System analysis and Design Concepts (COMP 1004) – Spring – 20 – CW 2 (Assignment) – All – QP
MEC_AMO_TEM_034_01 Page 1 of 10
Instructions to Student
Answer all questions.
Deadline of submission: 4th July 20
| | The marks received on the assignment will be scaled down to the actual weightage of the assignment which is 50 marks Formative feedback on the complete assignment draft will be provided if the draft is submitted at least 10 days before the final submission date. Feedback after final evaluation will be provided by 18th July 20 |
| | |
| |
Module Learning Outcomes
The following LOs are achieved by the student by completing the assignment successfully
1) Apply the tools of structured analysis within a process of systems development
2) Describe the different phases of systems design
3) Evaluate appropriate input and output design considerations
Assignment Objective
This is an individual case study aimed to apply analysis and designing techniques during system
development.
Assignment Tasks
1) Submit a work proposal for this assignment or before 6-May-20 (23:59) which must include:
| |
Understanding of deliverables –initial understanding of solution to task2. Timeline for completion of the given tasks. List of resources |
| ` | |
| IN SEMESTER (INDIVIDUAL) ASSIGNMENT | |
| Module Code: COMP 1004 | Module Name: System Analysis and Design Concepts |
| Level: 2 | Max. Marks: 100 |
System analysis and Design Concepts (COMP 1004) – Spring – 20 – CW 2 (Assignment) – All – QP
MEC_AMO_TEM_034_01 Page 2 of 10
The work proposal must be submitted in a word file through the link available in Moodle.
(10 Marks)
Task 2:
(90 Marks)
In the first assignment of System Analysis and Design Concepts for the current semester, you
have already completed the initial investigation of an Information System of your choice. In this
task, you will conduct all activities and prepare all deliverable products associated with the
System analysis and design process for the same system that you have studied in assignment1.
At the conclusion of your study, you will prepare a comprehensive, high-quality assignment
report containing your results. You will also design a prototype model (Design only) of your
proposed system using a suitable interface of your choice.
1. Prepare the Context diagram that describes the flow of information between the suggested
information system and the external entities.
(10 marks)
2. Prepare the DFD level 0 for the proposed system including at least 4 processes.
(20 marks)
3. Prepare two DFD level 1 that break down each one of the main processes that have been
determined in DFD level 0.
(10 marks)
4. Design the HIPO chart for the proposed system in consistency with the different DFD
prepared in the analysis phase. Make sure to include at least four modules.
(10 marks)
5. Design at least two IPO charts describing the input, process and output of two modules
included in the previous HIPO chart.
(10 marks)
6. Design at least four input/output forms in consistency with HIPO/IPO charts already
prepared. You need to use an automated design tool for this purpose.
(20 marks)
7. Write individually a reflective writing section that summarizes the contents of your
individual work, learning and experiences.
(10 marks)
System analysis and Design Concepts (COMP 1004) – Spring – 20 – CW 2 (Assignment) – All – QP
MEC_AMO_TEM_034_01 Page 3 of 10
Viva / Presentation: There are no separate marks for viva and presentation. The assignment will
be judged based on the knowledge and understanding of the student.
Note:
(i) All the marks will depend on viva voce during presentation.
Your assignment should include a cover page indicating your name, title of work, course, date,
and name of the instructor. Make sure that drawings are clear and legible. Keep in mind that you
will be judged on visual appearance, in addition to grammatical correctness and quality of writing.
The text must be well-structured, with paragraphs, full sentences and all the other features of a
well-written report. Your report must not consist of itemized lists of points. The report should
not exceed 20 pages (not counting references, appendices, figures or tables.) Text font size
should be 12 points.
