Data Structures代做 | 代做Project | Assignment | 英文report代写 – 这是一个数据结构方面的报告代写任务
CM2305 – Requirements Presentation
This assignment is worth 40% of the total marks available for this module. The penalty for late or non-submission is an award of zero marks. Marks will be awarded to the individual student based on the quality of the group report, the individual report and their contribution. Extenuating circumstances submitted for the autumn term project period will be considered pro-rata for the contribution weighting.
Assignment
The interim group report must describe a significant step towards solving the software development problem set by the client. It must fully specify the software problem being solved and contain a discussion of legal, social ethical and professional issues relevant to the problem. It must contain a description of the approach the group takes to solve the problem and outline the software development process the group wishes to adopt with a work plan and risk assessment for the rest of the project. It must clearly state the deliverables for the final group report. Make sure your report addresses the client’s problem and considers any input from the discussions and requests from the client, and further insights you gained about the problem.
The report must in particular address the following, based on the work to date:
An introduction explaining the problem you are trying to solve, with a brief motivation why this is an interesting problem and an overview of the report's
contents, in general terms. Make sure you justify that you made a significant step towards solving the problem in this report.
Multiple sections detailing your work on the project since its start. The sections and their contents depend on your development methodology, the work
you have actually undertaken, the project itself, and discussions with the client. You should describe, as far as addressed to date, the requirements,
software architecture, detailed design, implementation, and testing. Make sure that this is a coherent document guiding the readers through its contents,
enabling them to follow your reasoning (do not simply provide a collection of individual, quite unconnected pieces). These sections may cover some of the
following points:
System requirements with associated testable acceptance criteria and relevant quality factors.
A description of the system architecture and design. Use suitable diagrams, based on appropriate standards such as UML, that clearly expose the
static structure of the system (e.g. class and component diagrams or EAR diagrams) and its dynamic behaviour (e.g. sequence or other interaction
diagrams, use cases) on various detail levels (from the high-level architecture to the detailed design).
Employ mock-ups or other non-functional prototypes to describe the user interfaces as needed.
Core implementation tasks may be described using pseudo code, activity or state machine diagrams.
Code already implemented and relevant to the report should be provided in an attached single zip file and discussed as suitable in the report.
For testing explain the approaches used to ensure good quality code is developed. Clearly describe how the software is being tested from a user's as
well as a developer's perspective. Include test reports and discuss what of the system is working and where issues still have to be addressed.
A justification and evaluation of the presented work. Ensure your report contains justifications for the decisions you have made to solve the problem.
Clearly state any choices and assumptions that were made. Identify strengths as well as limitations of your suggested solution. Your report should also
highlight where you have considered or have been influenced by legal, social, ethical and professional issues.
A brief description of the software development process the group adopts and a workplan for the remaining time of the project (the future, not the past!)
until the final report is due, with clear milestones and deliverables. Include a risk assessment of key project risks and mitigation plans. The plan should be
sufficiently detailed such that it is clear which tasks individual members will be working on when. The workplan should be feasible given limitations on
available resources and time, etc.
The group report must have no more than 12,000 words, with additional supporting material in the appendices, if necessary. Note that content is more important than word count and a concise report is often better.
The individual report must discuss your contribution to the group report and to the overall group work. You must show that you contributed to the group work, which will be determined via the individual report and the contribution monitoring, conducted by the supervisor. Discuss what tasks you have performed and provide evidence of your work (you may refer to the group report for the actual work/results). Discuss how you approached these tasks and how you interacted with other members, both in sharing your results and in organising the team’s activities. Consider how well your existing skills were utilised and what new skills you have learned. Then reflect on your overall performance and role in the team and suggest what went well and what changes you will be making to improve your performance. You may also reflect on how your perspective and approach changed over time and adapted to improve your work. The individual report is expected to have no more than 2,000 words.
Given that you are expected to work about 100h in total for 10 credits and this is a 20credit, two semester module, the expected total individual work on the group project is about 8h per week during term time. Contribution is measured in hours and recorded at the weekly group meetings with supervisor (of course there can be more as needed without supervisor). At each group meeting the supervisor will record the tasks you have completed, with evidence that they are indeed complete and agree on an amount of hours this is worth with the group. Your contribution is measured with respect to the average hours and attendance as described below to determine a weighting factor for the group mark.
Learning Outcomes Addressed
Demonstrate an appreciation of the problems involved in tackling a challenging project as part of a team, as a result of the experience gained in this
module.
