SENG 205 Software Engineering Assessment 1

{`
  COURSE: Bachelor of Information Technology
  Unit Code: SENG 205
  Unit Title: Software Engineering
  Type of Assessment: Written Report
  Kent Institute Australia
  `}

Assessment Description:

Assessment 1 will be an initial design of your project – showing your project plan and its justification. You need to write 1000 words summary on initial project information, elicit high level requirements, classify and prioritize the high level requirements, choose a software development methodology and justify its choice, initial project timeline, and preliminary budget breakdown. You need to work in groups of 4-5 students. Further details of assignment is provided on the Moodle site in “Project Outline” Document in Assessment Briefs folder.

Marking Guide (Rubric):

Assessment Attributes	Fail (Unacceptable) 0-49%	Pass (Functional) 50-64%	Credit (Proficient) 65-74%	Distinction (Advanced) 75 -84%	High Distinction (Exceptional) 85-100%
Research 5/20	Little evidence of research. Sources are missing, Inappropriate, poorly integrated or lacking credibility. Lacks clear link of sources with essay. No in text citations	A minimum of 5 academic sources. Basic use of sources to support ideas, generally well-integrated, most sources are credible. May be weaknesses with paraphrasing or integration /application.	Research is generally thorough. Good use of sources to support ideas, mostly well integrated, sources are credible. May be weaknesses with paraphrasing or integration/ application.	Thorough research is indicated. Very good use of sources to support ideas, well integrated, sources are credible. May be minor weaknesses with paraphrasing or integration/application.	Thorough research is indicated. Professional use of sources to support ideas, well integrated, sources are credible. Very minor, if any, weaknesses with paraphrasing or Integration/application.
Information / Content 5/20	Report lacks coherence; topic is poorly addressed; little analysis.	Report is generally coherent; topic is addressed; analyses in reasonable depth with some description. There are some inconsistencies and weaknesses with flow.	Report is coherent and flows well; topic is addressed quite thoroughly; analyses in considerable depth. There may be some inconsistencies and weaknesses with flow.	Report is very coherent and flows well; topic is addressed thoroughly; analyses in depth. There may be minor inconsistencies and weakness with flow.	Professional work. Report is very coherent and flows well; topic is addressed thoroughly; analyses in great depth. Very minor, if any, inconsistencies and weaknesses with flow.
Structure 4/20	Topic, concepts and thesis are not clear in introduction. Material in the body is generally poorly sequenced. No discernible conclusion; no links to introduction.	Topic, concepts and thesis are stated with some clarity in introduction. Material in body is generally logically sequenced; some weaknesses. Conclusion does not clearly summarise essay; links to introduction are not clear.	Topic, concepts and thesis are clearly conveyed in introduction. Material in body is logically and clearly sequenced; few or minor weaknesses. Conclusion summarises essay; may be some weaknesses; generally clear links to intro.	Topic, concepts and thesis are clearly outlined in introduction. Material in body is logically and clearly sequenced; very few or minor weaknesses. Conclusion mostly effectively summarises essay; with recommendations and clear links to introduction.	Topic, concepts are clearly outlined in introduction. Material in body is logically and clearly sequenced; very minor, if any, weaknesses. Conclusion effectively summarises essay; with recommendations and clear links to introduction.
Language/ Presentation 3/20	Poor standard of writing. Word limit may not be adhered to. Incorrect format (e.g. includes Table of contents; bullet points; graphs etc.)	A minimum of 900 words. Basic and sound standard of writing; some errors in punctuation, grammar and spelling. Inconsistencies with the formatting.	Good standard of writing; few errors in punctuation, grammar and spelling. Almost correct format.	Very good standard of writing; very few or minor errors in punctuation, grammar and spelling. Correct formatting.	Professional standard of writing; no errors in punctuation, grammar and spelling. Correct formatting.
Referencing 3/20	No referencing is evident or, if done, is inconsistent and technically incorrect. No or minimal reference list, mixed styles. No in text citations	Basic and sound attempt to reference sources; may be some inconsistencies and technical errors in style. Reference list is generally complete with 1 or 2 references missing.	Good attempt to reference sources; inconsistencies and technical errors in style. Few inaccuracies in reference list and all references listed.	Very good attempt to reference sources; very minor inconsistencies and technical errors in style. Thorough and consistent reference list and all references listed.	Professional level of referencing and acknowledgment; no errors of style evident. Thorough and consistent reference list and all references listed

Australia Universities

ACT

Australian Catholic University

Australian National University

Bond University

Central Queensland University

Charles Darwin University

Charles Sturt University

Curtin University of Technology

Deakin University

Edith Cowan University

Flinders University

Griffith University

Holmes Institute

James Cook University

La Trobe University

Macquarie University

Monash University

Murdoch University

Queensland University of Technology

RMIT University

Southern Cross University

Swinburne University of Technology

University of Adelaide

University of Ballarat

University of Canberra

University of Melbourne

University of Newcastle

University of New England

University of New South Wales

University of Notre Dame Australia

University of Queensland

University of South Australia

University of Southern Queensland

University of Sydney

University of Tasmania

University of Technology Sydney

University of the Sunshine Coast

University of Western Australia

University of Wollongong

Victoria University

Western Sydney University

Year 11 - 12 Certification Assignment

Australian Capital Territory Year 12 Certificate

HSC - Higher School Certificate

NTCE - Northern Territory Certificate of Education

QCE - Queensland Certificate of Education

SACE - South Australian Certificate of Education

TCE - Tasmanian Certificate of Education

VCE - Victorian Certificate of Education

WACE - Western Australia Certificate of Education

SENG 205 Software Engineering Assessment 1

Diploma Universities Assignments