Case Study Assessment
Date for Submission: Please refer to the timetable on iLearn
(The submission portal on iLearn will close at 14.00 UK time on the date of submission)
Assignment Brief
As part of the formal assessment for the programme you are required to submit a Quality Systems in IT assignment. Please refer to your Student Handbook for full details of the programme assessment scheme and general information on preparing and submitting assignments.
Learning Outcomes:
After completing the module, you should be able to:
- Demonstrate a critical understanding of the need for quality assurance in IT system development.
- Examine the software development lifecycle and its relationship to quality issues, risks and counter measures.
- Develop and implement standard quality control documentation for an IT system development.
- Select, justify and use appropriate project management tools for an IT system development.
- Apply appropriate ethical considerations to quality management in IT.
Guidance
Your assignment should include: a title page containing your student number, the module name, the submission deadline and the exact word count of your submitted document; the appendices if relevant; and a reference list in AU Harvard system(s). You should address all the elements of the assignment task listed below. Please note that tutors will use the assessment criteria set out below in assessing your work.
You must not include your name in your submission because Arden University operates anonymous marking, which means that markers should not be aware of the identity of the student. However, please do not forget to include your STU number.
Maximum word count: 4,000 words
Please refer to the full word count policy which can be found in the Student Policies section here: Arden University | Regulatory Framework
Please note the following:
Students are required to indicate the exact word count on the title page of the assessment.
The word count includes everything in the main body of the assessment (including in text citations and references). The word count excludes numerical data in tables, figures, diagrams, footnotes, reference list and appendices. ALL other printed words ARE included in the word count.
Please note that exceeding the word count by over 10% will result in a 10- percentage point deduction.
Assignment Task – (LOs 1-5)
CASE STUDY:
Visit:
Read the case study presented there.
You will base this assignment directly on the case study.
NOTE: You may need to supplement this source with additional research as you attempt the various tasks within this assignment. Use your own initiative to identify and locate such sources. Be sure to fully reference, using the Harvard notation, all such external sources.
You have been hired as an IT Quality Consultant and have been asked to prepare a report that addresses the following issues for the case study.
You are required to prepare the report following the sections outlined below (and including an introduction and a conclusion) while using the learning materials provided in iLearn, the module textbook, reading materials from peer-reviewed sources (e.g., from Google Scholar, EBSCO), information given in the case-study, and your own research.
- This section of the report is about your critical understanding of the need for quality assurance for the case study. (800 words)
- Define what is meant by quality in terms of the development of a website and explain why a systematic approach to quality assurance and quality control is essential.
(10 marks)
- Identify and briefly discuss the national and international quality standards that are relevant to the development of a website as part of a larger IT system.
(10 marks)
(LO 1)
- This section of the report will examine the software development lifecycle and its relationship to quality issues, risks and counter measures. (800 words)
- Identify and discuss the potential risks and their counter measures associated with the development of an IT system which has a website at its centre.
(10 Marks)
- Describe the systems development life cycle (SDLC) as it applies to web- site development and explain how each phase of the life cycle is quality assured. Include an annotated diagram of the SDLC.
(10 marks)
(LO 2)
- This section will discuss the development and implementation of standard quality control documentation for the case study. (800 words)
- Discuss the critical importance of quality control documentation to the establishment and maintenance of a good quality IT system, during its entire life cycle.
(10 marks)
- Identify and describe one common problem which may be encountered in an IT system which is website centred and explain how it can be solved using Cause-and-Effect Analysis using a Fishbone diagram.
(10 marks)
(LO 3)
- This section selects, justifies and uses appropriate project management tools for the case study. (800 words)
- Explain the role of PRINCE2 in the project management of IT systems developments focusing on web-site development.
(10 marks)
- Explain, with relevant examples, how you would use a Work Breakdown Structure, a Precedence Diagram, and a Gantt chart in the web-site development project.
(10 marks)
(LO 4)
- This section discusses the appropriate ethical and legal considerations to quality management for the case study. (800 words)
- Discuss the two-main legal and ethical issues faced by the business- advisors in the case study and the software development team (4 in total).
(10 marks)
- Comment briefly on each of the above as well as on the reasons for any similarities and/or differences.
(10 marks)
(LO 5)
Formative Feedback
You have the opportunity to submit a draft assignment to receive formative feedback.