Understand common approaches towards software development from waterfall to iterative and agile methods.
Show awareness of legal, social, ethical and professional issues in software development.
Assess benefits, risks and quality factors appropriate to specifying, designing and implementing a software system.
Use common software development tools aimed at different development approaches and stages.
Design a software system to meet given requirements.
Reflect on their experience of working in a team and their individual contributions to the project.
Criteria for Assessment
Your client will mark your group report and your supervisor will mark the individual report and assess your contribution, according to the following criteria:
Group report (80% of individual mark, weighted by contribution)
Progress towards solving the software development problem, considering the following as suitable for the work undertaken to date under the
chosen development methodology, the problem to be addressed and the client requirements. (40% of group report mark)
Systems requirements: Coherency and completeness of functional and non-functional systems requirements with clear justification or
derivation; identification of system scope and boundaries with clear declaration of any assumptions made; testable acceptance criteria are
associated with the requirements.
Software architecture and data design: clear overall structure of the system, suitable decomposition, extensible and modular weakly-
coupled, cohesive components, identification of essential data aspects.
Detailed design: clear component interaction/interfaces and internal structure. All significant interactions included to meet requirements,
appropriate and effective interface designs to cover obvious and non-obvious interactions between components and with the user.
Implementation: appropriate and effective Data Structures and algorithms for interesting functionalities; well structured, clean easy to
maintain and well readable code; description of functionalities implemented, suitable to solve the problem.
Testing: clear concise test plan and test cases; suitable test/use cases which can show that the code is correct and the software executes
the required functionality well; evidence showing how well code passes the tests.
Evidence that the work has been implemented as a team showing efforts of how to integrate the components.
Overall report shows that clear progress towards understanding the problem and finding a solution has been made and any changes to the
project have been clearly justified and suitably addressed.
Justification and evaluation of work executed for the project. (40% of group report mark)
Clear justifications for any decisions are given, indicating choices made with justification and clearly stated assumptions.
Identification of strengths and limitations of the proposed solutions, based on clear acceptance criteria and suitable evidence.
Consideration of legal, social, ethical and professional issues.
Work plan (10% of group report mark)
Clear time plan with individual tasks for the project, covering the remaining project.
Clear statement of milestones and deliverables for future reports and final product.
Sound justification of feasibility of work plan with a risk assessment and risk mitigation.
Report Writing (10% of group report mark)
Presentation of report, including writing style, grammar, use of figures.
Clearly structured report.
Use and application of relevant literature and other resources with clear references.
Individual Report (20% of individual mark)
Role in the team (50% of individual report mark).
Learning and Professional Development (50% of individual report mark).
Contribution to the group report and project work with evidence in the individual report and from the contribution monitoring data (to determine
percentage of group report mark making up 80% of the individual mark).
All main criteria carry the weight as indicated above for your total mark and will be evaluated on the following scale:
Excellent (1st, 70-100%): rigorous, methodical, analytic, content meets all requirements of the work, very few errors/omissions.
Good (2.1, 60-69%): competent, reasoned, coherent, content very sound, few errors/omissions.
Fair (2.2, 50-59%): satisfactory, relevant, content meets many of the required elements, some errors/omissions.
Pass (3rd, 40-49%): Passable, basic relevant content, weaknesses in execution, errors/omissions.
Fail (Fail, 1-39%): not passable, evident weaknesses, gaps in content, evident errors/omissions.
None (0%): indicates that the topic has not at all been covered.
Feedback and Suggestion for Future Learning
Feedback on your coursework will address the above criteria. Feedback and marks will be returned by the 11th of January 2019 via learning central to every individual student covering the group as well as the individual report and the contribution. You will see this feedback and your individual mark as part of the individual report feedback, not he group report.
Client and supervisor will provide formal feedback about your reports explaining any concerns they may have and their expectations regarding the aims and objectives and deliverables. All reports and marks will be moderated by the module leader. You will further get informal feedback from your supervisor in your meetings and further comments will be provided by the client in a meeting, to be arranged by the group, after the report submission.
Feedback from this assignment will be useful for the final report and any future project work, such as the final year project.
Feedback Instructions for the Client
Complete the feedback form below by replacing the @XXX@ markers with appropriate comments, scale rating and marks. Provide a rating from the scale above for each sub-criterion of the main criteria and justify these in the comments section. All marks should be in rounded to integer percentages.
