CIS555 Pros and Cons of Number of Reviewers
Order ID |
53563633773 |
Type |
Essay |
Writer Level |
Masters |
Style |
APA |
Sources/References |
4 |
Perfect Number of Pages to Order |
5-10 Pages |
Description/Paper Instructions
CIS555 Pros and Cons of Number of Reviewers
CIS555, Pros, Cons, Number, Reviewers
There are two discussions here that need to be responded to thoroughly. Responses must be on APA format 150+words 1-2 legitimate verifiable sources per response.
CIS555 discussion 1 post responses.
Respond to the colleagues posts regarding:
“Requirements Inspection and Validation” Please respond to the following:
- From the e-Activity, examine the possibility that a gap between the animated model and the original specification may exist. Propose how you would detect the gaps.
- Assess the pros and cons of having a large number of reviewers versus having a small number of viewers in the requirements inspection process. Determine whether you would use internal or external reviewers and explain why.
MH’s post states the following:
From the e-Activity, examine the possibility that a gap between the animated model and the original specification may exist. Propose how you would detect the gaps.
The Solidworks Simulation is a software application that allows users to create and conduct studies on submodels, a section of a larger model selected specifically for further analysis (Solidworks, 2012). This capability allows the use of animation-based validation (Lamsweerde, 2009, p.187).
The existence of a gap between the animated model and the original specification is always a possibility. The identification of this gap is what makes the validation process valuable to the development team. The requirement deficiencies can be identified before development begins and the costs of fixing the errors begin to grow exponentially.
To detect the gaps using animation-based validation techniques: First, analysts must first work with stakeholders to create a formal specification document. Next, analysts must work with stakeholders to identify the parts of the specification that will be turned into an executable model of the proposed system.
Then, test cases with sample data must be generated for the selected model. When the model is ready, it can be turned over to expert users who can confirm if the proposed system will satisfy their identified needs (i.e., the system goals). If gaps are identified, analysts will then work with stakeholders to refine the requirements further and update the requirement documentation accordingly.
Assess the pros and cons of having a large number of reviewers versus having a small number of viewers in the requirements inspection process.
Although managing the inspection process would be more challenging, a larger number of reviewers from many different backgrounds would likely find many more defects within the requirements documentation. On the other hand, with the larger number of defects to analyzed, there will be many more “false positives” which will take additional time and resources to resolve.
Regarding large requirements documents, the work can be shared more easily across a large group of reviewers. This improves the likelihood that the entire document will receive a thorough review without overburdening the reviewers. Small teams would need more time to review a large document which the schedule may not be able to accommodate.
Determine whether you would use internal or external reviewers and explain why.
When it is an option, I always prefer to have a mixture of both internal and external reviewers on my requirements documentation inspection teams. However, if forced to choose between internal reviewers and external reviewers, I would choose an external review team. My personal experience has been that external reviewers typically provide more unbiased feedback than internal reviewers.
References
Lamsweerde, A. van. (2009). Requirements engineering: From system goals to UML models to software specifications. West Sussex, England: John Wiley.
SolidWorks. (2012, September 12). SolidWorks 2013: Simulation Sub-Modeling and Incremental Meshing [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TGMkMEPIsQ
CIS555 discussion 2 post responses.
Respond to the colleagues posts regarding:
“Traceability and Change Control” Please respond to the following:
- Suppose a system had no traceability management present. Predict five problems that you believe could occur when change requests are made.
- Suppose you were a project leader. Propose five methods that you would use to manage change requests. Select the method that you think would work best for you and defend your selection.
SP’s post states the following:
Revisions would be difficult as it is uneasy to trace back to where the problem initiated. The scope of the entire project may be thrown off since the request came at an unexpected time. The dependency link would be unuseful since it is not traceability.
Therefore is no indication if changing link A will affect changing link B. On another note, the entire system can be down for a period of time while the developers attempt to find the issue. Making a change to the system may cause further issues to the system and create other problems (Lamsweerde, 2009).
Suppose you were a project leader. Propose five methods that you would use to manage change requests. Select the method that you think would work best for you and defend your selection.
A change request can come from a multitude of sources. For instance, change requests can be business, technical, or stakeholder related. One method is to expect/anticipate change and prepare for it. Recognizing unstable requirements, that are prone to change early on, will assist the developers with change requests.
Another method is to include a change control process, which ensures that only authorized changes are implemented (Lamsweerde, 2009). Preferably, I would choose the authorized change request method. It seems as though with this process only the necessary changes will be approved and all other unnecessary changes would be filtered out.
Reference:
Lamsweerde, A. (2009). Requirements Engineering: From system goals to UML models to software specifications. West Sussex, England: John Wiley.
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE |
NO RESPONSE |
POOR / UNSATISFACTORY |
SATISFACTORY |
GOOD |
EXCELLENT |
Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) |
Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. |
20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. |
30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. |
40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. |
50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. |
Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). |
Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. |
5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. |
10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. |
15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. |
20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. |
Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) |
Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. |
5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors |
10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors |
15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. |
20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. |
Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) |
Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. |
3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. |
5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper |
7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. |
10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. |
|
|
GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
|
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME]and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!! |
|
|
PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!