i have attached the project outline and also the assessment brief in their
Microsoft Word - SENG 205 - Assessment Brief 2 T1 2022.docx Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd. ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051 Assessment Brief Version 2: 14th November 2022 Page 1 of 4 ASSESSMENT BRIEF 2 COURSE: Bachelor of Information Technology Unit Code: SENG205 Unit Title: Software Engineering Type of Assessment: Written Report Length/Duration: 1000 Words (+/- 10%) Unit Learning Outcomes addressed: 1) Describe compare and contrast various methodologies for software development processes 5) Be able to select an appropriate development method for a complex problem and give technical reasons for the choice Submission Date: Week 5 Assessment Task: Initial Design โ the plan and its justification Total Mark: 15 marks Weighting: 15 % of the unitsโ total marks Students are advised that submission of an Assessment Task past the due date without a formally signed approved Assignment Extension Form (Kent Website MyKent Student Link> FORM โ Assignment Extension Application Form โ Student Login Required) or previously approved application for other extenuating circumstances impacting course of study, incurs a 5% penalty per calendar day, calculated by deduction from the total mark. For example. An Assessment Task marked out of 20 will incur a 1 mark penalty for each calendar day. More information, please refer to (Kent Website MyKent Student Link> POLICY โ Assessment Policy & Procedures โ Student Login Required) Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd. ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051 Assessment Brief Version 2: 14th November 2022 Page 2 of 4 ASSESSMENT DESCRIPTION: Assessment 2 will be an initial design of your project โ showing your project plan and its justification. You need to write 1000 words summary on initial project information, elicit high level requirements, classify and prioritize the high-level requirements, choose a software development methodology and justify its choice, initial project timeline, and preliminary budget breakdown. You need to work in groups of 4-5 students. Further details of assignment is provided on the Moodle site in โProject Outlineโ Document in Assessment Briefs folder. The studentโs contribution and performance towards preparing the report will be accessed via peer review document. ASSESSMENT SUBMISSION: The Assessment 2 be submitted in Week 5 of the trimester on Moodle. Assignment should be submitted on time. However, consideration will be offered only under severe medical condition or unanticipated extenuating circumstances. You must provide appropriate supporting paper for consideration. MARKING GUIDE (RUBRIC): Assessment Attributes Fail (Unacceptable) (0-49%) Pass (Functional) (50-64%) Credit (Proficient) (65-74%) Distinction (Advanced) (75-84%) High Distinction (Exceptional) (>85%) Research Little evidence of A minimum of 5 Research is generally Thorough research is Thorough research is 20 research. academic sources. Basic thorough. Good use of indicated. Very good use of indicated. Professional Sources are missing, use of sources to sources to support sources to support ideas, use of sources to Inappropriate, poorly support ideas, generally ideas, mostly well well integrated, sources are support ideas, well integrated or lacking well-integrated, most integrated, sources are credible. May be minor integrated, sources are credibility. Lacks clear sources are credible. credible. May be weaknesses with credible. Very minor, link of sources with May be weaknesses weaknesses with paraphrasing or if any, weaknesses with essay. No in text with paraphrasing or paraphrasing or integration/application. paraphrasing or citations integration /application. integration/ application. Integration/application. Requirements 15 Poor standard of identifying requirements, classification and prioritization. Basic standard of identifying requirements, classification and prioritization. Good standard of identifying requirements, classification and prioritization. Very good standard of identifying requirements, classification and prioritization. Professional standard of identifying requirements, classification and prioritization. Methodology 15 Poor justification about the chosen software development methodology, the project time line and budget breakdown are not presented. Basic justification about the chosen software development methodology, the project time line and budget breakdown are poorly presented. Good justification about the chosen software development methodology, the project time line and budget breakdown are somewhat well presented. Very good justification about the chosen software development methodology, the project time line and budget breakdown are very well presented. Excellent justification about the chosen software development methodology, the project time line and budget breakdown are professionally presented. Structure Topic, concepts and Topic, concepts and Topic, concepts and Topic, concepts and thesis Topic, concepts are 15 thesis is not clear in thesis is stated with thesis is clearly are clearly outlined in clearly outlined in introduction. some clarity in conveyed in introduction. Material in introduction. Material Material in the body is introduction. Material introduction. Material in body is logically and clearly in body is logically and generally, poorly in body is generally body is logically and sequenced; very few or clearly sequenced; very sequenced. No logically sequenced; clearly sequenced; few minor weaknesses. minor, if any, discernible some weaknesses. or minor weaknesses. Conclusion mostly weaknesses. Conclusion conclusion; no links to Conclusion does not Conclusion summarizes effectively summarizes effectively summarizes introduction. clearly summarizes essay; may be some essay; with essay; with essay; links to weaknesses; generally, recommendations and clear recommendations and introduction is not clear links to intro. links to introduction. clear links to clear. introduction. Group and Good Organization 10 Group has serious issues with member engagement. Ideas are not exchanged. The group atmosphere is highly competitive and/or individualistic. C onflicts that arise are not dealt with or cannot be resolved and/or there are no effective group interactions. The group does not establish roles for each member and/or the workload is unequally