Project Sprint 3 Rubric
pdf
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Concordia University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
6311
Subject
English
Date
May 27, 2024
Type
Pages
5
Uploaded by JusticeIron12390
Gina Cody School of Engineering and Computer Science COEN 6311 –
Software Engineering P
ROJECT S
PRINT R
UBRIC P
RODUCT R
EPORT
Excellent Satisfactory Not satisfactory Goal and system context The product goal is clear and complete, the system context follows the standard notation and identifies the roles, channels, and external systems of the application 20 points Not clear product goal or the diagram is incomplete 10 points No product goal and no system context 1 point Main process The main process of the application is described using an activity diagram following UML notation 20 points The specification is shallow but the general idea is good and it follows the notation 10 points Missing activity diagram or very simple one. 1 point Software architecture Component diagram, follow the UML notation, are complete and coherent with the sprint goal 20 points Some minor errors in notation, or coherence 10 points Major errors, not clear, not present 0 points Data Model The data model includes the main entities: recipe, user, and either: steps or utensils or ingredients. Attributes are complete. It includes the cardinality of relationships 20 points Data model only contains recipe and user. 10 points Data model is incomplete, the attributes are incomplete 1 point Class diagram The class diagram includes models and controllers. It reflects the code 20 points
Gina Cody School of Engineering and Computer Science COEN 6311 –
Software Engineering Software design Sequence diagram: follows UML notation and is coherent with the functionality. The diagram is coherent with the component design. It is clear. 20 points Some minor errors in notation, or coherence 10 points Major errors, not clear or lack of coherence between diagrams (component and sequence) and code structure 1 point Deployment and repository Product is deployed online, can be accessed, and runs without major errors. There is a code repository 40 points The product can be accessed online but runs into some errors when casually tested. 20 points There is no evidence of product deployment yet or is only accessed via localhost No code repository is used. 5 - 1 points System components System components functionalities are complete and deployed 40 points Missing some components 20 points Missing major modules not completely functional components 5 –
0 points P
ROCESS The points for process are the sum of the points for each criterion Excellent
Satisfactory
Not satisfactory
Meetings report Sprint planning meeting report is updated in the page by the specified deadline and contains estimation, Sprint planning meeting report is updated by the specified deadline BUT is missing some of specified points (-5 Sprint planning meeting report is not updated by the deadline.
Gina Cody School of Engineering and Computer Science COEN 6311 –
Software Engineering capacity, sprint backlog, and risk estimation. There exists a report for review and a retrospective meeting 20 points point for each missing or incomplete point) 1 point if updated when grading, 0 otherwise. Review Show that in report About planning: was your planning correct or did you have to make many changes? Did it improve over sprints? Did you record the time? Risks: What risks materialized and how did you handle them? What risks were not considered but materialized and how did you handle them? About communication: What was your main communication method? What other methods were used? How often did you communicate with each other? What improvements could be made? Were there cultural misunderstandings that could impact the work? How did you handle them? About teamwork: How did you cooperate as a team? Were there subgroups of work? What could be improved? What can be repeated? Overall What would you suggest to future students of this course Discuss all points but shallowly 30 –
20 points The discussion does not follow the points mentioned 5 points
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
Gina Cody School of Engineering and Computer Science COEN 6311 –
Software Engineering to be successful in their team projects? 60 points Roles The student role is described with their major contributions and total time worked 20 points Partial roles assignment 10 points The student has no report about their role 1 point T
ESTING REPORT
Inspections, code evolution Inspections of at least 4 classes are reported. Validate code development and evolution code refactoring 30 points Partial inspection and code tracking 15 No code maintenance and system inspection. 1-5 points Tests plan The test plan is coherent with the functionality. There are inputs to test a successful case and an error case at least. Show different types of testing like scenario testing, development testing etc.. 20 points Partial testing plan missing minor test cases 10 points Missing major tests 1 points Test results The tests results are reported and if errors are found they are fixed. You must show code bugs, defects and code maintenance. More than 5 cases 20 points Partial report that shows max 3 to 4 cases. 10 No samples or 2 samples 0 –
5 points
Gina Cody School of Engineering and Computer Science COEN 6311 –
Software Engineering Stress test with validation and verification Developed system stress test showing system capabilities borders with validation and verification for system functionalities and development styles. 30 points Incomplete test with minor missing parts 15 points No test 0 points