[Year 12 SofDev] Devil's advocate == me?
Mark KELLY
kel at mckinnonsc.vic.edu.au
Fri Jul 29 14:23:23 EST 2011
Hi Andrew
I have just finished a draft of an SRS for the Mexican Cantina example. I
have renamed it EL SOMBRERO 'cos I found a nice logo.
I've been flipping and flopping over whether to include the transmission
software as an external entity or not. I tried it with and without, and
while the "with" version is (to my way of thinking) incorrect, it gives a
better idea of how the software programs actually interact. I could make
neither version really acceptable. Feel free to disagree.
My UCD is also pretty basic (no includes or extends) but I didn't want to
make things unnecessarily difficult.
I did, however, add a degree of difficulty to bolster the programming skills
and make task 2 more chewy: I said that credit card information would be
stored in the text file.
This let me introduce basic (weak) encryption to the kids, using ROT13.
They are at this moment trying to work out the ROT13 algorithm and produce a
ROT13 encoder/decoder program.
It was also a sneaky way to introduce the ASCII character set, the CHR and
ASC functions, and MID( ) to extract each letter of a string in a loop. I
love it when a plan comes together.
In task 2 I'll use the weakness of the ROT13 encryption method as an
ethical/legal issue.
I have not yet worked out a criteria sheet - that will come when the SRS is
bedded down.
Also, taking advantage of the mobile device's screen resolution constraint
(I'm forcing them to use 480x320 pixels), I told them to investigate the
usefulness of VB tabbed controls and horiz/vertical scrollbars.
As for the weighting of coding, I also consider it the main contributor to
u3o2 and u4o1. The subject's called 'software development' after all! (I'm
still a little disappointed that only half the outcomes actually involve
coding, but that's an issue for another time.)
As always, feedback is welcomed.
Cheers
Mark
On 29 July 2011 09:50, Andrew Shortell <shortell at get2me.net> wrote:
> Hi Mark (as I crouch behind the crenellations of my “ivory tower” )
>
> Did you just offer to create the required doc?
>
>
> Also with regard to weighting the ass criteria I reluctantly weight them
> fairly equally as coding is not on the exam. I would prefer to give a much
> bigger weighting to the actual coding because that is why I do the subject
> and most of my students.
>
> However most coding is now done in xxx (insert India, Philippines or
> Indonesia as you wish) so like we do with the mechanics who work on our cars
> – we understand what they do (sort of) but would not do it ourselves because
> of time etc.
>
> Andrew (as I run for the safety of the stairs in the tower)
>
>
>
> On 29/07/11 8:37 AM, "Mark KELLY" <kel at mckinnonsc.vic.edu.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all. I have believed that for SD U4O1 students should be provided with
> an SRS, based on the same study design text on p.82 quoted by Maggie:
> "Students must be provided with a design brief that includes an analysis of
> an information problem, couched in terms of an SRS."
>
> Also in the assessment handbook, p.34: "An accurate interpretation of the
> provided software requirements specifications is evident in the design of a
> feasible solution. "
>
> Also, regarding:
> "2. There has been a lot of discussion about needing to include
> either 2D arrays, stacks, queues, sorting and searching (or combinations).
> There is nothing in the Key Skills that states this. "
> The AssHandBook (as I like to call it) says on p.43 (admittedly in the
> "Sample approaches" section (which probably can be interpreted as a
> suggestion rather than a decree) that "The design brief should...include at
> least one type of data structure."
>
> [Mounts soapbox]
>
> I must say that as I try to craft an outcome for U4O1 that it is increasing
> frustrating trying to stitch together all the mandates spread across
> different parts of the study design, asshandbook, FAQs, errata, and VCAA
> bulletins. In the end I go through all the sources copying dictates and
> pasting them all together in one place to aggregrate them and make sense of
> them, and I suspect I still miss bits.
>
> It's quite a messy process, and it's no wonder that people can miss key
> information that they didn't see sprinkled here or there.
>
> I don't suppose VCAA would consider creating an easy-to-use web-based
> amalgamated resource that merged information from all of those sources?