Note, complete the report in plain text ASCII or UTF8 encoding. Do not change the format to anything else or the report will be returned to you. You may use markdown formatting (https://github.com/adam-p/markdown-here/wiki/Markdown-Cheatsheet).
Return the completed feedback report (without the coursework instructions in the previous section) by e-mail to [email protected] with the subject "CM2305 IGR Group @NUMBER@" (preferably signed with a valid GnuPG key and ideally encrypted with GnuPG; see https://langbein.org/contact/).
Copies of the contents of this proforma will be copied to the group as part of the formal feedback to this assessment.
CM2305 Interim Group Report Client Feedback Group: @NUMBER@
Progress towards Solving the Software Development Problem (40%)
The report overall shows clear progress toward understanding the problem and finding a solution and provides a coherent and full set of systems
requirements with testable acceptance criteria: @SCALE@
The quality of the software architecture, detailed design, implementation, testing, reported as suitable for the chosen development methodology and
stage of the project: @SCALE@
There is evidence that the work has been implemented as a team showing efforts of how to integrate the various work components: @SCALE@
Comments: @COMMENTS@
Mark: @MARK@ / 100%
Justification and Evaluation (40%)
The group provided appropriate justifications for their decisions and clearly stated any choices and assumptions that were made: @SCALE@
The team identified strengths and limitations of their suggested solution with suitable evidence: @SCALE@
The team considered legal, social, ethical and professional issues to justify their choices and evaluate their results: @SCALE@
Comments: @COMMENTS@
Mark: @MARK@ / 100%
Work Plan (10%)
A clear time plan with individual tasks for the project covering the remaining time of the project has been provided: @SCALE@
Clear statements of milestones and deliverables for the future reports and final product have been provided: @SCALE@
The work plan is suitable given the timeframe and thesize of the team: @SCALE@
The team assessed risks in the work plan with suitable risk mitigation: @SCALE@
Comments: @COMMENTS@
Mark: @MARK@ / 100%
Report Writing (10%)
The report is well presented, including writing style, grammar and use of figures: @SCALE@
The report is clearly structured: @SCALE@
There is evidence that the group is using relevant literature and other resources with clear references: @SCALE@
Comments: @COMMENTS@
Mark: @MARK@ / 100%
Total group report mark
Total Mark: @GTOTAL@ / 100% (weighted average of above percentages)
Feedback Instructions for the Supervisor
Complete the feedback form below by replacing the @XXX@ markers with appropriate comments, scale rating and marks. Provide a rating from the scale above for each sub-criterion of the main criteria and justify these in the comments section. All marks should be in rounded to integer percentages. @SELECT_ONE@ indicates to pick one of the options and delete the rest.
Note, complete the report in plain text ASCII or UTF8 encoding. Do not change the format to anything else or the report will be returned to you. You may use markdown formatting (https://github.com/adam-p/markdown-here/wiki/Markdown-Cheatsheet).
Create a zip file with the feedback reports for the individual students for each group to return the completed feedback reports (without the coursework instructions and the client feedback report above) by e-mail to [email protected] with the subject "CM2305 IIR Group @NUMBER@" (preferably signed with a valid GnuPG key and ideally encrypted with GnuPG; see https://langbein.org/contact/).
For the contribution section, comment on the overall contribution of the student to the project during the reporting period and whether the student has contributed to the project as much as their team members. For this use the evidence provided in the individual report and your contribution monitoring data from the group meetings as indicated. At each group meeting record who attended it and also take note of the tasks and the associated hours each student worked on the project. The tasks and hours claimed should be reasonable and be accepted by the whole group (as present at the meeting). As general guide, each student is expect to work about 8h per week on the project in total during term time, not necessarily evenly distributed over the term. The individual’s contribution is compared to the group average.
Copies of the contents of this proforma will be copied to the individual student as part of the formal feedback to this assessment.
CM2305 Interim Individual Report Supervisor Feedback
Student: @NAME@
Student Id: @ID@
Group: @NUMBER@
Supervisor: @NAME@
Role in the team (50%)
@SELECT_ONE@
Excellent: Comprehensive review of activities/roles within the team; excellent, detailed examples have been provided which clearly show contribution to the team.
Good: Good review of activities/roles within the team; good examples of contribution to the team have been provided.
Fair: A reasonable set of activities/roles has been discussed; some examples of contributions to the team have been provided, although these may lack some detail.
Pass: Few activities/roles have been presented; few examples of contributions to the team have been provided.
Fail: Inadequate activities/roles have been presented; no/inadequate examples of contributions to the team have been provided.
