Assessment 1: Report and Mock Up
Assessment 1: Report and Mock Up
(Due: 4 pm, Wednesday, 31st May 2023)
Coursework Assessment Brief
Assessment Details
Module Title: Contemporary Web Applications
Module Code: COM623
Module Leader: Check SOL
Level: 6
Assessment Title: 1. Report
Assessment Number: 1
Assessment Type: Individual written report
Restrictions on Time/Word Count: 2,500 Words (+/- 10%)
Consequence of not meeting time/word count limit: Assignments should be presented appropriately in line with the restrictions stated above; if an assignment exceeds the time/word count this will be taken in account in the marks given using the assessment criteria shown. *
Individual/Group: Individual
Assessment Weighting: 30%
Issue Date: February 2023
Hand In Date: Wednesday, 31st May, 2023
Mode of Submission: A PDF file submitted to SOL
Number of copies to be submitted: 1
Assessment Task
The practical outcomes for this unit are to create a responsive single page web-application (SPA) that supports Solent University students in some aspect of their day-to-day lives. To this end, over the course of two assessments you will use a data driven approach to identify a specific area in which students are being underserved and implement a prototype SPA to better serve students in your identified problem space.
Figure 1, HYPERLINK "https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/5-stages-in-the-design-thinking-process"The design thinking methodology, adapted from Interaction Design Foundation (n.d.).
In using the design thinking (DT) methodology as a lens (see Figure 1), this assessment represents the empathise, define and ideate phases of the overarching DT methodology. In other words, you will identify a problem in students every-day lives (empathise), clearly define this problem (define) and propose a solution (ideate).
Deliverables
You are required to deliver a 2,500-word academic styled report which includes a link to your mock-up. The report should include the section presented below.
Report Structure
1. 0 Introduction
This section should provide a background to the problem that you are addressing, the approach you used to explore the problem and your key findings.
2. 0 Methods/Methodology
2.1 Overarching Methodology
You should provide a summary of the overarching methodology that you are using. I recommend using DT. However, you are free to choose a different methodology if it better meets your needs. You can even cherry-pick elements of multiple methodologies. Regardless of the methodology you use, it must be clear that you have engaged with key sources and taken an organised, systematic approach in following your choice. Further to this, you must clearly argue why the given methodology is suitable for your project.
2.2 Methods
You should present the methods that you used. Methods can be considered the tasks, tools and techniques that you used to gain an understanding of the proposed problem and allowed you to hypothesise a solution (e.g. interviews, focus group, surveys or observations). You may use a single method (e.g. interview, focus groups or surveys) or several. Given the scope of the project, I am expecting a sample of around 5 to 10 students for focus groups/interviews, and 20+ for surveys.
3.0 Ethics
You should present a brief account of the ethical considerations and acknowledgment that you have gained ethical clearance.
4.0 Discussion and Results
This section presents the finding and outcomes of the methodology and methods that you employed. The primary focus will be on the outcomes of user testing.
4.1 Prototype
Based off your results, you should to present your prototype and clearly hypothesises how it solves the problem. You should use a tool such as Figma to present me with a high-quality design of a single page web application. This solution should be informed by your data collection and analysis and should endeavoured to solve the problem that you identified.
5.0 Conclusion
Conclude your overall findings, and propose a clear forward facing path.
Reference List
A list of sources that you used throughout your report.
Appendix
Included any additional information, such as mock-ups and ethics forms.
