Assessment Proforma 2024-25

Learning Outcomes

The learning outcomes for this assessment are as follows:

1.  Determine requirements for a new system to meet business needs, demonstrating an appreciation of the external factors influencing systems requirements (such as ethics, legal issues, and design issues).

2.  Analyse and reflect on personal and team performance (formative).

3.  Select, follow, and evaluate software development methodologies

4.  Analyse and reflect on personal and team performance

5.  Evaluate the outcomes of a project taking into consideration appropriate characteristics of software quality

Submission Instructions

The coversheet can be found under ‘Assessment & Feedback’ in the COMSC-ORG- SCHOOL organisation on Learning Central.

All files should be submitted via Learning Central.  The submission page can be found under ‘Assessment & Feedback’ in the CMT313 module on Learning Central.  Your submission should consist of multiple files:

Any deviation from the submission instructions above (including the number and types of files submitted) may result in a reduction in marks for the assessment. Any deviation from the use of the provided template may result in a reduction in marks for the assessment.

If you are unable to submit your work due to technical difficulties, please submit your work viae-mailto comsc-submissions@cardiff.ac.uk and notify the module leader, Dr. Usashi Chatterjee via email chatterjeeu@cardiff.ac.uk .

Assessment Description

This assessment involves developing the requirements, high-level design and implementation for the Automated Assessment Tool (AAT) project. The cohort has been provided with a scenario in a separate document, available on Learning Central. this assessment involves team working, each team member is expected to contribute to the team component and compile an individual portfolio of work consisting of:

1.  User Story & Acceptance Criteria

2.  Non-functional requirements (also known as Software product quality)

3.  Test Cases

4.  Developing the prototype

5.  Video demonstration

6.  Peer & Self-Assessment

Please make sure to cite any references used in the assessment using one of the following referencing styles: Cardiff Harvard or IEEE (one or the other, not both!). The guides and example of how to use these referencing styles are found at:

https://intranet.cardiff.ac.uk/students/study/study-skills/academic-writing-communication- and-referencing/citing-and-referencing-support

PRODUCT DELIVERABLES

Task 1: User Story & Acceptance Criteria

These requirements should be stored in GitLab and you can use them to track the progress of your project next term.

Your team should create a project in the School’s GitLab. The project name should identify your team name: [TeamName]CMT313_Assessment2 (eg: Team12CMT313_Assessment2)

Make sure all your team members and all the members of the teaching team are given Maintainer permission to your project on GitLab. Teaching Team (not limited to) includes Usashi Chatterjee, Annelies Gibson, Rochan Rochan, Sunbul Ahmad, Carl Jones.

Please follow the steps to achieve Task 1:

1.  As a team, develop a top-level Use Case diagram that highlights the most important features and services the system will provide. Each Use Case should be named appropriately from the client’sor user’s point of view. (This task will not be assessed.).

2.  Individual submission: Include the top-level Use Case diagram (from [1]) as a figure in your proforma. Each team member will be responsible for specifying one of the key Use Cases. Every team member should select a different Use Case and  develop it as a User Story with clear acceptance criteria, ensuring that each story is written in away that makes it easily validated. Each User Story, along with its acceptance criteria, should be created as a separate issue in GitLab. All issues must be accessible directly from each issue's page, rather than being available as a downloaded document. The ‘Assessment Proforma’ document must also include a table with working links to the relevant issues in GitLab It should use the following format:

Task 2. Non-functional requirements

1.  As a team, you need to work together to create a complete list of non-functional requirements (these are requirements that describe the quality of the software, such as performance, security, usability, etc.) for your system. This part is a group effort,   and the list should cover all relevant non-functional aspects of your system [Not assessed].

2.  Individual submission: Each team member must submit the full list of non-functional requirements that the team has created. Additionally, each member  needs to select their own top five (5) non-functional requirements from this list.

3.  Justification: For each of the five chosen requirements, the team member should provide a justification explaining why they believe these requirements are important.

4.  Testable Requirements: The selected requirements should be formulated in a way that allows them to be easily tested. This means that the requirements should be   clear, specific, and measurable so that they can be verified through testing.

Note: The five non-functional requirements chosen by each team member do not have to be the same as those chosen by other team members. Each person may have a different perspective on which requirements are the most important.

Task 3. Test Cases (ONE TEST CASE only)

Although this is an individual portfolio the test case handed in by each member of your team MUST be for a different main requirement. You can refer to the AAT Prototype Features and Mark Scheme sheet attached for the main requirements. Each test case should be presented using the test case template supplied in the lecture notes:

•     Create ONE test case that a user can follow to validate that your prototype meets ONE of the main requirements. Each Test Case should have a clear procedure, and input Data that can be followed by a tester to carryout the essential steps for the basic flow and a clear indication of the outputs that your prototype should give in response to the tester’sactions. (You can also provide wireframe diagrams to help them carry out the tests.  These will be used to help determine if you have provided sufficient information in your test case to cover the essential steps for each requirement.)

Task 4. Developing the prototype (700 words limit)

Explain and evaluate the effectiveness of your team whilst developing the prototype. This section should consider the project management and development methodologies your team used alongside team dynamics covered in the module. (Artifacts such as - charts, and boards appropriate to the methodology used can be included in an appendix of 3 pages max)

Task 5. Video & Quality Criteria

Walk through demonstration, including software quality criteria of the elements of the prototype you developed.

Make  a  video   (Maximum   of  5-minutes)  with   narrative  that   runs  through  the  working functionality of the prototype that you developed, This video should:

•   clearly showing how your section integrates with other related sections of the prototype.

•   as part of the demonstration highlight TWO examples of how and where your part of the final product took into consideration software quality criteria (e.g. usability, reliability, integrity, maintainability, testability, and flexibility), identified in Task 2. Non-functional requirements section.

•    highlight   any   extra   features   or   interesting   functionality   that   were   successfully implemented.

Task 6. Peer and Self-assessment (use form provided, max 1 page per student)

•         Looking  back  at  your  experience  having  undertaken  the  team  exercise  for  module

CMT313 Software Engineering during the Autumn and Spring semester, complete a peer/self- assessment for each member of your team including yourself.

Weightings

The following weightings are allocated for the different components of the assessment:

Assessment Criteria

Credit will be awarded using the marking criteria detailed below, and using the following marking bands:

•    High Distinction - 80%+

•   Distinction - 70-79%

•   Merit - 60-69%

•    Pass - 50-59%

•   Marginal Fail - 40-49%

•    Fail - 0-39%