None: Role in the team has not been addressed at all or dominantly, verifiably false claims have been made.
Comments: @COMMENTS@
Mark: @MARK@ / 100%
Learning and Professional Development (50%)
@SELECT_ONE@
Excellent: Comprehensive discussion of key learning experience is provided; excellent examples have been provided to illustrate how each of the learning experiences have developed a range of knowledge and skills; a clear understanding is provided of how knowledge and skills obtained through undertaking a team project are likely to contribute to the student’s professional development.
Good: Good discussion of key learning experience is provided; good examples have been provided to illustrate how most of the learning experiences have developed a range of knowledge and skills; a good understanding is demonstrated of how knowledge and skills obtained through undertaking a team project are likely to contribute to the student’s professional development.
Fair: Provided a reasonable discussion of knowledge and skills obtained; examples have been provided to illustrate how some of the learning experiences have developed knowledge and skills; a reasonable understanding is provided of how knowledge and skills obtained through undertaking a team project are likely to contribute to the student’s professional development.
Pass: Little discussion of knowledge and skills acquired; few examples have been provided to illustrate how learning experiences have developed knowledge and skills; little understanding is provided of how knowledge and skills obtained through undertaking a team project are likely to contribute to the student’s professional development.
Fail: No/inadequate discussion of knowledge and skills acquired; no/inadequate examples have been provided to illustrate how learning experiences have developed knowledge and skills; no/inadequate understanding is provided of how knowledge and skills obtained through undertaking a team project are likely to contribute to the student’s professional development.
None: Learning and professional development has not been addressed.
Comments: @COMMENTS@
Mark: @MARK@ / 100%
Total individual report mark
Total Mark: @ITOTAL@ / 100% (average of above percentages)
Contribution to Project
Attendance at Supervisor Group Meetings (30%)
List the average number of meetings the group members attended and the number of meetings the individual attended.
Average attendance: @AVG_ATTENDANCE@
Individual attendance: @ATTENDANCE@
Attendance: @ATTENDANCE/AVG_ATTENDANCE@
Contribution to the Group’s Work (70%)
List the average number of hours group members and the hours the individual student worked for the groups as recorded in the weekly gropu meetings.
Average hours: @AVG_HOURS@
Individual hours: @HOURS@
Work: @HOURS/AVG_HOURS@
Contribution Weight
Calculate a numerical contribution as the 30%,70% weighted average of the above percentages.
Contribution: @0.3 * ATTENDANCE + 0.7 * WORK@
Use this value as a guide to decide on the contribution factor below as indicated by the scale. You may use your digression to adjust the factor, but please briefly
justify this in the comments.
@SELECT_ONE@
Excellent: Contribution >= 1.
Student contributed fully, at least as much as most involved in the project. (100%, in exceptional circumstances more, but not more than 125% and total mark always capped at 100% – may indicate group is not fully collaborating, but can also reward individuals putting in a lot of effort into the project).
Good: 1.0 > Contribution >= 0.
Student contributed about as much as everyone else involved in the project. (100%, expected level of contribution – may also indicate that collaboration in the group works well).
Fair: 0.8 > Contribution >= 0.
Student contributed less than most involved in the project, but still made some notable contribution. (75%-99%, should be an exception – may indicate that there are some not sufficiently contributing to the group work even if the group is overall working well and there are no serious concerns).
Pass: 0.6 > Contribution >= 0.
Student contributed little to the project, but has been involved in some activities. (50%-74%, should be very exceptional – may indicate that the group has some members contributing minimally to the work damaging overall group performance and that there are some serious concerns about the members on this level, and this may have to be consider for group report mark).
Fail:: 0.4 > Contribution > 0
Very little contribution from the student and student was only remotely involved. (1-49%, not expected – indicates student has not been participating in the project during the reporting period, possibly due to extenuating circumstances, which must be reported separately; will have to be considered for the group report mark).
None: Contribution = 0
Student was not present and has not contributed anything. (0%, indicates that student was effectively not a member of the team; may point toward serious problems in the team or extenuating circumstances, which must be reported separately; will have to be considered for the group report mark).
Comments: @COMMENTS@
Contribution factor: @FACTOR@ / 100%
Overall Individual Mark
To be moderated and completed by module leader.
Contribution weight: @FACTOR@
Group report total: x @GTOTAL@ x 80%
Individual report total: + @ITOTAL@ x 20%
Total: = @TOTAL@ out of 100%