• Identify a real/realistic problem(s) for which an IT solution is appropriate and beneficial.
• Analyse the current situation and identify any dissatisfaction with the system.
• For the current system identify the data flows and processing requirements.
• Identify the problem's information flow and data dynamics, both in time, e.g. from one year end to the start of the next, and in processing.
• Subdivide the problem into manageable tasks and integrate the tasks into a coherent system.
• Produce a requirements specification for the identified tasks and the system as a whole; identify the precise needs of the users in relation to the identified tasks, i.e. derive the user and information requirements of a system considering the human aspects and physical environment.
• Identify the users' current IT skill level and further training needs.
• Determine evaluation criteria for the system.

• Derive the input, processing and output needs to match the requirements specification.
• Divide the overall task into sub-tasks and schedule them.
• Outline a solution in IT terms meeting the requirements specification of the identified sub-tasks.
• Determine appropriate data capture and validation procedures, data organisation(s), output contents and formats, operational procedures and user interface(s) for the IT system.
• Relate possible solutions to the capabilities of the available hardware, software and human resources.
• Evaluate alternative IT strategies for meeting the requirements specification.
• Justify the choice of hardware and software to be used.
• Specify the financial and human implications of the proposed solution.
• Document the design to provide a detailed system specification, suitable for a third party to implement the system.
• Schedule the various stages of the implementation of the system.
• Determine the test strategy, including identifying the test data, for the system.
  

• Make full and effective use of the chosen hardware and software facilities to implement the design.
• Test the system with typical, extreme (boundary) and erroneous data to ensure full compliance with the requirements specification, documenting the results and fully annotating the test output.
• Document the implementation stage in a technical manner that would be suitable for a maintenance developer.

• Provide an appropriate user guide including installation and backup procedures.

• Produce an evaluation report. that applies the determined evaluation criteria to the solution to assess its compliance and its degree of effectiveness as a workable system.
• Involve the end-user in the process.

• Produce a well-written project report to give an overview of the system and to enable the system to be used and maintained unaided.
  

Assessment Criteria:

Introduction

It is expected that the teacher will be involved at various stages in the development of the candidate's solution. However, in the award of marks, the teacher should attempt to solely assess the candidate's contribution. In applying the criteria, account should be taken of the amount of assistance given. The criteria give scope for discriminating between candidates who tackled more demanding problems, compared to those who undertook problems of a less demanding nature.

Criteria for the assessment of Module 6

The following categories are to be used in the assessment of the project. The criteria for marking these categories are listed below.

The project is marked out of a total of 90.

• Analysis 18 marks
• Design 16 marks
• Implementation 15 marks
• Testing 15 marks
• User Guide 8 marks
• Evaluation 10 marks
• Report 8 marks
• Total 90 marks

Analysis (18 marks)

• 15 - 18    The candidate has identified an appropriate problem in conjunction with their end-user and independently of the teacher.
  • A clear, statement covering both the context and the nature of the
    problem has been provided.
  • The candidate has clearly identified and delimited a substantial and realistic problem, recognising the requirements of the intended user(s) and the capabilities and limitations of the available resources.
  • All of the requirements are specified and clearly documented.
  • The candidate has fully identified the information flow and data dynamics of the problem.
  • The analysis indicates understanding of the full potential of the appropriate hardware and software facilities which are available and, as appropriate, the limitations.
  • The candidate has identified the user's current IT skill level and training needs.
  • Qualitative and quantitative evaluation criteria have been identified in detail and analysis has been completed without undue assistance.
    

   

• 10 - 14    The candidate has identified an appropriate problem with reference to their end-user and independently of the teacher.
  • A clear outline statement covering both the context and the nature of the problem has been provided.
  • The candidate has identified a substantial problem, recognising many of the requirements of the intended users and many of the capabilities and limitations of the available resources.
  • The documentation is intelligible but is lacking in some respects.
  • The analysis indicates which software will be used, but may not make it clear how the software will be used.
  • The candidate has partly identified the information flow and data dynamics of the problem.
  • Reasonable evaluation criteria have been identified.
  • Some assistance has been required to reach this stage.
  • Alternatively, the candidate has identified a relatively straightforward problem and has proceeded unaided, covering most or all of the points required for 15-18 marks.
    

