| IFN552: Systems Analysis and Design Assessment Task 1 – Requirements Analysis, Use Case and Activity Diagram |
IFN552: Systems Analysis and Design – Assessment Task 1 Page 2 of 11
Assessment Task 1 – Individual
Task overview
| Assessment name: | Requirements Analysis, Use Case and Activity Diagram |
| Task description: | In this Assignment, you will take what you have learnt in weeks 1, 2 and 3 and apply this to a case. You will develop a list of questions that you would ask key stakeholders to elicit requirements, distil stakeholder needs into functional requirements in a Requirements Matrix, draw a Use Case Diagram and Activity Diagram. You will also justify your designs in short descriptions accompanying each of these outputs. |
| Learning outcomes measured: |
This assignment will assess your understanding of the material taught in weeks 1, 2 & 3, your ability to apply what you have learnt to a particular business case, and communicate effectively through your written and diagrammatic outputs (i.e. the matrix, diagrams and their accompanying descriptions). The skills you will develop as part of this process will be useful when you move forward into your careers. |
| Due: | Week 4 (see Canvas for precise date) |
| Weighting: | 50% |
| Individual/Group: | Individual |
| Authentic Assessment: | Yes No |
| Formative/Summative: | Summative |
| How will I be assessed: | 7-point grading scale using a rubric |
Task details
What you need to do: 1. Read the Criterion-Referenced Assessment Rubric at the end of this
document.
2. Read Case 1 (below) and explore the Freelancer site to familiarise
yourself further with the case.
3. Develop and document a list of questions for one of the key
stakeholders you have identified, to specifically gather functional
requirements. Aim for approximately 10 key questions (focus on
key specific questions related to functionality, assuming general and
rapport-building questions have already been asked).
4. Develop a Requirements Matrix to organise the below basic starter
requirements into the following sub-systems: Payments,
Directories (search), Project Management, Support. Up to 2
modules in each subsystem must be defined by you. If you are
IFN552: Systems Analysis and Design – Assessment Task 1 Page 3 of 11
unsure about any of these subsystems, try looking at the sitemap,
FAQs and support documentation on the company’s website.
Starter requirements you must use are below (note: do not change
the wording of these in your submitted assignment – they are not
intended to demonstrate best practice in requirements wording, and
you will have the opportunity to critique them in step 6 below):
R1. Users should be able to create an account with a unique
username and password.
R2. Allow users to log in with their Google account
R3. Display “forgot my password” link to send an automated
password reset email to users
R4. The platform should provide secure authentication
mechanisms to protect user accounts.
R5. Provide a user interface for customising profiles with skills,
work history, and portfolio information.
R6. Present a form for clients to enter project details including
requirements, budget, and timelines.
R7. Store project information upon submission.
R8. Display form for freelancers to enter bid details and submit
proposals for projects.
R9. Implement a messaging system with an interface for clients
and freelancers to communicate and discuss project
details.
R10. Provide a user interface for clients and freelancers to leave
reviews and ratings for each other.
R11. Display accumulated reviews and ratings on user profiles
for reference.
R12. The user experience and interface should be optimized for
different screen sizes and devices.
R13. Provide chat box to allow communication between clients
and freelancers and also allow files to be uploaded via this
chat box
R14. Allow users to post a challenge
R15. Develop a mobile application for iOS and Android devices
with an intuitive interface.
5. Underneath the starter requirements, add your own unique
requirements to the matrix. These new requirements should cover
different functions than those described by the starter list. Aim for:
a) 10 Essential Functional Requirements
b) 3 Desirable Functional Requirements
c) 2 Optional Functional Requirements
You should include the suggested number for each priority of
requirements, totalling around 15 additional Functional
Requirements on top of the starter requirements in your matrix. A
small amount less or more may be ok depending on the quality of
the ones you include, but you will need to stay around the number
stated above. Whilst each will have certain priority, and the list may
not be comprehensive, you need to ensure that all are relevant to
the case and are concise, specific, measurable and actionable.
Note that priority is documented in a separate column in the matrix.
See unit materials for templates and required format for both the
matrix and the requirements.
