08/11/2021 Page 1 of 10
|Coursework Header Sheet
|Course||COMP1833: Software Quality Management||Course School/Level||H/PG|
|Coursework||Software Quality Management||Assessment Weight||50.00%|
|Tutor||D Frangiskatos||Submission Deadline||22/11/2021|
|Coursework is receipted on the understanding that it is the student’s own work and that it has not,
in whole or part, been presented elsewhere for assessment. Where material has been used from
other sources it has been properly acknowledged in accordance with the University’s Regulations
regarding Cheating and Plagiarism.
|Grade Awarded___________||For Office Use Only__________||Final
|Moderation required: yes/no||Tutor______________________||Date
08/11/2021 Page 2 of 10
|Plagiarism is presenting somebody else’s work as your own. It
includes: copying information directly from the Web or books
without referencing the material; submitting joint coursework as
an individual effort; copying another student’s coursework;
stealing coursework from another student and submitting it as
your own work. Suspected plagiarism will be investigated and if
found to have occurred will be dealt with according to the
procedures set down by the University. Please see your student
handbook for further details of what is / isn’t plagiarism.
All material copied or amended from any source (e.g. internet, books)
must be referenced correctly according to the reference style you are
Your work will be submitted for plagiarism checking. Any attempt to
bypass our plagiarism detection systems will be treated as a severe
Coursework Submission Requirements
• An electronic copy of your work for this coursework must be fully uploaded
on the Deadline Date of 22/11/2021 using the link on the coursework
Moodle page for COMP1833.
• For this coursework you must submit a single PDF document. In general,
any text in the document must not be an image (i.e. must not be scanned)
and would normally be generated from other documents (e.g. MS Office
using “Save As .. PDF”). An exception to this is hand written mathematical
notation, but when scanning do ensure the file size is not excessive.
• There are limits on the file size (see the relevant course Moodle page).
• Make sure that any files you upload are virus-free and not protected by a
password or corrupted otherwise they will be treated as null submissions.
• Your work will not be printed in colour. Please ensure that any pages with
colour are acceptable when printed in Black and White.
• You must NOT submit a paper copy of this coursework.
• All courseworks must be submitted as above. Under no circumstances can
they be accepted by academic staff
The University website has details of the current Coursework Regulations,
including details of penalties for late submission, procedures for Extenuating
Circumstances, and penalties for Assessment
Offences. See http://www2.gre.ac.uk/current-students/regs
08/11/2021 Page 3 of 10
There are four parts on this group coursework. The first three parts of this coursework
will have to be divided among the group participants. The last part consist of a group
performance evaluation which allows you individually to discuss your group’s
performance. This will encapsulate your own views of how well your group did.
• You will need to form a group of three.
• You will need to decide and assign roles to each one within the group and clearly
state these roles. Each of the first three tasks can be then discussed between
the group. It is suggested that you assign a Project Lead, a Project Developer and
a Stake holder. Ideally each one of you will have their role and their views for
this project and contribute as required. You can then divide the work and each
of you can work on each one of the first three tasks or all of you can work
together on each of the first three tasks.
• The last task should be completed individually and it will contain your own,
individual views regarding the group’s performance.
• The group size cannot be less than three or more than three. Note: As a last
resort and only if there is no way to form a group of three you can ask your
lecturer for an exception and these requests will be considered.
• It is your responsibility to create and manage the group. Not your lecturer’s.
• It is your responsibility to manage the group, the work load, the tasks, the
comms and deal with any issues such us poor contribution.
• You will receive a mark based on the mark of your group so it is in your interest
for your group to perform well.
• If members of your group do not contribute despite your efforts, then when you
submit your work you can mention this and similar issues in part 4 of the
coursework. A mark reduction might be applied based to these individuals
depending on the impact of their (lack of) engagement.
Part 1: Project planning case study- worth 30%
In this section you are required to define a set of requirements for the Hospital Sterile Services case
(I1). A preliminary design (I2) should follow again as part of your work.
I3 is the proposed planning and it is required – you cannot get marks for I1 and I2 without it.
08/11/2021 Page 4 of 10
You should then create a CoCoMo estimation for the project (I4) and conduct a Social, Legal and
Ethical review of the project (I5).
Deliverables from part 1:
I1: Requirements specification (5 marks)
I2: Design work (5 marks)
I3: Proposed planning (A Gantt chart or similar) – you must do this to get marks for I1 & I2
I4: CoCoMo (10 marks)
I5: Social, Legal and Ethical review of the project (10 marks)
The Case Study: Hospital Sterile Services
The sterile services department of a large hospital manages the cleaning and sterilisation of surgical
and other medical instruments used at various medical procedures such as medical operations in the
hospital. Surgical instrument are organised in trays, each identified by a unique identification number.