>
> [Dismounts]
>
> Cheers
> Mark
>
> On 28 July 2011 15:14, Matheson, Heath A <
> Matheson.Heath.A at edumail.vic.gov.au> wrote:
>
> Good Afternoon,
>
> My Zimbabwean dollars worth,
> I tend to use the assessment handbook in creating the SACs and assessment
> criteria. For this outcome the handbook is a little contradictory /
> inconsistent / unclear / all of the above? (Eg the mobile phone oversight
> Paula cleared up for us). The “designing the assessment task” section pretty
> much restates the key skills from the study design so I agree with Adrian
> that we are assessing key skills. In order to be able to address the key
> skills you need the key knowledge and make sure you choose the most
> effective and efficient processes to create the solution. In U3 O2 each of
> my five students used a different method to solve the problem and they all
> worked. There is nothing to state that queues, stacks, 2D arrays all must be
> used. However, the performance descriptors do emphasise and require
> validation.
> Apart from the use of “mobile phone” instead of “device”, the description
> states to create a “solution in response to a design brief” suggesting an
> SRS is not essential but the performance descriptors state “An accurate
> interpretation of the provided software requirements specifications is
> evident in the design of a feasible solution” suggesting an SRS is
> essential. My gut says that the VCAA intends us to provide an SRS again.
>
> I wonder whether it is worth weighting each statement in the performance
> descriptors equally. The coding will take the most time but does that mean
> it is more important in creating a solution than say an comprehensive
> testing table? This is where I would like some opinions.
>
> So my interpretation of what we are assessing (equally?):
> 1. interpret the SRS and create a feasible design including all
> specifications.
>
> 2. Create a design that takes into account mobile devise constraints
> and is clear and accurate.
>
> 3. Clear and logical algorithm .
>
> 4. The coding and internal documentation is awesome.
>
> 5. Data validation and “techniques and procedures” (I take this as
> data structures, sequence, selection and iteration procedures) are
> effectively applied.
>
> 6. Testing Table
>
> 7. The solution covering all the SRS.
>
>
> By now my Zimbabwean dollars worth is nearly zero so I’ll sign off!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Heath
>
>
>
> *From:* sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au [
> mailto:sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au <sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au>] *On
> Behalf Of *Margaret King Iaquinto
> *Sent:* Thursday, 28 July 2011 2:25 PM
> *To:* 'Year 12 Software Development Teachers' Mailing List'
> *Subject:* Re: [Year 12 SofDev] Devil's advocate == me?
>
>
> Adrian, what kinds of responses are you looking for (depth, breadth, list?)
> in your first assessment criterion? Samples you would expect...?
>
> Because I will couch my task in an SRS, the factors are pretty much listed
> there in functional and non-functional requirements.
>
> I need help here.
>
> Maggie
> VK3CFI
>
> *On Thu Jul 28 11:47 , 'Adrian Janson' sent:
> *Hi everyone,
>
> OK. I have been reading a lot of the posts about U4O1 – and have written
> my own which I will post to the lists very shortly. There has been a lot of
> talk about the SAC and what needs to be included – but I have some issues /
> questions for the community.
>
>
> *The follow is my opinion only!!!! (disclaimer!)
> *
> Now my understanding of Key Knowledge vs Key Skills is this: the key
> knowledge describes the content of the Area of Study and is full examinable
> (as is everything in the study design proper). The Key Skills describe what
> needs to be addressed via the assessment of the area of study (the SAC).
> Not all points within the Key Knowledge need to be assessed via the SAC.
>
> 1. A lot of people are writing SACs in which the student needs to
> work from / interpret an SRS. This is not a requirement of the SAC. The
> Key Skill states: ‘interpret solution requirements in order to ....’. Now
> the ‘solution requirements’ could be framed in an SRS (and for consistency I
> have done it this way), but it doesn’t need to be. The Key Skill in U3O2
> stated: ‘interpret software requirements specifications by ...’. The Key
> Skills are different.
