thanks
Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd. Assessment Brief ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458 Version 2: 11th October, 2019 Page 1 of 3 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051 ASSESSMENT BRIEF COURSE: Bachelor of Information Technology Unit Code: SENG 205 Unit Title: Software Engineering Type of Assessment: Project Report Length/Duration: 3000 Words (+/- 10%) Unit Learning Outcomes addressed: 1. Describe compare and contrast various methodologies for software development processes 2. Importance of and approaches to project and change management 3. Describe modern tools and the contexts for their appropriate use for software development, configuration, support, installation, and managing incremental updates 4. Be able to select an appropriate development method for a complex problem and give technical reasons for the choice 5. Be able to define adequate metrics over a defined software process and critically and objectively determine its capability level and course of action towards improvement 6. Be able to gather requirements, develop specifications, design, implement and test a prototype Submission Date: Week 11 Assessment Task: Complete Project Documentation Total Mark: 65 marks Weighting: 65 % of the units 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 – Assignment Extension Application Form – 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 40 will incur a 2 mark penalty for each calendar day. More information, please refer to (Kent Website MyKent Student Link> POLICY – Assessment Policy & Procedures – Student Login Required) https://kentinstituteaustralia.sharepoint.com/sites/Policies%26Forms/SitePages/Home.aspx?RootFolder=%2Fsites%2FPolicies%26Forms%2FPolicies%20and%20Forms%2FStudent&FolderCTID=0x012000E6C01ECDB12ACE448B94EB84A9F93758&View=%7B148054E0%2D0936%2D4517%2D8B3E%2DD0CCDC7CD88F%7D https://kentinstituteaustralia.sharepoint.com/sites/Policies%26Forms/SitePages/Home.aspx?RootFolder=%2Fsites%2FPolicies%26Forms%2FPolicies%20and%20Forms%2FStudent&FolderCTID=0x012000E6C01ECDB12ACE448B94EB84A9F93758&View=%7B148054E0%2D0936%2D4517%2D8B3E%2DD0CCDC7CD88F%7D Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd. Assessment Brief ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458 Version 2: 11th October, 2019 Page 2 of 3 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051 ASSESSMENT DESCRIPTION: Your Assessment 2 will be Complete Project Documentation presented as a formal report to the client showing plans, detailed requirements elicitation, detailed requirements analysis and prioritization, high level design, detailed component design, justifications for the choice of software development models, create a Hi-Fidelity prototype following the design principles learned as part of the unit, formal documentation, budget breakdown, and detailed project timeline. You need to write 3000 words report for Assessment 2. You need to work in groups of 4-5 students. Further details of assignment is provided on the Moodle site in “Project Outline” Document in Assessment Briefs folder. ASSESSMENT SUBMISSION: The Project Report will be submitted in week 11 of the trimester. 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) 85-100% Research 10/65 Little evidence of research. Sources are missing, Inappropriate, poorly integrated or lacking credibility. Lacks clear link of sources with essay. No in text citations A minimum of 5 academic sources. Basic use of sources to support ideas, generally well-integrated, most sources are credible. May be weaknesses with paraphrasing or integration /application. Research is generally thorough. Good use of sources to support ideas, mostly well integrated, sources are credible. May be weaknesses with paraphrasing or integration/ application. Thorough research is indicated. Very good use of sources to support ideas, well integrated, sources are credible. May be minor weaknesses with paraphrasing or integration/application. Thorough research is indicated. Professional use of sources to support ideas, well integrated, sources are credible. Very minor, if any, weaknesses with paraphrasing or Integration/application. Information / Content 25/65 Report lacks coherence; topic is poorly addressed; little analysis. Report is generally coherent; topic is addressed; analyses in reasonable depth with some description. There are some inconsistencies and weaknesses with flow. Report is coherent and flows well; topic is addressed quite thoroughly; analyses in considerable depth. There may be some inconsistencies and weaknesses with flow. Report is very coherent and flows well; topic is addressed thoroughly; analyses in depth. There may be minor inconsistencies and weakness with flow. Professional work. Report is very coherent and flows well; topic is addressed thoroughly; analyses in great depth. Very minor, if any, inconsistencies and weaknesses with flow. Structure 10/65 Topic, concepts and thesis are not clear in introduction. Material in the body is generally poorly sequenced. No discernible conclusion; no links to introduction. Topic, concepts and thesis are stated with some clarity in introduction. Material in body is generally logically sequenced; some weaknesses. Conclusion does not clearly summarise essay; links to introduction are not clear. Topic, concepts and thesis are clearly conveyed in introduction. Material in body is logically and clearly sequenced; few or minor weaknesses. Conclusion summarises essay; may be some weaknesses; generally clear links to intro. Topic, concepts and thesis are clearly outlined in introduction. Material in body is logically and clearly sequenced; very few or minor weaknesses. Conclusion mostly effectively summarises essay; with recommendations and clear links to introduction. Topic, concepts are clearly outlined in introduction. Material in body is logically and clearly sequenced; very minor, if any, weaknesses. Conclusion effectively summarises essay; with recommendations and clear links to introduction. Language/ Presentation 10/65 Poor standard of writing. Word limit may not be adhered to. Incorrect format (e.g. includes Table of contents; bullet points; graphs etc.) A minimum of 2500 words. Basic and sound standard of writing; some errors in punctuation, grammar and spelling. Inconsistencies with the formatting. Good standard of writing; few errors in punctuation, grammar and spelling. Almost correct format. Very good standard of writing; very few or minor errors in punctuation, grammar and spelling. Correct formatting. Professional standard of writing; no errors in punctuation, grammar and spelling. Correct formatting.