Home > Undergraduate > Professional Computing 3200 >  Project

  CITS3200 PROFESSIONAL COMPUTING
 
 

Sprint 1 Marking Criteria

When marking the project the following scheme will be used as a guide. Maximum marks for a criterion, eg 5/5, will only be awarded sparingly. The marks for group-based part of Sprint 1 will be the sum of the individual criteria. The marking critera of the components of Sprint 1 are:
  • The overall quality of the Scope of Work/Epic as a document (/5).
    What is being assessed here is not the format, but the clarity, both in the use of language and as a logical exposition of the work to be done.
  • 0Absent or totally garbled
    1The document is: incoherently laid out; has little evidence of proof reading; inconsistent; difficult to use
    2The document has a little useful content but is seriously deficient on the other criteria
    3A reasonable standard of presentation but has many small defects or content is imprecise or inconsistent
    4Very few errors in presentation
    5Remarkable job. Has high clarity and appeal

  • Acceptance Tests (/4)
  • 0Absent or meaningless
    1A rudimentary set of tests which do not appear to challenge even a basic set of requirements
    2A reasonable set of tests but with some shortcomings in scope or presentation
    3A clearly defined set of tests which appear useful
    4A comprehensive set of tests which are perfectly specified and exercise all the use cases corresponding to the top $70 (70%) of value

  • Skills and Resources Audit (/4)
  • 0No skills audit
    1Just a token effort
    2Rudimentary, but some evidence of thought
    3Solid audit of what the Team has versus what will be required for the project
    4The Team has really thought of everything

  • Risks Register (/4)
  • 0No risk register
    1Just a token effort
    2Rudimentary, but some evidence of thought
    3Solid audit of the risks the project may face and what the Team will do to mitigate those risks
    4The Team has really thought of everything

  • Coherence and reasonablenesss of the set of Sprint 2 (i.e. intermediate) goals (/5)
  • 0No plan
    1Incoherent set of goals that bear little relationship to desired final outomes
    2Sprint 2 goals bear some relationship to final outcome
    3Sprint 2 goals clearly heading to final outcome, but are either too close (essentially just final goal recapitulated) or too unambitious, leaving far too much for the final Sprint
    4A solid set of goals, with appropriate phasing, but something missing
    5An extremely solid plan


Department of Computer Science & Software Engineering
The University of Western Australia

Last modified: 1 July 2020
Created by: Michael Wise
UWA