TDDD26 Development of Interactive Systems (User-centered Agile System Development)
The examination of the course consists of two parts:
- Project work in group. This receives the grade Fail (E) or 3 (C).
- Individual report. This receives grade Fail, 3 ,4 or 5 (E, C, B or A)
To pass the course with grade 3 (C) both project work and individual report must receive grade 3 (C). For grade 4 or 5 (B or A) the project work must receive grade 3 (C) and the individual report grade 4 or 5 (B or A). Thus, the individual report is the base for individual examination. As a complement to this we will use a survey for self and peer assessment. This is used to corroborate the grading of the individual reports. Here you can find the survey.
Below are more detailed information on the requirements for the different grades for the project work and the individual report.
Project work in group
- Actively participate in all aspects of project work: design workshop, planning game, design, coding, testing.
- Actively participate in the supervision meetings.
- Hand in the code and documentation for the project work at the demo session:
- Name, personnummer (social security number), liu e-mail for all participants
- Project specification
- All written work material, for example user stories, acceptance tests, sketches.
- Results from discussions, planning games and tests with users
- Instructions for how to start the prototype (and technical requirements)
- Prototype (code)
- A printed version of the peer assessment survey that you have filled in.
Individual reportThe report should show how you have personally contributed to the project work and what the most important things you have learned in the course are. Thus it is an individual examination based on the group work. To recieve a high grade it is required that you have worked hard in the project (shown through the individual report and the peer assessment surveyes) and learned about the methods both through reading the litterature and practical work. The individual report is an opportunity to reflect on what insights the project have brought and how these relate to the course litterature.
To recieve the Grade 3 (C) the report must:
- be 1500 - 2500 words. The number of words must be stated in a footnote.
- be written entirely individual.
- be well-written. It must be spell checked and thoroughly proof read. Spoken language is not acceptable. A report with poor language is returned immediately without review.
- use correct terminology according to the course literature.
- have a clear structure and theme.
- clearly justify why the described contributions have been important for the project work results.
- clearly justify why each reported lesson learned is important.
- clearly refer to the course literature (with page number in the case of books).
To recieve the Grade 4 (B) the report must also:
- demonstrate that the student has made outstanding efforts in the project work.
- clearly show how the lessons learned are linked to relevant previously, or at the same time, read university courses (two courses, which are referred to by name of course).
- describe your own contribution and lessons learned in a way that demonstrates an excellent understanding of the course content.
To recieve the Grade 5 (A) the report must also:
- clearly show that you have read extensive literature related to the lessons learned described in the report (referred with page number in the case of books).
More detailed instructions
The reflection report is a mean for you as a student to convince the teacher that you deserve a grade higher than the base line. Remember that this is an advanced course, so the requirements are high. To convince the teacher you need to demonstrate that you have reflected on the topics of the course, integrated them in the project work, and understood their limits.
Write the report in a way that allows for an external reviewer (without deeper insight into the specific project group) to form a good idea of how you have worked and what you have learned. You can however expect that the examiner has an approximate picture of what the project work is about, so you need not start from scratch, about 4-5 lines of concise description of the project work should be enough. Likewise, you can assume that the reviewer has very good knowledge of the subject. Basic concepts need not be explained.
Stick roughly to the following structure (it is not a requirement that the report looks exactly like this, but if you are in doubt, sticking to the following structure will probably help you):
- Personal contributions are reported by the 3-5 most important contributions to the project work described in detail. Be sure to justify why and how the contributions were important. Try to highlight what is unique to you. Have you made any important decision? What were its consequences? Have you taken responsibility for something specific? Contributions made with another person, where it is difficult to tell who did what exactly, may also be described, but then it should be clear who the other person is and how the collaboration came about. Try to avoid a description of the form "First I did this, then I did that ...". It can of course be important to use a chronological order in certain cases, but it is not an exhaustive list of what you've done in the course that is requested.
- Select a couple of lessons learned (normally 3-5) from your project work worthy of deeper discussion. Select the issues with care, e.g. important problems that occurred. Make sure that you can relate the issues to the course topics (e.g. agile methodology). If you can't, then it's not a good issue to discuss. For each issue, do the following:
- Describe the issue and the part of the project work that is related to the issue, so that the issue can be well understood (i.e. give a context to the issue). Justify why the issue is interesting (e.g. because the consequences of the issue are severe, or the issue is common but difficult to handle).
- Give concrete examples of the issue and/or it's consequences.
- Describe an approach to handle the issue (e.g. what you could have done differently).
- Give concrete examples of how the proposed approach could be applied in the project.
Note that proposed approaches must be thought through. It is not enough to just say "we need to work harder", or "we need to prepare better". You must describe exactly *how* you should change your work method, or *how* your preparation should change, in detail and with examples.
For example, if one of your issues is that your team worked with user stories being too complex and therefore difficult to handle, and your approach is to work with smaller user stories the next sprint, you should do the following:
- Give some context to the issue by describing how user storiess were created and how your team worked with the stories afterwards.
- Explain what the negative consequences of working with complex stories were in your case.
- Give examples of a story that was overly complex.
- Suggest an approach to divide complex stories into smaller stories (e.g. using a time threshold, so that stories estimated to 15 or more hours must be divided into smaller stories).
- Suggest how the example story could have been divided.
- Throughout this discussion it would be good with references to literature discussing user story writing or story estimation.
- References to the literature should be given throughout the report. Such references can be done along the lines of "the outcome in this case was not as predicted by [x]", or "this approach to the problem is also suggested by [y]", or "the approach suggested in [z] could be adapted as follows". Use the links on the literature section of the course web page, or use the Internet.
- Note that 2500 words is a limited space. It's about carefully deciding what should be included and how it is presented. Remember that it is much easier to write a long and unstructured report than a short and koncis. The report should not follow the classical report template with the purpose, method, etc. It is not the type of report simply. Often it works well to have two parts: one part with contributions and one part with lessons learned. The basic rule is that the reader should be able to follow a line of argument through the report and not feel that it jumps back and forth.
Common student problems to avoid
- No issues are discussed at all; the report is just a step-wise description of what was done in the project. This kind of report gets an immediate fail, since it is not the kind of report we asked for.
- Discussion of non-interesting issues. Failure to justify why the issue is interesting.
- Some issues are described but not in enough detail, or without examples.
- No approach for overcoming an identified problem is described, or not described in enough detail, or without concrete examples. Or the approach is simply too naive.
- No references to the literature.
Total grade for course
The grade for the course is based solely on the grade on the individual report.
Note that if the report shows a poor level of effort in the project work, it will result in the grade Fail (U/E) on the project, and thus the grade for the course as a whole will be Fail (U/E). The only possibility to pass the project and the course is to to take the course next time it is given.
Page responsible: Annika Silvervarg
Last updated: 2014-03-10