metcs633_M3_A3_Optimize Peer Reviews(1)

docx

School

Boston University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

633

Subject

Computer Science

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by eyietemi

BU MET CS Assignment Optimize Peer Reviews Overview of the Assignment: Please respond to the following seven questions. Be sure to submit your completed assignment via Blackboard using the Assignment tool. 1. When designing tests, it is prudent to consider various defect modes. Hence, when we systematically list possible ways for a system to fail, we lay foundation for improving our test coverage. Consider the software development process consisting of phases depicted at the figure below. Provide examples of six defects that can only be found during a corresponding phase or at the intersection of selected phases. Build & Unit Test Component & Integration Test Peer Reviews Check-In D e f e c t T y p e s Example # 1 ??? Example # 2 ??? Example # 3 ??? Example # 4 ??? Example # 5 ??? Example # 6 ??? Example # 1 (a defect can only be found during Component Test) … Answer: A defect can be found when components of an application integrate and it does not meet requirements, causing the system to fail Example # 2 (a defect can only be found during Peer Review) … Answer: A defect that can be found during peer review is not following good coding practices, or code not achieving set needs Example # 3 (a defect can only be found during Unit Test) … Answer: A defect in a unit test would be a particular unit not functioning as required, the output given back is not what it is intended for. © February 2024 Alex Elentukh. Materials contained within this course are subject to copyright protection. Page# 1

BU MET CS Assignment Optimize Peer Reviews Example # 4 (a defect cannot be found during Unit Test, Component Test, Peer Reviews) … Answer: A defect may not be found until the full application is tested Example # 5 (a defect can be found during both Unit Test and Component Test) … Answer: A defect cannot be found where a unit test produces the output required but all components tests do not meet the expectation Example # 6 (a defect can be found during both Unit Tests and Peer Reviews) … Answer: A defect of badly written code or unclear coding cannot be a defect after peer reviews and unit testing. 2. With reference to the Michael Fagan's categories of defects, a) missing, b) wrong, c) extra. And also, with reference to common rules of a constructive comment, a) addressing a product, not a producer, b) stating a problem and not a solution. Document six "good" comments as examples related to your term project. Here are three examples for you to build upon and continue: o I see a missing here. Several personas are not connected to any of the use cases. o I see a wrong here. The bottom line sum of the estimation record is much greater than the total hours that could be realistically allocated for this project. o I see an extra here. The state transition diagram has two states that are not an option on the drop down of the field called "state". Answer:  I see something wrong here. In the database the field “Course_Num” in the course section is set as a data string instead of an integer.  I see an extra here. There is an extra “rest password” component that is not aligned with the requirements stated  I see a missing feature here. There seems not to be an edit button for users to edit comments and reviews in the inquiry system © February 2024 Alex Elentukh. Materials contained within this course are subject to copyright protection. Page# 2

BU MET CS Assignment Optimize Peer Reviews  I see a missing requirement here. There are no features that allow prior students to give success tips under class information, which is valuable  I see an extra here, there is an extra notification message when someone responds to a comment, that does not agree with the project requirement  I see something wrong here. with the course information page, the logic that updates the courses offered each semester, we need to update the prerequisite and course checklist 3. Relate the pictorial below to your environment . What is the optimal number of participants in a code review? What would be a result of an insufficient participation? Or over-abundant participation? Answer: The optimal number for participation in code review would be 5, the result from insufficient participation would bring about a less effective review, and there won’t be enough peers with the knowledge to cover every aspect of the application to meet the expectation, whereas overabundant participation can bring a little conflict where everyone has a strong view of how the code should be viewed. 4. Write a brief paragraph relating the pictorial below to your environment. How does the size of an asset correlate to the optimal number of days an asset should be distributed prior to a peer review face-to-face meeting? What would be a result of not giving enough time to participants to prepare? Or giving them over-abundant time? © February 2024 Alex Elentukh. Materials contained within this course are subject to copyright protection. Page# 3

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

BU MET CS Assignment Optimize Peer Reviews Answer: The picture explains the balance of having days to review assets prior to meeting face-to-face, it shows the equilibrium of the number of days matching with the asset time. If less time is provided then it won’t be as effective as the asset won’t be completely assessed and could cause some defects down the road. Whereas if a lot of time is provided there would be a lot of time gone since analysis and all key points during the face-to-face meeting would be pointed out. 5. Describe circumstances when an effective peer review is run, although the F2F meeting (see activity #5 of the "Swim Lanes") is skipped. Additionally, as a second part of this question, describe circumstances when F2F meeting is mandatory and should not be skipped. © February 2024 Alex Elentukh. Materials contained within this course are subject to copyright protection. Page# 4

