data or evidence (even a small dataset) to support the argument?
- Are there KPI + target values + period (not only “increase/ improve”)?
- Are the recommendations operational (steps + timeline + risks/mitigation)?
- Are citations and references consistent in one style (APA/IEEE/Vancouver)?
- Does the file look final (no placeholders, clean formatting, complete sections)?
Note for Students
This recap is intended as a learning tool. Use your score and this general feedback to identify one priority improvement for your next writing/project (e.g., KPI clarity, evidence quality, formatting consistency, or conclusion strength).