IFN552: Systems Analysis and Design – Assessment Task 1 Page 4 of 11
| 6. In 300 words or less, critique the starter requirements. Think about things such as their wording, accordance with “S.M.A.R.T” principles, and to what degree they describe functional requirements. Refer to examples from the list to justify your arguments. Finally, discuss how your own list of added functional requirements address any issues you identified in the starter requirements. 7. Draw 1 (one) Use Case Diagram capturing how actors interact with the system across the range of important functions available in the system. a) Aim to include around 15-20 Use Cases in your diagram (no more than 23). Ensure that the use cases you do include are important and relevant to the system being represented. b) Remember to include relevant relationships between elements of the diagram such as use cases and actors 8. In 250 words or less also introduce your use case diagram (i.e. what is it describing? At which points do users interface with the system? What is outside the scope of your diagram and why? Etc.). 9. Draw an Activity Diagram, representing how a project would be conducted in the system. This begins at project posting, through to management and finalisation of project. Remember to balance detail with clarity in your diagram. Take note of the following guidelines regarding scope: a) Use around 2-3 swimlanes to differentiate system activities initiated by different actors. For activities performed by a subsystem with no interaction with an actor, you may use a separate “system” swimlane, however, ensure all other activities performed in actor swimlanes describe system interactions. b) Use up to 60 shapes – ideally around 50 shapes – (shapes include boxes, decision nodes, fork and join, arrows, etc.) to show the process of user activities. c) Use decision nodes two or three times and fork and join two or three times in your model. d) Preferably, your activity diagram will be vertical, rather than horizontal (this will make it easier when merging it into the submission PDF). 10. Write a short description of your Activity Diagram in 250 words or less. Imagine you are presenting it to a set of stakeholders and you need to introduce concisely what it is showing (~1-2 sentences) and mention a few interesting/important activities or flows, as well as parts where you have made assumptions (~3-4 sentences). Note that it’s important to practice this skill, as you will need to contextualise designs/diagrams when you create reports/presentations. 11. Save your submission and cover page as a single PDF |
|
| Presentation requirements: |
This assessment task must be formatted in the following way: • 12 point font • All diagrams large enough to be legible |
IFN552: Systems Analysis and Design – Assessment Task 1 Page 5 of 11
| Use the following naming convention for your PDF submission: “Firstname_Lastname_IFN552Assessment1_Day-Month-Year” Ensure you include a cover page including: • Your name • The name of your tutor |
|
| Resources needed to complete task: |
• IFN552 Canvas site • Attendance at tutorials • Diagram modelling software (some examples of free to use tools will be provided in tutorials) • Extra resources and discussion on Slack • QUT Cite|Write APA guide. |
Assignment 1 Case – Freelancer
Background: This case is based on a platform that matches freelancers with clients across
a range of projects as well as challenges. All details required for this assignment can be
gained by exploring the platform. Sign-up is not required for the purposes of this assignment.
The platform includes extensive FAQs and help articles that describe the range of features
involved in the system and how they work. The first step of this assignment is to research the
system in this case through exploring information available on its website. This can be found
here: https://www.freelancer.com/.
Submission Information
| What you need to submit: |
One PDF document that contains the following items: 1. Cover page 2. List of questions for stakeholders 3. Requirements Matrix with critique 4. Use Case diagram with description 5. Activity diagram with description |
| How to submit: | This assessment is to be submitted digitally through Canvas. Submissions that are received via any other medium (e.g. email) will not be marked. 1. Access the Canvas Submission link >>View/Complete 2. Click on the Submit button 3. Give the submission a title, select the correct file and click Upload. 4. Click Confirm. 5. Click Return to Assignment list |
IFN552: Systems Analysis and Design – Assessment Task 1 Page 6 of 11
| 6. ALWAYS double check your submission has gone through. | |
| Moderation: | All staff who are assessing your work meet to discuss and compare their judgements before marks or grades are finalised. |
Academic Integrity
As a student of the QUT academic community, you are asked to work to uphold the principles of academic
integrity during your course of study. QUT sets expectations and responsibilities of students, more specifically it
states that students “adopt an ethical approach to academic work and assessment in accordance with this
policy and the Student Code of Conduct. E/2.1 (MOPP C/5.3 Academic Integrity).
At university, students are expected to demonstrate their own understanding and thinking using the ideas
provided by ‘others’ to support and inform their work, always making due acknowledgement to the source.
While we encourage peer learning, it is not appropriate to share assignments with other students unless your
assessment piece has been stated as being a group assignment. If you do share your assignment with another
student, and they copy part of or all of your assignment for their submission, this is considered collusion and
you may also be reported for academic misconduct. If you are unsure and need further information you can
find this at: http://www.mopp.qut.edu.au/C/C_05_03.jsp#C_05_03.03.mdoc.
IFN552: Systems Analysis and Design – Assessment Task 1 Page 7 of 11
IFN552 | Systems Analysis and Design Assessment Task 1 Rubric
Criteria High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Marginal Fail Fail/Low Fail No Evidence
Needs
elicitation –
Interview
Questions
Demonstrate
an
understanding
of the case by
developing a
comprehensiv
e list of
questions
relevant to
interrogating
the needs of
important
stakeholders.
