software development approaches

 

 

Assignment Brief 2022/2023

Submission arrangement online via Aula:

File types and method of recording: A PDF file and online submission Mark

 

Module Learning Outcomes Assessed:

 

Evaluate and apply appropriate software development approaches (e.g. agile) to the design and development of a software product in a team work environment to meet the time constraints and quality
Evaluate and apply current technologies and platforms to deliver software solutions in order to meet the business requirements.
Evaluate software solutions against a range of software quality metrics and effectively communicate information and analysis both verbally and in
Evaluate commercial risks of a software production with professional, social, legal, ethical awareness according to the professional codes of conduct guided by computing related professional bodies. e.g. British Computer Society (BCS)

 

Task and Mark distribution

This is a group-based assignment to report on the full-stack development of a software product of your choice, agreed by the team. You should form a group of 5 members to undertake a group project and deliver a software product of your choice (with the technologies or platforms agreed by the team).

Submission

A group presentation video (a maximum of 20 mins up to one GB file size, e.g., using Microsoft Teams recording converted to the MP4 format, or an equivalent agreed by the team) for the following areas:

Presentation slides

Evaluation of key agile techniques applied to develop and manage the group software project with evidence of using software tools (LO1)
Evaluation of the group software product against ONE appropriate quality metric of your group choice with evidence of data generated from the metric (LO1, LO3)
Evaluation of the project risks, social, professional, legal and ethical issues associated with the group software project (LO4)

Demonstration of software feature(s)

Working of the most significant or innovative feature(s) implemented in the chosen the technologies and platforms to meet the business requirements supported with a rationale for the development (LO1, LO2)

Peer assessment rating: as an individual member of the group, you need to submit a rating for each of your team members in terms of his/her contribution to the group project (using the

‘Peer Assessment’ template on Aula.)

Please note:

As a team member, you should ensure that you contribute to the different aspects of software project, including design, implementation and
You should provide a rationale for the features of your project, in relation to other existing similar
You must add consent forms that are signed by your users if your project involves any users, e.g., for user requirements or usability testing. No personal details should be used in your software product

 

The assessment criteria are as detailed as below:

GROUP PRESENTATION ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
CW1 marks

Presentation Slides – Evaluation
60

Quality of evaluation in the following areas related to the group software project:

·         Key agile techniques with evidence of using software tools

·         ONE software quality metric with evidence of data generated from the metric

·         The project risks, social, professional, legal and ethical issues

 

Demonstration – Software Solutions
30

Quality / complexity / creativity (supported with a rationale for software features)
 

Peer Assessment (overall project)

Give the rating out of 10 (10 being the highest rating) for the contribution of each individual team member

10

Total:
100

 

 

Notes:

University now uses the APA Referencing Style. If you started your course before 1st September 2020, you may continue to use the Coventry University Guide to Referencing in Harvard Style until you graduate. For support and advice on this, see the online referencing guidance or contact your Academic Liaison Librarian.
Please notify your registry course support team and module leader for disability

 

Any student requiring an extension or deferral should follow the university process as outlined here.
The University cannot take responsibility for any coursework lost or corrupted on disks, laptops or personal computer. Students should therefore regularly back-up any work and are advised to save it on the University
If there are technical or performance issues that prevent students submitting coursework through the online coursework submission system on the day of a coursework deadline, an appropriate extension to the coursework submission deadline will be agreed. This extension will normally be 24 hours or the next working day if the deadline falls on a Friday or over the weekend period. This will be communicated via your Module
You are encouraged to check the originality of your work by using the draft Turnitin links on your Aula
Collusion between students (where sections of your work are similar to the work submitted by other students in this or previous module cohorts) is taken extremely seriously and will be reported to the academic conduct panel. This applies to both courseworks and exam
A marked difference between your writing style, knowledge and skill level demonstrated in class discussion, any test conditions and that demonstrated in a coursework assignment may result in you having to undertake a Viva Voce in order to prove the coursework assignment is entirely your own
If you make use of the services of a proof reader in your work you must keep your original version and make it available as a demonstration of your written
You must not submit work for assessment that you have already submitted (partially or in full), either for your current course or for another qualification of this university, unless this is specifically provided for in your assignment brief or specific course or module information. Where earlier work by you is citable, ie. it has already been published/submitted, you must reference it clearly. Identical pieces of work submitted concurrently will also be considered to be self-plagiarism.

 

Overall mark guidelines to students

0-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70+
80+

Work mainly incomplete and

/or weaknesses in most areas

Most elements completed; weaknesses outweigh

strengths

Most elements are strong, minor weaknesses
Strengths in all elements
Most work exceeds the standard expected
All work substantially exceeds the standard

expected

 

Marking Rubric

 

Mark band
Outcome
Guidelines
 

 
 
Content
Structure and Style
Demonstration

 

90-100%

 

Distinction

 
Distinction – Professional work delivered in the quality of contents to a professional level
Distinction – Professional work delivered in the quality of structure and style to a professional

level

Distinction – Professional work delivered in quality, complexity and creativity to a professional level

 

80-89%

 

Distinction

 
Distinction – Outstanding work delivered in the quality of contents to an outstanding level
Distinction – Outstanding work delivered in the quality of structure and style to an outstanding

level

Distinction – Outstanding work delivered in quality, complexity and creativity to an outstanding level

70-79%

 

Distinction

 

Meets learning outcomes

Distinction – Excellent work delivered in the quality of contents to an excellent

level

Distinction – Excellent work delivered in the quality of structure and

style to an excellent level

Distinction – Excellent work delivered in quality, complexity and creativity

to an excellent level

60-69%

 

Merit

Merit – The work delivered in the quality of contents to a very good level
Merit – The work delivered in the quality of structure and style to a

very good level

Merit – The work delivered in quality, complexity and creativity

to a very good level

50-59%

 

Pass

 
Pass – The work delivered in the quality of contents to a good level
Pass – The work delivered in the quality of structure and style to a good level
Pass – The work delivered in quality, complexity and creativity

to a good level

40-49%

 

Pass

 
Pass – The work delivered in the quality of contents to a basic level
Pass – The work delivered in the quality of structure and style to a basic level
Pass – The work delivered in quality, complexity and creativity

to a basic level

30-39%

 

Fail

 
Fail – The poor work delivered in the quality of

contents

Fail – The poor work delivered in the quality of

structure and style

Fail – The poor work delivered in quality,

complexity and creativity

 

20-29%

 

Fail –

Fails to achieve

learning outcomes

Fail – clear failure of work delivered in the quality of contents
Fail – The work of a clear failure delivered in the

quality of structure and style

Fail – The work of a clear failure delivered in

quality, complexity and creativity

0-19%
 
Fail – little or no work

delivered in the contents

Fail – little or no work

delivered

Fail – little or no work

delivered

Fail
 
 
 
 

 

software development approaches
Scroll to top
WhatsApp
Hello! Need help with your assignments? We are here