   

• 6 - 9    The candidate has required some guidance from the teacher to identify an appropriate problem with an end-user.
  • A simple outline statement has been provided.
  • The candidate has selected a substantial problem and attempted to identify many of the requirements of the intended users and many of the capabilities and limitations of the resources available but has required assistance in analysing the problem.
  • The candidate has identified only a limited subset of the information flow and data dynamics of the problem.
  • The documentation is available but is incomplete.
  • Alternatively, the candidate has identified a fairly simple problem and has recognised most of the requirements of the intended users and most of the capabilities and limitations of the resources available.
  • The candidate has required assistance to analyse the problem.
  • The documentation is complete in most respects.
    

   

• 3 - 5    The candidate required considerable guidance from the teacher to identify an appropriate problem with an end-user.
  • A superficial outline statement was provided.
  • The candidate has identified a fairly simple problem, recognising some of the requirements of the intended users and some of the capabilities and limitations of the available resources.
  • Few, if any, indications of what must be done to carry out the task are present.
  • There is little indication of how the software will be used.
  • The candidate has not identified the information flow and data dynamics of the problem.
  • Documentation is weak and incomplete.
  • The candidate has required much assistance in analysing the problem.

• 1 - 2    The candidate has identified a simple problem or been given a straightforward problem.
  • There is only minimal recognition of either the requirements of the intended users or capabilities and limitations of the available resources.
  • The documentation is poor and substantial assistance has been required.

   

• 0    No analysis is present.
  

Generation of possible solutions and solution design. The design phase includes bringing together results of the analysis and gathering and ordering information related to the background of the problem, to then generate a range of possible solutions. This may be alternative types of package or alternative solutions within a package.
The solution design should be specified so that it can be implemented by a competent person. There should be a clear specification of how each sub-task identified in the analysis is to be solved.

Design (16 marks)

• 13 - 16    A relevant range of appropriate approaches to a solution has been considered in detail.
  • Compelling reasons for final choice of solution are given which have been fully justified and the likely effectiveness has been fully considered.
  • A completely detailed solution has been specified so that it could be undertaken by a competent third party.
  • The proposed solution has been clearly broken down into sub-tasks, with the necessary
    indications of how those are to be solved.
  • All the requirements are specified and clearly documented.
  • A well-defined schedule and work plan have been included, showing in detail how the task is to be undertaken. This explains what is required in a comprehensible manner - it can include layout sheets, record structures, spreadsheet plans, design for data-capture sheets, as
    appropriate.
  • An effective and full testing plan has been devised, with a comprehensive selection of test data and reasons for the choice of the data clearly specified.
  • This stage has been undertaken without assistance.

• 9 - 12    A relevant range of appropriate approaches to a solution has been considered.
  • Reasons for final choice of solution are provided which have been justified and the likely effectiveness has been reasonably considered.
  • A solution has been specified which a competent third party could carry out, but with some difficulty.
  • The proposed solution is broken down into sub-tasks, with some indication of how those are to be solved.
  • Some of the requirements are specified and clearly documented.
  • A schedule and work plan has been included, showing how the tasks are to be undertaken.
  • This explains what is required in a reasonable manner - it can include layout sheets, record structures, spreadsheet plans, design for data-capture sheets, as appropriate.
  • A testing plan has been devised, with some test clearly specified.
  • This stage has been undertaken without undue assistance.
    

• 6 - 8    A limited range of approaches which may have required some assistance.
  • The reasons given for the final choice are weak and the likely effectiveness has not been discussed in detail.
  • Sufficient detail has been given so that the candidate, but not another person, can replicate the solution at a later date.
  • An attempt has been made to break down the solution into sub-tasks, with some indications of how these are to be solved.
  • The documentation is clear but lacking in some respects.
  • A schedule and work plan are included but limited in nature.
  • A testing plan is present.
  • This has been undertaken without undue assistance.
    

• 3 - 5    Only one approach considered which may have required considerable assistance.
  • Only vague reasons given for the final choice and the likely effectiveness has not been discussed.
  • Sufficient detail has been given so that the candidate, but not another person, can replicate the solution at a later date, but with some difficulty.
  • An attempt has been made to break down the solution into sub-tasks but with insufficient indications as to how those are to be solved.
  • The documentation is lacking in many respects.
  • A schedule and work plan should be included, but which are poorly thought out.
  • A testing plan is included but is poor.
  • Substantial assistance may have been required.
    

