Posted: September 16th, 2017

Software Quality Management

Software Quality Management

Learning Outcomes of this Assessment
The learning outcomes covered by this assignment are:
• A1 – explain and apply the underlying theory of software quality metrics
• A2 – discuss, in-depth, quality management and its application to software
development
• A3 – show a comparative and reflective understanding of the impact of particular
software development approaches
Key Skills to be Assessed
This assignment aims at assessing your skills in critically analysing software quality issues as
they have occurred in real projects/products as well as applying metrics for estimating the
complexity and effort related to software development.
Task
This assignments consists of two parts which are both to be completed.
Part 1 (60 Marks)
Your task is to research and present one case of a major software quality related failure as it
has actually occurred. The failure can be related (but is not limited) to general bugs, security
related issues, service outages, malfunctions and accidents. Specifically, you are expected to
do a critical analysis of the following aspects:
• What caused the problem and how did it manifest itself? Make sure to include
appropriate references to where you found the information about the case you are
presenting.
• Which quality attributes were affected?
• What was the magnitude of the damage (accident resulting in injury or death,
financial loss, how many users were affected, reputation damaged etc.)?
• What measures were taken to rectify the problem?
• What improvements were implemented afterwards (e.g. related to the development
process) to prevent this or similar problems from happening again? If, despite due
diligence, no information can be found about this point, what improvements would
you propose?
Your essay on part 1 should show that you have an in-depth understanding of the matter
but is not to exceed 2500 words. Make sure you pay special attention to
• Relevance/originality of the case
• Adequate level of detail regarding technical aspects (you need to make sure that
enough information is available for the case you want to present, otherwise you
should pick another case)
• Covering all aspects (completeness)
• Critical discussion of causes/remedies
• Proper use of references
For the avoidance of doubt – simply repeating an analysis found on the web will not be
acceptable. All submissions will be checked to this end.
Part 2 (40 Marks)
Consider an address book program.
• In a similar way as for the spell checker and examination marks evaluator, represent
the functionality of this program graphically. From this graph, determine the
Unadjusted Function Count (UFC) of the application.
• Consider each component of the Technical Complexity Factor (TCF) in turn. Give your
interpretation of what each component measures, and evaluate it for the address
book application giving reasons for your evaluation. In this way, determine the
Technical Complexity Factor (TCF) of the application.
• Hence determine the Function Point for this application. Assuming that it takes a
developer on average two person days to implement a function point, estimate how
long it will take to code this application.
• Give your personal opinion as to whether for this particular type of application this is
a reasonable estimate, and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the use of
the Function Point measure in software quality procedures. Make sure to include
any references used in your discussion.
N.B. There is no single correct answer to this problem: You will have to make subjective
decisions, which will be given full marks if accompanied by reasoned argument.
Requirements / Marking Scheme
Category
Requirement
Maximum
Available
Marks
Part 1
Cause (description of the case) 20
Quality attributes affected 10
Magnitude of damage 5
Rectification of the fault 10
Process improvements 15
Part 2
Unadjusted Function Count 12
Technical Complexity Factor 12
Function Point, effort estimate 4
Discussion 12
Total 100
Extremely poor (0-9): Totally inadequate demonstration of required knowledge.
Very Poor (10-19): Virtually no relevant knowledge demonstrated.
Poor (20-29): Inconsistent or inaccurate knowledge.
Unsatisfactory (30-39): Limited evidence of knowledge.
Adequate (40-49): Basic knowledge with occasional inaccuracies.
Fair (50-59): Mostly accurate knowledge with satisfactory depth and breadth of knowledge.
Good (60-69): Consistently relevant accurate knowledge with good depth and breadth
Very Good (70-79): Comprehensive knowledge demonstrating very good depth and breadth
Excellent (80-89): Excellent depth of knowledge in a variety of contexts.
Outstanding (90-100): Outstanding knowledge.
Submission
The assignment (Part 1 and Part 2) is to be submitted via Blackboard in a single MS Word
file. You will only have one submission opportunity. Therefore, please ensure you submit
the correct and complete file. Emailed submissions cannot be considered and will be
ignored.
Notes
• You must complete the assignment on your own.
• The assignment must be completed on time.
• If you submit work late, it will be marked according to the University’s late
submission policy
The University has strict policies on unfair means. It is your responsibility to ensure that you
both understand these and adhere to them in the production of your assignment. Any
submitted works with such content identifiable will be penalised in accordance with the
University of Salford regulations which are available at:
http://www.governance.salford.ac.uk/page/academic_handbook

PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT 🙂