Assessment Criteria
You will be assessed on your ability to critically explore the needs of your user demographic and propose an innovative solution. Specifically, I will be accessing you on the following areas:
A1-A4 B1-B3 C1-C3 D1-D3 F1-F3
Reporting Standards
Your report is produced to an exceptional standard. You have presented a clear and cohesive piece of work which clearly argues the need for your proposed solution. Your report is accurately structured. There is a clear chain of evidence linking sections. There are some minor logical or grammatical errors. Your report is complete. However, there is little in the way of logical flow between sections. Rather than providing deep incites, parts of the work are surface level explanations. There are several logical or grammatical errors. While the report is readable there are numerous inaccuracies and omissions. There is little, to no, evidence of deep incites. There are many logical or grammatical errors. Does not meet threshold
Methodologies/Methods
You convincingly argue why your methodologies/methods are well suited to your project. In doing so, you have clearly presented and communicated your choices. Your arguments for why you chose your given methods are largely convincing. You have, on the whole, communicated your choices. It is not entirely clear why your chosen methods/methodology are suitable for your project. In places, surface level, explanations of the types of methods you are using are provided. These explanations are not interlinked to your project; rather, they are broad overviews. You have presented me with methods/methodologies. However, it is not in anyway clear how they relate to your project, supporting you in exploring how students are underserved. Does not meet threshold
Results/Discussion/Conclusion
Your results are well presented, and you use appropriate analytical tools. There is a clear logical chain of evidence connecting your results to your discussion and conclusion. Your results are well presented, with largely appropriate analytical tools used. There is a chain of evidence connecting your results to your discussion and conclusion. However, in places, it may not be entirely convincing. Your results are complete and presented, with some analysis. However, there is little in the way of connection between your results and discussion and conclusion. You have presented a limited set of results. The arguments you make in your discussion and conclusion are not underpinned by your results. Does not meet threshold
Quality of Proposed Solution
You have presented an exceptionally well designed solution. It is clear that you used your data collection methods and methodology to inform this design. You have presented a convincing solution to the problem that you defined. You have presented a well design solution. It is clear that you used your data collection methods and methodology to inform this design. The solution, is on the whole, a convincing solution to the problem that you defined. You have presented a reasonably well designed solution. It is clear, in places, that you used the incites gained from your data. However, it is not entirely convincing how the solution will solve the proposed problem. Your solution is present. It is basic; however, it does communicate some ideas. There is a disconnect between the solution and your data collection incites. It is not clear how you are presenting a solution that is any better to what students currently have access to. Does not meet threshold
Learning Outcomes
This assessment will enable students to demonstrate in full or in part the learning outcomes identified in the Module descriptors.
Late Submissions
Students are reminded that:
If this assessment is submitted late i.e. within 5 working days of the submission deadline, the mark will be capped at 40% if a pass mark is achieved;
If this assessment is submitted later than 5 working days after the submission deadline, the work will be regarded as a non-submission and will be awarded a zero;
If this assessment is being submitted as a referred piece of work then it must be submitted by the deadline date; any Referred assessment submitted late will be regarded as a non-submission and will be awarded a zero.
Extenuating Circumstances
The Universitys Extenuating Circumstances procedure is in place if there are genuine circumstances that may prevent a student submitting an assessment. If students are not 'fit to study, they can either request an extension to the submission deadline of 5 working days or they can request to submit the assessment at the next opportunity (Defer). In both instances students must submit an EC application with relevant evidence. If accepted by the EC Panel there will be no academic penalty for late submission or non-submission dependent on what is requested. Students are reminded that EC covers only short term issues (20 working days) and that if they experience longer term matters that impact on learning then they must contact the Student Hub for advice.
Please find a link to the EC policy below:
https://students.solent.ac.uk/official-documents/quality-management/academic-handbook/2p-extenuating-circumstances.pdf
Academic Misconduct
Any submission must be students own work and, where facts or ideas have been used from other sources, these sources must be appropriately referenced. The Universitys Academic Handbook includes the definitions of all practices that will be deemed to constitute academic misconduct. Students should check this link before submitting their work.
Procedures relating to student academic misconduct are given below:
https://www.solent.ac.uk/about/documents/student-academic-misconduct.pdf
Ethics Policy
The work being carried out by students must be in compliance with the Ethics Policy. Where there is an ethical issue, as specified within the Ethics Policy, then students will need an ethics release or an ethical approval prior to the start of the project.