Rules & Regulations:
<Below given are only suggestive. It may be edited as per the needs of the assignment/module>
| |
All resources should be cited using CU Harvard style. The final assignment must have a Title page, Table of Contents, References/ bibliography using CU Harvard Style and page numbers. Title Page must have Assignment Name, Module name, Session, your name, ID, and the name of the faculty. Softcopy in word format is to be submitted through Turnitin link on Moodle. Viva will be conducted after the assignment submission as per the dates informed earlier. |
| | |
| |
Guidelines:
<Below given guidelines are only suggestive. It may be edited as per the needs of the assignment/module>
| | Assignment must be computer typed. |
| |
Font – Times New Roman Font – Style – Regular Font – Size – 12 Heading should be with Font Size 14, Bold, Capital and Underline. |
Explain with suitable diagrams wherever required. Diagrams must be drawn using suitable
software or by pencil.
System analysis and Design Concepts (COMP 1004) – Spring – 20 – CW 2 (Assignment) – All – QP
MEC_AMO_TEM_034_01 Page 4 of 10
| | Each student has to do the assignment individually / Students have to do the assignment collaboratively and each student should write a brief reflection on their contribution and learnings from group work. You can refer books in eLibrary or use internet resource. But you should not cut and paste material |
| |
from internet nor provide photocopied material from books. The assignment answers should be
in your own words after understanding the matter from the above resources.
Important Policies to be followed
1. Student Academic Integrity Policy*:
MEC upholds the spirit of academic integrity in all forms of academic work and any form of violation
of academic integrity shall invite severe penalty. Any benefit obtained by indulging in the act of
violation of academic integrity shall be cancelled.
All cases of violation of academic integrity on the part of the student shall fall under any of the below
mentioned categories:
1. Plagiarism
2. Malpractice
3. Ghost Writing
4. Collusion
5. Other cases
If the student fails a module and has a proven case of academic integrity violation in this module, the
student is required to re-register the module. This is applicable to first and second offenders of
plagiarism.
1. Plagiarism
A. First offence of plagiarism
I. If a student is caught first time in an act of plagiarism during his/her course of study in
any assignment other than project work, the student will be allowed to re-submit the
assignment once, within a maximum period of one week. However, a penalty of
deduction of 25% of the marks obtained for the resubmitted work will be imposed.
| II. | Period of re-submission: The student will have to re-submit the work one week from the date he or she is advised to re-submit. If the re-submitted work is also found to be plagiarized, then that assessment will be |
| III. |
awarded a zero mark. Re-submission of the work beyond the maximum period of one
week will not be accepted and the assessment will be awarded a zero mark.
B. Second offence of plagiarism
System analysis and Design Concepts (COMP 1004) – Spring – 20 – CW 2 (Assignment) – All – QP
MEC_AMO_TEM_034_01 Page 5 of 10
If any student is caught second time in an act of plagiarism during his/her course of study (in a
subsequent semester), the student will directly be awarded zero for the work in which plagiarism
is detected. In such cases, the student will not be allowed to resubmit the work. A warning of
suspension shall be issued, and student has to sign an undertaking and undergo counselling
session in such cases.
2. Malpractice/Ghostwriting/Collusion
A. First offence of Malpractice/Ghostwriting/Collusion
If a student is caught in an act of Malpractice/Ghostwriting/Collusion for an assessment
component irrespective of coursework or end semester, the student shall fail the module
and shall be required to re-register the module
B. Second Offence of Malpractice/Ghostwriting/Collusion
If a student is caught a second time in an act of Malpractice/Ghostwriting/Collusion for
an assessment component irrespective of coursework or end semester, the student
shall fail the module. A warning of suspension shall be issued, and student has to sign
an undertaking and undergo counselling session in such cases.
3. Third Offence of Academic Integrity Violation
If a student is caught a third time in an act of Academic Integrity Violation for an assessment
component irrespective of coursework or end semester (in a subsequent semester), the student
shall fail the module and also shall be suspended for one semester from the College, as
recommended by institutional level academic committee, Chaired by the Associate Dean, Academic
Affairs.
4. Fourth Offence of Academic Integrity Violation:
If a student is caught a fourth time in an act of Academic Integrity Violation for an assessment
component irrespective of coursework or end semester (in a subsequent semester), the student shall
fail the module and also shall be expelled from the College, as recommended by institutional level
academic committee, Chaired by the Associate Dean, Academic Affairs.