BU MET CS Assignment Optimize Peer Reviews Answer Effective peer reviews can be conducted remotely if the work product is well-defined, accessible to all reviewers, and feedback can be provided clearly through online platforms. However, face-to-face meetings are essential in cases of confusion, sensitive issues, the need for relationship-building, or organizational policy requirements . 6. The dynamics of an active peer review meeting involving multiple participants is quite different from a situation when a reviewer is sitting quietly in his/her office, while trying to find hidden defects. An experienced Author is able to leverage both of these very different environments. Please provide three examples of types of defects that are found o during preparation, and then another three examples of types of defects that are found o during F2F meeting Answer: During preparation the defect include  Syntax errors, where some variables are declared incorrectly  Issues with the logic in the codes like conditional statements  Issues with lack of proper documentation, using comments to explain During the face-to-face meeting  Issues with real life implementation of feature, how applicable is a feature with various users © February 2024 Alex Elentukh. Materials contained within this course are subject to copyright protection. Page# 5

BU MET CS Assignment Optimize Peer Reviews  Topics on user experience, how the design is, and if there are potential navigation issues  Requirement issues, where the requirement set out is different from what is being implemented 7. List several underlying reasons hindering adoption of peer reviews as a consistent practice across a large organization.  Ambiguity in evaluating feedback and how effective it would be -  Potential issues in work relationships when reviews are conducted by co-workers within the same organization, as it may impact their collaborative dynamics and hinder teamwork.  Risks of biased reviews influenced by personal relationships or biases. © February 2024 Alex Elentukh. Materials contained within this course are subject to copyright protection. Page# 6

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Related Documents

Oryzanin_outcroppings_areae.docx

Technology Lesson Demonstration.docx

Lab1_Password_Cracking.docx

Lab2_Recon_Network_Scanning.docx

Lab3_Sniffing.pdf

Framework for Enhancing Digital Proficiency K Lazard.docx

CSC420 Week 2 Exercise Lab.docx

3.1.4 Section Quiz.pdf

CSC420 Week 1 Exercise Lab.docx

CSC305-Week 1 Written Assignment.docx

CSC305-Week 2 Written Assignment.docx

AI Assignment 4.pdf

Recommended textbooks for you

Fundamentals of Information Systems

Computer Science

ISBN:9781305082168

Author:Ralph Stair, George Reynolds

Publisher:Cengage Learning

Principles of Information Systems (MindTap Course...

Computer Science

ISBN:9781285867168

Author:Ralph Stair, George Reynolds

Publisher:Cengage Learning

Fundamentals of Information Systems

Computer Science

ISBN:9781337097536

Author:Ralph Stair, George Reynolds

Publisher:Cengage Learning

Information Technology Project Management

Computer Science

ISBN:9781337101356

Author:Kathy Schwalbe

Publisher:Cengage Learning

Principles of Information Systems (MindTap Course...

Computer Science

ISBN:9781305971776

Author:Ralph Stair, George Reynolds

Publisher:Cengage Learning

Systems Analysis and Design (Shelly Cashman Serie...

Computer Science

ISBN:9781305494602

Author:Scott Tilley, Harry J. Rosenblatt

Publisher:Cengage Learning

SEE MORE TEXTBOOKS

Recommended textbooks for you

Fundamentals of Information Systems
Computer Science
ISBN:9781305082168
Author:Ralph Stair, George Reynolds
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Principles of Information Systems (MindTap Course...
Computer Science
ISBN:9781285867168
Author:Ralph Stair, George Reynolds
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Fundamentals of Information Systems
Computer Science
ISBN:9781337097536
Author:Ralph Stair, George Reynolds
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Information Technology Project Management
Computer Science
ISBN:9781337101356
Author:Kathy Schwalbe
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Principles of Information Systems (MindTap Course...
Computer Science
ISBN:9781305971776
Author:Ralph Stair, George Reynolds
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Systems Analysis and Design (Shelly Cashman Serie...
Computer Science
ISBN:9781305494602
Author:Scott Tilley, Harry J. Rosenblatt
Publisher:Cengage Learning