>
> 2. There has been a lot of discussion about needing to include either
> 2D arrays, stacks, queues, sorting and searching (or combinations). There is
> nothing in the Key Skills that states this. I have chosen to write a task
> that lends itself to a queue – and have included requirements that are need
> sorting / searching routines – but this is not necessary. I feel that it is
> in students best interest to include some of these things so that U4O1 is
> set apart from U3O2 and there is a progression in skills. Also as these
> things are going to appear on the exam it is in the best interest of
> students. However, a task need not have these things – the Key Skills says
> ‘write solutions and internal documentation’ and ‘interpret solution
> requirements in order to design and develop solutions’ (only). Yes – the
> Key Knowledge states ‘forms and uses of data structures to organise and
> manipulate data, including two-dimensional arrays, stacks and queues’ and it
> would be hard to write a solution without using a data structure at all –
> but all the task asks is that students ‘write solutions’.
>
> 3. User interface and validation. I am putting a fair emphasis on
> the design of the user interface and the validation as I feel that there
> needs to be as this is ‘a solution’. The Key Skills do not mention user
> interface or validation at all (they are mentioned in detail in the Key
> Knowledge). We want students to produce a complete solution – therefore
> there needs to be an emphasis on these things. They will also have a
> significant effect on the testing table.
>
>
> Again – all my opinion – and not intended to cause confusion – just to
> promote an understanding of the task amongst all of us.
>
> (so flame away!!!)
>
> Cheers,
> Adrian
>
> *Adrian Janson **B.Sc, Dip.Ed, M.Ed
> Director of ICT
> *
> Melbourne High School, Forrest Hill, South Yarra, Victoria 3141 Australia.
> Phone: 03 9826 0711 International: +61 3 9826 0711
> Fax: 03 9826 8767 International: +61 3 9826 8767
> E-mail: janson.adrian.a at edumail.vic.gov.au <
> http://janson.adrian.a@edumail.vic.gov.au>
> Website: http://www.mhs.vic.edu.au <http://www.mhs.vic.edu.au/>
> Blog: http://jansona.edublogs.org <http://jansona.edublogs.org/>
>
>
>
> *Important - *This email and any attachments may be confidential. If
> received in error, please contact us and delete all copies. Before opening
> or using attachments check them for viruses and defects. Regardless of any
> loss, damage or consequence, whether caused by the negligence of the sender
> or not, resulting directly or indirectly from the use of any attached files
> our liability is limited to resupplying any affected attachments. Any
> representations or opinions expressed are those of the individual sender,
> and not necessarily those of the Department of Education and Early Childhood
> Development.
>
>
>
> *Important - *This email and any attachments may be confidential. If
> received in error, please contact us and delete all copies. Before opening
> or using attachments check them for viruses and defects. Regardless of any
> loss, damage or consequence, whether caused by the negligence of the sender
> or not, resulting directly or indirectly from the use of any attached files
> our liability is limited to resupplying any affected attachments. Any
> representations or opinions expressed are those of the individual sender,
> and not necessarily those of the Department of Education and Early Childhood
> Development.
>
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.edulists.com.au - FAQ, Subscribe, Unsubscribe
> IT Software Development Mailing List kindly supported by
> http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au - Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority
> and
> http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html
> http://www.vitta.org.au - VITTA Victorian Information Technology Teachers
> Association Inc
>
>
>
>
> --
> --
> Andrew Shortell
>
> mailto:shortell at get2me.net <shortell at get2me.net>
> Heidelberg Teaching Unit
> Ph 9470 3403
> Fax 9470 3215
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.edulists.com.au - FAQ, Subscribe, Unsubscribe
> IT Software Development Mailing List kindly supported by
> http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au - Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority
> and
> http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html
> http://www.vitta.org.au - VITTA Victorian Information Technology Teachers
> Association Inc
>
--
Mark Kelly
Manager of ICT, Reporting, IT Learning Area
McKinnon Secondary College
McKinnon Rd McKinnon 3204, Victoria, Australia
Direct line / Voicemail: +613 8520 9085, Fax +613 9578 9253
kel at mckinnonsc.vic.edu.au
VCE IT Lecture Notes: http://vceit.com
Moderator: IT Applications Edulist <http://www.edulists.com.au/>
Want a good time? Call 0112358. Ask for Mr Fibonacci.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/sofdev/attachments/20110729/f37478b1/attachment-0001.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: U4O1 2011 SRS-EL SOMBRERO-v3.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 100352 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/sofdev/attachments/20110729/f37478b1/U4O12011SRS-ELSOMBRERO-v3-0001.doc
More information about the sofdev
mailing list