5. Other cases
If a student commits an act of academic integrity violation as per the definition of “other cases”
mentioned in the previous section or of a different nature, student’s case shall be forwarded to an
institutional level academic committee, Chaired by the Associate Dean, Academic Affairs. The
committee shall investigate the case by means of a viva and/or a disciplinary hearing and shall take
appropriate decision. The penalty that can be granted to a proven case of academic integrity violation
which falls in this category of “other cases” can be a warning/component zero/ module
fail/suspension/expulsion depending on the nature and gravity of the offence.
6. Types/Variations of Cases:
System analysis and Design Concepts (COMP 1004) – Spring – 20 – CW 2 (Assignment) – All – QP
MEC_AMO_TEM_034_01 Page 6 of 10
| I. | If plagiarism is detected in any component of one assessment, the deduction in marks will be applicable for the whole assessment, even if only the component or part submission alone needs to be resubmitted. If plagiarism is detected in a group assessment, all students of the group will be considered as having committed an act of plagiarism and the policy will then be applied to all students If plagiarism is detected in any component of a group assessment, the deduction in marks will be |
| II. | |
| III. |
applicable for the whole assessment even if only the component or part submission alone needs
to be resubmitted.
All students of the group would be considered as having committed an act of plagiarism and the
policy will then be applied to all the students of the group.
| IV. | If the assessment consists of components or part submissions that could be a group assessment component (e.g. group assignment) and an individual assessment component (e.g. individual reflection), the following will be applicable: |
| a. | If plagiarism is detected in the group assessment component, all students of the group |
will be considered as having committed an act of plagiarism, The policy will then be
applied to all students of the group. Group assessment component will be resubmitted
as per the policy.
b. If plagiarism is detected in the individual assessment component, the individual
assessment component will be resubmitted and the policy will then be applied to that
student alone.
c. For both (a) and/or (b), the deduction in marks will be applicable for the whole
assessment.
* for further details Refer to MEC Student Academic Integrity Policy in Student Handbook.
2. Late Submission Regulations:
<Following content to be added for UG>
It is the students’ responsibility to check all relevant timelines related to assessments.
As per the Assessment Policy at MEC, late submissions are allowed for one week (5 working days)
for all UG modules with a penalty. In such cases, a deduction of 5% of the marks obtained for the
submitted work shall be imposed for each working day following the last date of submission
till the date of actual submission. Assessment documents submitted beyond a period of one
week (5 working days) after the last date of submission will not be accepted and will be awarded
a zero for that assessment. In cases where the submission has been delayed due to extenuating
circumstances, the student may be permitted to submit the work without imposing the late
submission policy stated above. The extended period of submission will be one week from the
original last date of submission. In such cases, the student is expected to submit the supporting
certificates on or before the original last date of submission of the assessment and the decision
of extension rests with faculty responsible for the assessment .The late submission policy shall be
applied if the student fails to submit the work within one week of the original last date of
submission.
System analysis and Design Concepts (COMP 1004) – Spring – 20 – CW 2 (Assignment) – All – QP
MEC_AMO_TEM_034_01 Page 7 of 10
Students may contact their teachers for clarification on specific details of the submission time if
required.
<Following content to be added for PG>
It is the students’ responsibility to check all relevant timelines related to assessments.
Late submission penalty for PG modules shall be imposed 10% deduction of the marks obtained
for work submitted up to 1 week (5 working days) after the due date for submission and for work
submitted after this, but up to 2 weeks (10 working days) late, student will lose a further 10% of
the obtained mark (i.e. 20% overall). Work tendered for submission more than 2 weeks (10
working days) after the due date will not be accepted and an absence will be recorded for the
assessment concerned. This will count as a failed attempt and may result in failing the module
overall.
Students may contact their teachers for clarification on specific details of the submission time if
required.
3. Research Ethics and Biosafety Policy
To protect and respect the rights, dignity, health, safety, and privacy of research subjects involved
including the welfare of animals and the integrity of environment, all student projects are
expected to be undertaken as per the MEC Research Ethics and Biosafety Policy. Accordingly the
following shall apply.