A medical procedure will typically use one or more of trays of surgical instruments. The tray id is
recorded in the procedure notes, so that the history of any instruments used can be traced at any time
in the future and cross-referenced to individual patients and medical personnel. Each procedure type
requires a prescribed number of trays, each with a predetermined list of contents, specific for this type
After a procedure, some or all of the instruments used may need to be disposed of. Any individual
instruments disposed of are replaced by brand new ones. The trays are then loaded on trolleys and
taken through a series of cleansing and sterilisation procedures. Typically, each tray is washed to
remove any organic matter and then put through a series of operations to sterilise them. The series of
required sterilisation operations depend on the tray instrument list type. For each sterilisation
operation, the operator name, sterilisation machine identification, date and time need to be recorded.
Your software consultancy company has been approached to automate the current process that is
largely paper based. The aim is to create a software system that can automate the process and allow
integration with other hospital information systems.
You are required to model the current business system and propose a new, integrated software system
that will include all current functionality and enhancements needed.
Your job is to elicit the exact requirements from the case study. Any clarifications that you need to
make will be done in questions and answer sessions with your client (your lecturer) during class. You
can make further assumptions, as well. However, you will (as good software engineers) record any
conclusions and assumptions you make from these discussions to be included in your final
Part 2: Management report for the production of an academic essay – worth 30%
For this task you are required to perform some management for the production of a quality assurance
on your essay part 3. You should document as a detailed section in your coursework how you will
ensure both process and product quality, time management using project planning techniques and
risk assessment. You should also include review of your plan once the work is complete.
08/11/2021 Page 5 of 10
This part your coursework should include the following:
1. A description of your process and product quality assurance procedure for your
coursework. This should include a description of any change control that you have
2. A review of your quality assurance procedures.
Deliverables from part 2:
I6: QA plan with commercial risk assessment (10 marks) and time management (30 marks)
Your QA plan should guide your production of Part 3
08/11/2021 Page 6 of 10
Part 3: Academic essay – worth 30%
You are to submit an academic style paper.
In his seminal paper “No Silver Bullet – Essence and Accidents of Software Engineering1” Fred
Brooks Jr. questioned whether there could be a “silver bullet” that could lay to rest the monsters of
missed schedules, blown budgets and flawed products. He argued that software development is
ultimately reliant on good designers and good managers and so advances in technology and
methodology such as object-orientated analysis and design or programming languages can never give
more than marginal gains. He concluded that “Building software will always be hard. There is
inherently no silver bullet.”
However, that paper was written nearly thirty years ago and in that time there have been a number of
advances which claim to specifically address the problems of large scale systems development.
You are to research and prepare a report on one of these techniques from the following list:
• Extreme Programming.
Your report should be an academic style discussion that critically evaluates the technique’s value in
light of software engineering’s inherent problems and concludes by discussing how far the technology
does, or does not, go toward supporting the view expressed by Brooks in the quotation given above.
The report should have solid academic content and you should therefore base your discussion on at
least one refereed paper from a leading computing or software engineering journal such as IEEE
Software, IEEE Computing or Communications of the ACM.
The paper in Part 2 should following typical format of a formal academic paper. You may consider
looking at the ‘information for authors’ found in all referred archived journals for examples of
formatting and layout. An example of the IEEE style manual and article templates can be found at
The essay should be between 1,500 and 2,000 words arranged in the following order:
2 Author name, degree program and email address
3 An abstract description of your paper,
4 The main body of your, suitably divided under headings and where necessary, sub-headings
(for example, Introduction, Discussion, Conclusions, Evaluation, Future Work)
5 Acknowledgements (if any)
6 References (Harvard standard)
7 Appendices including a glossary of terms and list of acronyms used (if any).
The paper in Section 2 should following typical format of a formal academic paper.
Deliverables from part 3:
I7: Academic essay
1 Brooks Jr., F. P., “No Silver Bullet: Essence and Accidents of Software Engineering”,
Computer, Vol. 20(4), (April 1987) pp. 10-19. (A copy of this can be found online)
08/11/2021 Page 7 of 10
Part 4: Group Performance Evaluation – worth 10%
You are to complete a short individual evaluation of the performance of your group (up to
two A4 pages).