• 1 - 2    Little or no consideration has been given to approaches to the solution.
  • No or invalid reasons given for final choice of solution.
  • A superficial outline of the solution has been chosen so that thecandidate is unable to replicate the solution at a later date.
  • Little attempt has been made to break down the problem into sub-tasks.
  • The schedule and work plan are vague or missing.
  • The testing plan is vague or missing.
  • The documentation is poor and substantial assistance may have been required.
    

• 0    No detail of chosen solution given.
  

Implementation (15 marks)

• 11 - 15    The candidate has fully implemented the detailed design unaided, in an efficient manner and with no obvious defects.
  • All the appropriate facilities of the software and hardware available were fully exploited.
  • The documentation is clear and thorough.
    

• 6 - 10    The candidate has implemented the essential elements of the design reasonably effectively and largely unaided.
  • The implementation has exploited some of the relevant features of the software and hardware
    available.
  • The documentation lacks detail or may have been omitted. Alternatively, the candidate has fully-implemented a simple design.
    

• 1 - 5    The design has been partially implemented.
  • The implementation has exploited few relevant features of the software and hardware available.
  • The documentation lacks detail or may have been omitted.
    

• 0    There is no implementation.
  

Testing (15 marks)

• 11 - 15 The candidate has shown insight in demonstrating effective test data to cover most or all eventualities.
  • There is a clear evidence of full end-user involvement in testing.
  • The system works with a full range of test data (typical, extreme, erroneous), the test outputs are fully annotated.
    

• 6 - 10    The candidate has demonstrated a range of appropriate test data perhaps with some assistance.
  • There is evidence of end-user involvement during testing.
  • The system works with a limited range of test data, the tests outputs are annotated to a limited extent.
    

• 1 - 5    There is little evidence of testing.
  • There has been only limited involvement of the end-user in testing.
  • It does not meet the design specification.
    

• 0    There is no evidence of testing.
  

User guide (8 marks)

• 6 - 8    A comprehensive, well-illustrated user guide has been produced that deals with all aspects of the system (installation, backup procedures, general use and trouble shooting).
  

• 4 - 5    An illustrated user guide has been produced that deals with general use of the system, but only vaguely considers other areas required to gain 6 - 8 marks.
  

• 1 - 3     A user guide has been produced that deals with general use of the system.
  

• 0    There is no user guide.

Evaluation of the project (10 marks)

• 9 - 10    The candidate has considered clearly a full range of qualitative and quantitative criteria for evaluating the solution.
  • The candidate has fully evaluated his/her solution intelligently against the requirements of the user(s).
  • Evidence of end-user involvement during this stage
    has been provided.
    

• 6 - 8    The candidate has discussed a range of relevant criteria for evaluating the solution.
  • The candidate has evaluated his/her solution against the requirements of the user(s) in most respects.
  • Some, but not all, performance indicators have been identified.
  • Any modifications to meet possible major limitations and/or enhancements have been
    specified, maybe with assistance.
    

• 3 - 5    The system has only been partially evaluated against the original specification and the requirements of the user(s).
  • This may be because the original specification was poor. Few, if any, performance indicators have been identified.
  • Discussion concerning the limitations or enhancements to the system have largely been omitted or have required some prompting.
    

• 1 - 2    Little attempt at evaluation has been made.
  • No performance indicators have been identified.
  • Discussion concerning the limitations or enhancements to the system have been omitted or are limited and have required considerable prompting.
    

• 0    No attempt at evaluation has been made.
  

Preparation of the report (8 marks)

• 7 - 8    A well-written, fully illustrated and organised report has been produced.
  • It describes the project accurately and concisely.
    

• 5 - 6    A well-written report has been produced, but lacks good organisation.
  • Alternatively a well-organised report has been produced which is of limited quality.
    

• 3 - 4    The report is of generally poor quality but shows some evidence of organisation.
  • There has been a number of deficiencies and omissions.
    

• 1 - 2     The report has been poorly organised and presented with few or no diagrams.
  • There has been a considerable number of omissions.
    

• 0    No report is present.