Software Architecture and Testing CT059-3-2 Assignment

Page 1 of 3

ASIA PACIFIC UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION Level 2 CT059-3-2 - Software Architecture and Testing Assignment Learning Outcome 1. Decide the aims and objectives, deliverables and scope of typical IT Software architectural styles. 2. Evaluate and deploy a software architecture for a software development project 3. Analyze the software architecture using ATAM, ARID and SAAM. How to proceed with your assignment: Organise yourselves into groups of not more than 3 students. Answer all questions. Work with your group. In week 13, you will lead a presentation to present your findings and considered opinions to your lecturer and your peers. o In the week following your presentation, submit a final documentation of your findings and considered opinions. o o o o Research Questions 1. Think of a system that is not yet ready for an architecture evaluation. What is it about the system that made you choose it? Can you generalise your answer to establish criteria for whether or not a project is ready for an architecture evaluation? 2. One of the benefits the client perceived from ATAM exercise was the chance to achieve consensus among the stakeholders about which system enhancement to tackle first. Suppose that was your only goal. Propose a new method, called Stakeholder Consensus Realisation Analysis Method (SCRAM), and define its steps, phases, participants and artifacts. 3. The SAAM is a relatively simple architecture evaluation method that was created to operationalise the vague claims of modifiability, robustness, portability and so forth that people typically make for their architecture. Plan an implementation strategy using SAAM for your software architecture evaluation. Clearly identify and evaluate the steps involved. 4. Pick a design from your software development projects and walk through a small ARID exercise on it. Identify the designer who would represent it during the review. Choose the stakeholder you would want to review. Propose a set of scenarios that exemplify its usage.
Level 2 Asia Pacific University College of Technology & Innovation 2009

Software Architecture and Testing CT059-3-2 Assignment

Page 2 of 3

Assessment Criteria Each question carries 25 marks. Each question will be assessed on the following criteria: 1. Introduction (5 marks) 2. Maturity of arguments explanation, justification, usage of examples and etc. (15 marks) 3. Conclusion and recommendation (5 marks) The workload matrix should indicate the contribution of each individual for each required question (shown in %age form) and should be signed off by each team member. It is advisable for all group members to contribute in all questions. Sample Workload Matrix No. 1 2 3 4 Description Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Signature Student 1 Student 2 Student 3 100% 100% 100% 100%

Final Documentation The final documentation of your assignment should be a comb binding copy with an appropriate cover page stating: APIIT Logo Subject title Topic of assignment Intake code Your group No. Student ID number.

To address the subject satisfactorily for each question length should be a maximum of 1,500 words [excluding diagrams and appendices]. The documentation has to be wordprocessed, printed on single side A4 size paper with 1.5 line spacing. You will not be assessed on presentation skills. We are looking primarily for quality of research, supporting evidence for your arguments, and mature value judgements about the assignments subject matter.

Level 2

Asia Pacific University College of Technology & Innovation

2009

Software Architecture and Testing CT059-3-2 Assignment

Page 3 of 3

Performance Criteria Grade General 0-49% Assessment Guidelines Pass answers are expected to be legible, tidy, well organised and written in clear, understandable English. Students who grossly exceed the word limit will be penalized. Superficial analysis, concepts and language of the subject are absent or scant. Irrelevant regurgitation of text book. Ideas are poorly expressed. Many key issues are ignored. Concepts and language of the subject are used but are often confused in application and or explanation. Some key issues are ignored. Some understanding of the relevant models and concepts. Some elements of an appropriate structure are present. Restricted analysis of some issues. Evidence of reading and research. Understanding of the application of appropriate models and concepts is demonstrated. Key issues are identified and analysed, although this may be restricted at times. Some sources are acknowledged. Evidence of wider reading. The assignment effectively interprets the information and exhibits the integration of ideas across the subject area. The assignment has credible recommendations. A systematic approach to development and evaluation is used. Most sources are acknowledged and referenced using Harvard system. and Arguments are clear and convincing. Confident integration of theory and practices is demonstrated. Consistent referencing to sources using the Harvard system.

50-64% 65-74%

75-79%

80% above

Level 2

Asia Pacific University College of Technology & Innovation

2009