How did you perform while working together? Any issues, problems and how did you work
around these? There is no requirement for a formal report for this task but try to keep within
one A4 page.
08/11/2021 Page 8 of 10
Deliverable summary and checklist
The following deliverables are expected as part of this coursework. You can complete this table on
your printed sheet to ensure that you have not forgotten to include any of the items.
|1 (30%)||I1||Requirements specification||5 (only with
|I2||Design work||5 (only with
|I3||Completed Gantt Chart (or
similar) – required for I1 and I2
|I4||CoCoMo cost estimations||10|
|I5||Social, Legal and Ethical review
of the project
|2 (30%)||I6||QA plan with commercial risk
|3 (30%)||I7||Academic essay|
|Knowledge and Comprehension||6|
|Analysis and Synthesis||6|
|4 (10%)||I8||Performance Evaluation||10|
08/11/2021 Page 9 of 10
In addition to the criteria of excellent this level must show excellent referencing and the
work has the possibility of publication; subject to suitable editing.
Excellent / Very good
In addition to the criteria of good work at this level must demonstrate significant
substantiated critique, insight and academically sound assertions.
The QA plan contains both excellent project management and well specified quality
objectives that are exceptional. Section 1 is complete.
In addition to the criteria of satisfactory, this level this level demonstrates strong synthesis,
analysis and application, knowledge and comprehension but somewhat weak critique.
The work provides some critique and insight but its not well supported by evidence or logic.
Provides relevant contextual examples of the techniques to support the discussion, such
examples are mostly based on evidence or sound logic. The combination of work
demonstrates good synthesis and generates additional information beyond the original
sources. Occasional strong academic assertions are made. The student demonstrates and
clear analytical approach to answering the question posed.
The QA plan contains either good project management and somewhat relevant, well
specified quality objectives or vice-versa. Section 1 is complete.
This level demonstrates the occasional presentation of relevant knowledge and
comprehension applied and contextualised to the question posed, absent or unsound
synthesis, analysis and critique. The student demonstrates sufficient knowledge and
comprehension. This includes the use of academic sources of information to present
information accurately. The paper fails to make relevant examples and/or the examples are
The QA plan makes an attempt at project management and quality objectives but they are in
places quite weak and erroneous. Deliverables are absent but those provided are of sufficient
quality to warrant a pass.
This level demonstrates unsound presentation of relevant knowledge and comprehension
applied and/or the presentation of material is not contextualised to the question posed,
absent or unsound synthesis, analysis and critique. Does not demonstrate accurate
reporting of information. The references are unsound. Does not answer the question
The QA plan is incomplete. The plan does not provide project management and/or quality
objectives. A factual presentation without application to the specific task of writing an
academic paper warrants a failure.
08/11/2021 Page 10 of 10
YOUR ATTENTION IS ONCE AGAIN DRAWN TO THE UNIVERSITY RULES ON
This is a level seven degree coursework and therefore, as well as a demonstrating that you have learnt some
facts or skills, you are being assessed on your ability to research, think and reason and then articulate your
findings and conclusions.
You will be assessed on the following points:
Knowledge & Comprehension:
• A clear demonstration of background reading and research into the issues discussed.
• A demonstration of your understanding of the field, i.e. clearly identifying and enumerating the
fundamental issues, use of correct terminology and facts including knowledge of the existence and names
of methods, classifications, abstractions, generalizations and theories.
• Discussion summarizing the topic area and ability to extrapolate beyond the given situation.
• Can explain or summarize information giving a good account of work done by others and reporting ideas
intelligibly with accuracy and thoroughness and without introducing gross distortions
Analysis, Application & Synthesis
• Able to apply abstractions in particular and concrete situations, e.g. use of examples to illustrate and
support your argument.
• General organizational structures can be identified
• Assumptions can be recognized.
• Can produce sensible, reasoned and substantiated criticism and suggest alternatives
• Does not indulge in pointless and unsubstantiated criticism
• Able to combine elements or parts in such a way as to produce a pattern or structure that was not clearly
Evaluation / critique
• Demonstration of insight
• A strong argument supporting or rejecting the technique with a sound conclusion given your stated
• Can make qualitative and quantitative judgments about the value of methods, processes or artefacts.
Consider how these will be met within your academic paper
- Assignment status: Already Solved By Our Experts
- (USA, AUS, UK & CA PhD. Writers)
- CLICK HERE TO GET A PROFESSIONAL WRITER TO WORK ON THIS PAPER AND OTHER SIMILAR PAPERS, GET A NON PLAGIARIZED PAPER FROM OUR EXPERTS