The feedback is designed to help you develop areas of your work and it helps you develop your skills as an independent learner.
If you are a distance learning student, you should submit your work, by email, to your tutor, no later than 2 weeks before the actual submission deadline. If you are a blended learning student, your tutor will give you a deadline for formative feedback and further details.
Formative feedback will not be given to work submitted after the above date or the date specified by your tutor – if a blended learning student.
Referencing Guidance
You MUST underpin your analysis and evaluation of the key issues with appropriate and wide-ranging academic research and ensure this is referenced using the AU Harvard system(s).
Follow this link to find the referencing guides for your subject: Arden Library
Submission Guidance
Assignments submitted late will not be accepted and will be marked as a 0% fail.
Your assessment should be submitted as a single Word (MS Word) or PDF file. For more information, please see the “Submitting an Assignment – Guide” document available on the A-Z key information on iLearn.
You must ensure that the submitted assignment is all your own work and that all sources used are correctly attributed. Penalties apply to assignments which show evidence of academic unfair practice. (See the Student Handbook which is available on the A-Z key information on iLearn.)
Assessment Criteria (Learning objectives covered – all)
| Level 5 reflects the continuing development in knowledge, understanding and skills from Level 4. At Level 5, students are not expected to be fully autonomous but are able to take responsibility for their own learning with appropriate guidance and direction. Students are expected to further develop their theoretical knowledge within a more intellectual context and to demonstrate this through more complex forms of expression which move beyond the descriptive or imitative domain. Students are expected to demonstrate skills of analysis in both problem-solving and resolution. |
| Grade | Mark Bands | Generic Assessment Criteria |
| First (1) | 80%+ | An exceptional information base exploring and analysing the discipline, its theory and any associated ethical considerations. There is sophisticated use and management of learning resources and a high degree of autonomy is demonstrated. Writing is exceptionally well structured and accurately referenced throughout. Where appropriate, outstanding professional skills are demonstrated. The work is original and with some additional effort could be considered for internal publication. |
| 70-79% | An excellent knowledge base within which the discipline is explored and analysed. There is a good degree of originality in the approach. The work demonstrates confidence and autonomy and extends to consider ethical issues. Learning resources have been managed confidently. Writing is exceptionally well structured and accurately referenced throughout. Where appropriate, an excellent level of professional skills are demonstrated and the work demonstrates a high level of intellectual and academic skills. | |
| Upper second (2:1) | 60-69% | A very good knowledge base which explores and analyses the discipline, its theory and any associated ethical issues. There is evidence of some originality and independence of thought. A very good range of learning resources underpin the work and there is evidence of growing confidence and self-direction. The work demonstrates the ability to analyse the subject and apply theory with good academic and intellectual skills. Academic writing skills are good, expression is accurate overall and the work is consistently referenced throughout. |
| Lower second (2:2) | 50-59% | A satisfactory understanding of the discipline which begins to analyse the subject and apply some underpinning theory. There may be reference to some of the ethical considerations. The work shows a sound level of competence in managing basic sources and materials. Academic writing skills are good and accurate overall and the work is planned and structured with some though. Professional skills are satisfactory (where appropriate). The work lacks original thought but academic and intellectual skills are moving into the critical domain. The work is referenced throughout. |
| Third (3) | 40-49% | Basic level of performance in which there are some omissions in understanding the subject, its underpinning theory and ethical considerations. There is little evidence of independent thought, and the work shows a basic use of sources and materials. Academic and intellectual skills are limited. The work may lack structure overall. There are some difficulties in developing professional skills (where appropriate). There is an attempt to reference the work. |
| Marginal Fail | 30-39% | A limited piece of work in which there are clear gaps in understanding the subject, its underpinning theory and ethical considerations. The work shows a limited use of sources and materials. Academic and intellectual skills are weak and there are errors in expression and the work may lack structure overall. There are difficulties in developing professional skills (where appropriate). The work lacks original thought and is largely imitative. |
| 29% and below | A poor performance in which there are substantial gaps in knowledge and understanding, underpinning theory and ethical considerations. The work shows little evidence in the use of appropriate sources and materials. Academic writing skills are very weak and there are numerous errors in expression. The work lacks structure overall. Professional skills (where appropriate) are not developed. The work is imitative. |
Get expert help for MIS605 Systems Analysis and Design and many more. 24X7 help, plag-free solution. Order online now!
