Object-oriented Development and Testing

Hello, dear friend, you can consult us at any time if you have any questions, add WeChat: daixieit

Assessment Details and Brief

Module Title:

Object-oriented Development and Testing

Module Code:

 

Author(s)/Marker(s) of Assignment

 

Assignment No:

1

Assignment Title:

Reflective Report

Percentage contribution to module mark:

50%

Weighting of components within this assessment:

Implementation   80%

Report                    20%

Module learning outcome(s) assessed:

LO1: Produce appropriate and well-structured object oriented software designs for problems

LO2: Understand and be able to apply industry-standard tools to support software development process

 

The assessment is marked anonymously

No

Assessment Brief and Assessment Criteria:

Develop a software project using the provided codebase.

 

Assessment marking criteria/rubric:

See below

 

Date of issue:

 

Sem 1 week 1

Deadline for submission:

 

 

Method of submission:

e-submission (online via MyStudies)

 

Date feedback will be provided

Within 20 working days of submission

 

 


1. Requirements

If one or more requirements are not met, the submission will not be accepted or will be penalised.

 

1. Develop a software solution by improving the target system codebase provided as part of the assessment.

· Link to existing codebase available from Assessment and Marks on MyStudies. You must use the provided codebase.

2. Produce a technical report that describes the design, management, and development of your addition to the project. Given page length is guidance, not a limit.

· Title page

· Introduction (~0.5 page): the idea for the improvements.

· Development and Management (~4 pages): highlight any technically complex implementation details and how you approached them. Justify the design and implementation choices that were made during the development. Include developed code screenshots that are clearly readable and clearly describe the purpose of the additions.

· Critical Review (~1 page): identify three reasons why the design, management and implementation of the project are good. Further identify three reasons where the implementation could be improved and a summary of how the improvements could be made.

· Conclusion (~0.5 page): what are the main take-away messages – what are the key concepts that you learned during the development.

· Estimated grade: your self-assessed grade based on assessment criteria below. Example: Development: A, Management: A, Report: B

· References: include references to existing articles (whether books, research papers, online blogs or educational videos). Clearly identify and reference any 3rd party tutorials / assets / code used and provide their source and license. Failure to do this is likely to lead to serious consequences, including a 0 mark. 

2. Deliverables

1. Technical report in PDF format.

3. Submission procedure:

The report must be submitted through the Assessment & Marks area of this module on MyStudies as a single PDF file.

 

Note: Students are allowed to submit work within two weeks of the published deadline (or agreed extension date), or the last working day immediately prior to the feedback date if this is shorter than two weeks. Any work submitted later than 15:00 of the date shown on the front page without an approved extension will be treated as late and capped at the pass mark.

 

By submitting your work you are agreeing to the following statements:

 

- A copy of your coursework submission may be made as part of the University of Brighton’s and School of Computing, Engineering & Mathematics procedures which aim to monitor and improve quality of teaching.  You should refer to your student handbook for details.

- All work submitted must be your own (or your team’s for an assignment which has been specified as a group submission) and all sources which do not fall into that category must be correctly attributed. The markers may submit the whole set of submissions to the JISC Plagiarism Detection Service.

 

Link to coursework codebase: https://github.com/AlmasB/CI553-CW

 

Assessment Criteria

 

Unsatisfactory

(E/F 0-39%)

Adequate

(D 40-49%)

Sound

(C 50-59%)

Good

(B 60-69%)

Excellent

(A 70-79%)

Outstanding

(A+/A* 80-100%)

Development:

(60%) (LO1,2)

No, minimal, incorrect

understanding of the

development

process.

Basic understanding

of the development

process, and

application to a

simple development

task in a target

system.

Sound understanding

of most elements of

the development

process, and the

appropriate

application to one or

more development

tasks in a target

system.

Good

understanding of all

or most elements of

the development

process, and

appropriate

application to

achieve one or more

development goals in

a target system.

Excellent understanding of the

Development process, and the

application of all or most elements to achieve an appropriate advanced

development goal in a target system.

Exceptional software

development skills

going beyond the

requirements of a

particular target

system.

Management:

(20%) (LO1,2) 

No, minimal,

incorrect

understanding of

project management

and delivery.

Basic understanding

of project

management and

delivery, and simple

practical application

of some aspects.

Sound understanding

of most aspects of

project management

and delivery, and

appropriate practical

application of two or

more aspects.

Good

understanding of

most aspects of

project management

and delivery, and

effective application

to support one or

more development

goals.

Excellent

understanding of

most aspects of

project management

and delivery,

effectively used to

achieve an advanced

development goal.

Exceptional

understanding and

use of project

management and

delivery.

Report

(20%) (LO2)

Completely unsatisfactory and weak in all sections, or no submission.

A poorly structured report with vague language, may require a lot of polishing. Covers key sections but to a poor extent. Weak response to technical content.

A well-structured report, very few typos. Covers most sections but to a poor extent. A sound response to technical content.

A clearly structured well-written report. Covers all sections to a reasonable extent. A good depth and breadth of knowledge are shown.

Also uses precise terminology and concise in its narrative. Covers all sections, providing extensive links to other sources of information. Demonstrates clear understanding of the technical details.

Also a deep understanding of the problem/solution in the domain is shown, with alternative solutions discussed. Sophisticated critical reflection. Professionally looking, clearly written report.

 


2022-12-28