distributed. Group is only engaged with encouragement or not all members are engaged. Ideas may not be exchanged effectively. There is a general atmosphere of respect for group members, but some members of the group do not feel free to ask questions and contribute. There is no decision- making process, decisions are mainly made by individuals. No clear roles for each member, and/or the workload is unequally Group is engaged but can be distracted. Ideas are exchanged with encouragement. There is a general atmosphere of respect for group members, but some members of the group do not feel free to ask questions and contribute. Members are generally able to resolve conflicts through open discussion with outside assistance. A procedure for making decision is established by the group, but it not clear and/or it focuses on individuals. The group establishes informal Everyone is engaged most of the time. The exchange of ideas is effective most of the time. There is a general atmosphere of respect for all group members. The majority of group members feel free to ask questions and contribute. Members are generally able to resolve conflicts through open discussion. A clear procedure for making decisions is informally established by the group. The group establishes clear and formal roles for each member Everyone is fully engaged with effective exchange of ideas. Members of the group share respect for each other. All members of the group feel free to ask questions and contribute. Conflicts are resolved with open dialogue and compromise. A clear procedure for making decisions is formally established by the group. The group establishes and documents clear and formal roles for each member Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd. ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051 Assessment Brief Version 2: 14th November 2022 Page 3 of 4 distributed. roles for each member. The workload could be distributed more equally. and distributes the workload equally. and distributes the workload equally. Language/ Poor standard of A minimum of 900 Good standard of Very good standard of Professional standard of Presentation writing. Word limit words. Basic and sound writing; few errors in writing; very few or minor writing; no errors in 15 may not be adhered standard of writing; punctuation, grammar errors in punctuation, punctuation, grammar to. Incorrect format some errors in and spelling. Almost grammar and spelling. and spelling. Correct (e.g., includes Table of punctuation, grammar correct format. Correct formatting. formatting. contents; bullet and spelling. points; graphs etc.) Inconsistencies with the formatting. Referencing No referencing is Basic and sound Good attempt to Very good attempt to Professional level of 10 evident or, if done, is attempt to reference reference sources; reference sources; very referencing and inconsistent and sources; may be some inconsistencies and minor inconsistencies and acknowledgment; no technically incorrect. inconsistencies and technical errors in style. technical errors in style. errors of style evident. No or minimal technical errors in style. Few inaccuracies in Thorough and consistent Thorough and reference list, mixed Reference list is reference list and all reference list and all consistent reference list styles. No in text generally complete with references listed. references listed. and all references listed citations 1 or 2 references missing. Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd. ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051 Assessment Brief Version 2: 14th November 2022 Page 4 of 4 GENERAL NOTES FOR ASSESSMENT TASKS Content for Assessment Task papers should incorporate a formal introduction, main points and conclusion. Appropriate academic writing and referencing are inevitable academic skills that you must develop and demonstrate in work being presented for assessment. The content of high quality work presented by a student must be fully referenced within-text citations and a Reference List at the end. Kent strongly recommends you refer to the Academic Learning Support Workshop materials available on the Kent Learning Management System (Moodle). For details please click the link http://moodle.kent.edu.au/kentmoodle/mod/folder/view.php?id=3606 and download the file titled โHarvard Referencing Workbookโ. This Moodle Site is the location for Workbooks and information that are presented to Kent Students in the ALS Workshops conducted at the beginning of each Trimester. Kent recommends a minimum of FIVE (5) references in work being presented for assessment. Unless otherwise specifically instructed by your Lecturer or as detailed in the Unit Outline for the specific Assessment Task, any paper with less than five (5) references may be deemed not meeting a satisfactory standard and possibly be failed. Content in Assessment tasks that includes sources that are not properly referenced according to the โHarvard Referencing Workbookโ will be penalised. Marks will be deducted for failure to adhere to the word count if this is specifically stated for the Assessment Task in the Unit Outline. As a general rule there is an allowable discretionary variance to the word count in that it is generally accepted that a student may go over or under by 10% than the stated length. GENERAL NOTES FOR REFERENCING References are assessed for their quality. Students should draw on quality academic sources, such as books, chapters from edited books, journals etc. The textbook for the Unit of study can be used as a reference, but not the Lecturer Notes. The Assessor will want to see evidence that a student is capable of conducting their own research. Also, in order to help Assessors determine a studentโs understanding of the work they cite, all in-text references (not just direct quotes) must include the specific page number(s) if shown in the original. Before preparing your Assessment Task or own contribution, please review this โYouTubeโ video (Avoiding Plagiarism through Referencing) by clicking on the following link: link: http://moodle.kent.edu.au/kentmoodle/mod/folder/view.php?id=3606 A search for peer-reviewed journal articles may also assist students. These type of journal articles can be located in the online journal databases and can be accessed from the Kent Library homepage. Wikipedia, online dictionaries and online encyclopaedias are acceptable as a starting point to gain knowledge about