The Ethics Policy is contained within Section 2S of the Academic Handbook:
https://www.solent.ac.uk/about/documents/assessment-regulations.pdf
Grade marking
The University uses a letter grade scale for the marking of assessments. Unless students have been specifically informed otherwise their marked assignment will be awarded a letter grade. More detailed information on grade marking and the grade scale can be found on the portal and in the Student Handbook
https://www.solent.ac.uk/about/documents/assessment-regulations.pdf
Assessment 2
Implementation and a Report (in the form of technical documentation.
DUE: 4 pm, Friday, 2nd June, 2023)
Coursework Assessment Brief
Module Title: Contemporary Web Applications
Module Code: COM623
Module Leader: Check SOL
Level: 6
Assessment Title: 2. Implementation and Report
Assessment Number: 2
Assessment Type: Implementation and a Report (in the form of technical documentation)
Restrictions on Time/Word Count: 1,500 Words (+/- 10%)
Consequence of not meeting time/word count limit: Assignments should be presented appropriately in line with the restrictions stated above; if an assignment exceeds the time/word count this will be taken in account in the marks given using the assessment criteria shown. *
Individual/Group: Individual
Assessment Weighting: 70%
Issue Date: Oct
Hand In Date: 4 pm, Friday, 2nd June, 2023
Mode of Submission: On the Course SOL page
Number of copies to be submitted: 1
Assessment Details
Assessment Task
The practical outcomes for this unit are to create a responsive single page web-application (SPA) that supports Solent University students in some aspect of their day-to-day lives. To this end, over the course of two assessments you will use a data driven approach to identify a specific area in which students are being underserved and implement a prototype SPA to better serve students in your identified problem space.
Figure 1, The design thinking methodology, adapted from Interaction Design Foundation (n.d.).Once again, in using the design thinking (DT) methodology as a lens (see Figure 1), this assessment represents the prototype and test phases of the overarching DT methodology. You will implement the prototype solution that you designed for the first assessment. Your implementation will be in the form of a single page web application (SPA).
Deliverables
The source code of your solution should include a documentation.md file produced using valid markdown. This file should be 1,500 Words (+/- 10%) in length. While it is not a formal academic styled report, it should not be chatty. Furthermore, it should be produced using valid markdown. You are not required to use a reference list; however, you should try and justify your choices by linking to external papers and articles. You may link to the blogs of expert practitioners; however, do not use product or promotional blogs, these are very biased.
Your documentation.md file should, as a minimum, include the following sections
Cover Page
Project Title
Name (student number)
Link to your hosted website
Link to your Git Repository, which should include a:
Professional README.md file
Your project's version controlled source files
Introduction
This should pull together, and summarise, the entire project. You may, at this point, want to re-iterate the problem statement you derived in the first assessment.
Methodology
You have already defined your overarching methodology, in assessment 1. For this assessment, you need to decide on a development methodology. It is important, what ever methodology you use, you adapt it to meet the needs of a small scale individual project (e.g. see, HYPERLINK "https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229046039_Personal_Extreme_Programming-An_Agile_Process_for_Autonomous_Developers/link/00b7d523ff57b9a937000000/download"Dzhurov, Yani & Krasteva, Iva & Ilieva, Sylvia. (2009).
Whatever methodology you choose it must be clear that you have used it. For instance, if you choose agile there should be clearly defined user stories and iterations. You can use the appendix to include items, such as, user stories.
Methods
You will need to evaluate your solution with a representative user base. In this section, you will justify the data collection methods you used to conduct an insightful evaluation.
Conclusion/Results
Given the limited word count, I recommend you combine these sections. You should, based off your results and reflective accounts, evaluate your solution.
Appendix
Additional supporting information
Assessment Criteria
You will be assessed, mostly, on the quality of your solution. However, the documentation is important, as it allows me to understand to what extent your solution solves the problem that you defined.