Research and other enterprise activities shall be conducted by maintaining the high ethical
standards consistent with national and international standards and conventions.
Any research at MEC that is categorized as high-risk research shall be subject to review and
approval by the Research Ethics and Biosafety Committee.
Research activities involving collection of human or animal tissues and manipulation of microbial,
animal or plant cells shall be subject to review and approval by the Research Ethics and Biosafety
Committee.
Participants involved in research must be informed about the purpose of research and intended
uses of research findings. Written consent must be obtained from people involved prior to the
commencement of research.
Data obtained from participants must be treated with high confidence and should be used only
for the intended purpose of research.
System analysis and Design Concepts (COMP 1004) – Spring – 20 – CW 2 (Assignment) – All – QP
MEC_AMO_TEM_034_01 Page 8 of 10
Assessment Evaluation Criteria
| Classification And % Range <to be given as per requirement> |
Reflection and critical analysis. |
Knowledge and Understanding/ Application of Theory |
Evidence of Reading | Referencing and Bibliography |
Presentation, Grammar and Spelling |
| Outstanding | Highly competent analytical skills and reflective practice, demonstrating personal learning and growth, insight into required professional values and principles and professional development planning. |
Extensive knowledge and depth of understanding of principles and concepts and /or outstanding application of theory in practice. |
Evidence of reading an extensive range of educational literature/research and where applicable workplace strategies, policies and procedures. |
Accurate referencing and bibliography correctly using appropriate referencing style |
Excellent presentation, logically structured, using correct grammar and spelling, excellent cross referencing and links to supporting evidence |
| Excellent | Strong analytical skills and reflective practice used, demonstrating personal learning and growth, insight into required professional values, principles and competencies and professional development planning. |
Excellent knowledge and understanding of principles and concepts and /or excellent knowledge and understanding of the application of theory in practice |
Evidence of reading a wide range of educational literature/research and where applicable, workplace strategies, policies and procedures. |
Appropriate referencing and bibliography correctly using appropriate referencing style |
Good presentation, competently structured, using correct grammar and spelling, clear and easy to use links to supporting evidence |
| Very Good Quality | Good use of analytical skills and reflective practice demonstrating personal learning and growth, insight into required professional values, principles and competencies and professional development planning. |
Good knowledge or key principles and concepts and/or good knowledge of the application of theory in practice |
Evidence of reading a good range of educational literature/research and where applicable workplace strategies, policies and procedures. |
Generally well referenced with correct use of the appropriate referencing style |
Reasonable presentation, completely structured, acceptable grammar and spelling, acceptable links to supporting evidence |
| Good (Acceptable) | Acceptable use of analytical skills and reflective practice demonstrating personal learning and growth, insight into required professional values, principles and competencies and professional development planning. |
Acceptable knowledge of key principles and concepts and/or knowledge of the application of theory in practice |
Evidence of reading an appropriate range of educational literature/research and where applicable, relevant workplace policies and procedures |
Adequate referencing. Generally accurate use of appropriate referencing style |
Adequate presentation and structure, acceptable grammar and spelling, adequate links to supporting evidence |
| Adequate/ Satisfactory | Adequate use of analytical skills and reflective practice demonstrating personal learning and growth, insight into required professional values, principles and competencies and professional development planning. |
Adequate knowledge of key principles and concepts and/or satisfactory evidence of the application of theory in practice. |