Reporting Standards
A1-A4 B1-B3 C1-C3 D1-D3 F1-F3
Methodologies/Methods
You convincingly argue why your methodologies/methods are well suited to your project. In doing so, you have clearly presented and communicated your choices. Your arguments for why you chose your given methods are largely convincing. You have, on the whole, communicated your choices. It is not entirely clear why your chosen methods/methodology are suitable for your project. In places, surface level, explanations of the types of methods you are using are provided. These explanations are not interlinked to your project; rather, they are broad overviews. You have presented me with methods/methodologies. However, it is not in any way clear how they relate to your project, supporting you in exploring how students are underserved. Does not meet threshold
Results/Discussion/Conclusion
Your results are well presented, and you use appropriate analytical tools. There is a clear logical chain of evidence connecting your results to your discussion and conclusion. Your results are well presented, with largely appropriate analytical tools used. There is a chain of evidence connecting your results to your discussion and conclusion. However, in places, it may not be entirely convincing. Your results are complete and presented, with some analysis. However, there is little in the way of connection between your results and discussion and conclusion. You have presented a limited set of results. The arguments you make in your discussion and conclusion are not underpinned by your results. Does not meet threshold
Quality of Proposed Solution
You have presented an exceptionally well implemented solution. It is clear that you have used professional, tools and techniques constructing your solution. You have presented an well implemented solution. It is clear that you have, largely used, professional, tools and techniques in constructing your solution. While you have presented a reasonably well implemented solution. It is not entirely convincing how the solution solved the problem you defined. Your solution is, largely functional. However, it is very simple, and only uses basic techniques. It is not convincing that it solves your defined problem Does not meet threshold
Learning Outcomes
This assessment will enable students to demonstrate in full or in part the learning outcomes identified in the Module descriptors.
Late Submissions
Students are reminded that:
If this assessment is submitted late i.e. within 5 working days of the submission deadline, the mark will be capped at 40% if a pass mark is achieved;
If this assessment is submitted later than 5 working days after the submission deadline, the work will be regarded as a non-submission and will be awarded a zero;
If this assessment is being submitted as a referred piece of work then it must be submitted by the deadline date; any Refer assessment submitted late will be regarded as a non-submission and will be awarded a zero.
Extenuating Circumstances
The Universitys Extenuating Circumstances procedure is in place if there are genuine circumstances that may prevent a student submitting an assessment. If students are not 'fit to study, they can either request an extension to the submission deadline of 5 working days or they can request to submit the assessment at the next opportunity (Defer). In both instances students must submit an EC application with relevant evidence. If accepted by the EC Panel there will be no academic penalty for late submission or non-submission dependent on what is requested. Students are reminded that EC covers only short term issues (20 working days) and that if they experience longer term matters that impact on learning then they must contact the Student Hub for advice.
Please find a link to the EC policy below:
https://students.solent.ac.uk/official-documents/quality-management/academic-handbook/2p-extenuating-circumstances.pdf
Academic Misconduct
Any submission must be students own work and, where facts or ideas have been used from other sources, these sources must be appropriately referenced. The Universitys Academic Handbook includes the definitions of all practices that will be deemed to constitute academic misconduct. Students should check this link before submitting their work.
Procedures relating to student academic misconduct are given below:
https://www.solent.ac.uk/about/documents/student-academic-misconduct.pdf
Ethics Policy
The work being carried out by students must be in compliance with the Ethics Policy. Where there is an ethical issue, as specified within the Ethics Policy, then students will need an ethics release or an ethical approval prior to the start of the project.
The Ethics Policy is contained within Section 2S of the Academic Handbook:
https://www.solent.ac.uk/about/documents/assessment-regulations.pdf
Grade marking
The University uses a letter grade scale for the marking of assessments. Unless students have been specifically informed otherwise their marked assignment will be awarded a letter grade. More detailed information on grade marking and the grade scale can be found on the portal and in the Student Handbook.
https://www.solent.ac.uk/about/documents/assessment-regulations.pdf