Evidence of minimal reading of educational literature/research and where applicable relevant workplace policies and procedures |
Adequate referencing. Appropriate referencing style used but may contain some inaccuracies. |
Weak presentation , satisfactory structure, grammar and spelling, links to supporting evidence |
| Weak /Poor (all learning outcomes not adequately met) |
Little use of analytical skills and reflective practice demonstrating personal learning and growth, insight into required competencies and/or professional development planning. Professional values and principles not reflected in the submission. and/or Insufficient/no use of analytical skills and reflective practice demonstrating personal learning and growth, insight into required competencies and professional development planning |
Little evidence of knowledge of key principles or concepts and/or little evidence of the application of theory in practice and/or No evidence of knowledge of key principles or concepts and/or no evidence of application of theory in practice |
Little or no evidence of reading outside of the course textbook and/or reference to relevant work place policies and procedures and/or No evidence of reading outside of the course textbook and/or reference to relevant workplace policies and procedures |
Little or no referencing, incorrect style, or very inaccurate use of appropriate referencing style |
Poor presentation, grammar and spelling, links to supporting evidence and/or Unacceptable presentation, grammar and spelling, structure is very poor, links to supporting evidence |
System analysis and Design Concepts (COMP 1004) – Spring – 20 – CW 2 (Assignment) – All – QP
MEC_AMO_TEM_034_01 Page 9 of 10
Systems Analysis and Design Concepts (COMP 1004)
Spring 20
Case Study Evaluation Grid
Student ID: Session:
Student Name:
| Group Task(40) | |||||
| Deliverables | 0-2 | 3-5 | 6-8 | 9-10 | Mark |
| Task 1: Work Proposal |
No proposal or fewer details |
Proposal with only features |
Proposal With features and Plan |
Complete with all details. |
|
| 0-2 | 3-5 | 6-8 | 9-10 | Mark | |
| Task 2.1 Context diagram |
Incomplete/ Weak/Plagiarized |
Partially correct/ incomplete |
Good diagram with minor issues/minimum of 2 external entities/8 data flows are identified |
Correct diagram/ minimum of 3 external entities and 12 data flows are identified. |
|
| 0-5 | 6-12 | 13-16 | 17-20 | Mark | |
| Task 2.2 DFD 0 |
Incomplete/ Weak/Plagiarized features |
Partially correct / average clarity/ |
Good/minimum of 4 processes, 10 data flows and 2 data stores |
Correct and accurate /minimum of 6 processes/16 data flows and 4 data stores |
|
| 0-2 | 3-5 | 6-8 | 9-10 | Mark | |
| Task 2.3 DFD 1 |
Incomplete/ Weak/Plagiarized/ |
Partially correct / only one DFD 1 is given |
Two DFD 1 are given/ minor issues/minimum of 2 processes, 4 data flows and 2 1 data store for each |
Two correct DFD 1 are given / minimum of 3 processes, 6 data flows and 2 data stores for each |
|
| 0-2 | 3-5 | 6-8 | 9-10 | Mark | |
| Task 2.4 HIPO |
Incomplete/ Weak/Plagiarized features |
Partially correct / average clarity/ |
Good/minimum of 4 modules are provided and 2 levels/few issues |
Correct chart /minimum of 4 modules are provided |
System analysis and Design Concepts (COMP 1004) – Spring – 20 – CW 2 (Assignment) – All – QP
MEC_AMO_TEM_034_01 Page 10 of 10
| and 2 levels/few issues |
||||
| 0-2 | 3-5 | 6-8 | 9-10 | Mark |
| Task 2.5 IPO |
Incomplete/ Weak/Plagiarized |
Partially correct / only one IPO chart is given |
Two IPO charts/ minor issues in the list of input/output and processes |
Two correct and complete IPO charts/ |
| 0-5 | 6-12 | 13-16 | 17-20 | Mark |
| Task 2.6 input/output forms |
Incomplete/ Weak/Plagiarized |
Partially correct /designed without a digital tool/ less than 3 forms |
Satisfactory /3-4 forms are designed/minor issues |
Complete and accurate / consistent with the previous HIPO/IPO charts/nice appearance/at least 4 different GUI components are used in all the forms |
| 0-2 | 3-5 | 6-8 | 9-10 | Mark |
| Task 2.7 Reflective writing |
No/Incomplete | Incomplete | Satisfactorily | Excellent reflection covering critical thinking, summary of learning experience and knowledge gained. |
| Total marks |
| Penalty |
| Final marks |
| Signature of the Instructor |
FEEDBACK:
DATE:
The post System analysis and Design Concepts appeared first on My Assignment Online.