Weighting: 8%
Flawless/
Exemplary:
flawless, deep
understanding of the
case, reveals
cohesive
interrogation of the
needs of the
stakeholders.
Questions are
extremely relevant; it
is made extremely
clear that the
questions proposed
would lead to a
useful list of needs
specific to functional
requirements of the
system.
Very good: does
not miss anything
important, and
shows that the
author has deep
understanding of
the case. There
are however some
very minor
omissions.
Questions are very
relevant; it is made
very clear that the
questions
proposed would
lead to a useful list
of needs specific to
functional
requirements of the
system.
Good: reveals
attention to detail,
but there are some
minor mistakes,
omissions and
inconsistencies.
Questions are
relevant; it is made
mostly clear that
the questions
proposed would
lead to a useful list
of needs specific to
functional
requirements of the
system.
Satisfactory:
reveals little
attention to detail.
There are some
important
inconsistencies,
omissions and
mistakes.
Questions are
somewhat
relevant; it is made
somewhat clear
that the questions
proposed would
lead to a useful list
of needs specific to
functional
requirements of the
system.
Unsatisfactory:
lacks important
details, there are
significant
inconsistencies
and omissions, and
lack of clarity
throughout.
Multiple irrelevant
questions; it is not
made clear that the
questions
proposed would
lead to a useful list
of needs specific to
functional
requirements of the
system.
Unsatisfactory:
lacks many
important details,
there are
significant
inconsistencies
and omissions, and
many parts are
largely unclear
Questions are
mostly irrelevant; it
is entirely unclear
that the questions
proposed would
lead to a useful list
of needs specific to
functional
requirements of the
system.
Unsatisfactory:
little to no evidence
of an
understanding of
the case, no clear
needs are provided
Questions are
either omitted or
completely
irrelevant/unclear.
Requirements
Matrix –
organisation
and critique
of starter
requirements
Through
critical analysis
and
categorisation,
demonstrate
an
understanding
of the case
Flawless/
Exemplary:
Demonstrates an
exceptional
understanding of the
case and flawlessly
organises the
requirements into
subsystems with
well-defined
modules. Provides
insightful and
constructive critique
of the existing
requirements,
Very good: Shows
a clear
understanding of
the case and
effectively
organises the
requirements into
subsystems with
minor room for
improvement.
Offers valuable
critique of the
existing
requirements,
providing relevant
Good: Shows an
understanding of
the case and
adequately
organises the
requirements into
subsystems.
Provides a clear
critique of the
existing
requirements,
offering feedback
on strengths,
weaknesses, and
Satisfactory:
Demonstrates a
satisfactory level of
understanding of
the case and
organises the
requirements into
subsystems,
though with room
for improvement.
Offers critique of
the existing
requirements,
providing feedback
on strengths,
Unsatisfactory:
Displays limited
understanding of
the case and
organisation of
requirements lacks
clarity and/or
coherence.
Provides limited,
unclear or generic
critique of the
existing
requirements, with
insufficient
feedback on
Unsatisfactory:
Little
understanding of
the case is
demonstrated, with
requirements
organised poorly,
lacking clarity
and/or coherence.
Offers little or no
critique of the
existing
requirements,
providing minimal
or no feedback on
Unsatisfactory:
No clear
understanding of
the case
demonstrated, with
no clear attempt to
organise the
requirements.
Provides no
critique or
feedback on the
existing
requirements.
IFN552: Systems Analysis and Design – Assessment Task 1 Page 8 of 11
and of
appropriate
techniques in
describing
requirements.
Weighting:
15%
highlighting highly
relevant strengths,
weaknesses, and
potential
improvements.
feedback on
strengths,
weaknesses, and
potential
improvements.
potential
improvements.
weaknesses, and
potential
improvements,
however, requires
further depth,
clarity and/or
specificity.
strengths,
weaknesses, and
potential
improvements.
strengths,
weaknesses, and
potential
improvements.
Requirements
Matrix – new
requirements
Formulate,
prioritise and
categorise a
new list of
functional
requirements
not covered by
the starter list,
by applying
relevant
techniques
and methods
as taught in
the unit.
Weighting:
15%
Flawless/
Exemplary:
flawless, deep
understanding of the
case, provides a
clear presentation of
all details, highly
appropriate
formation of
requirements from
the details of the
case, distinct from
the starter list.
Requirements
accord extremely
well with the
guidelines taught in
the unit, and the
principles of being
specific,
measurable,
actionable and
relevant.
Very good: does
not miss anything
important, shows
that the author has
a deep
understanding of
the case, and
provides a clear
presentation of
requirements
distinct from the
starter list. There
are however some
very minor
omissions.
Requirements
accord very well
with the guidelines
taught in the unit,
and the principles
of being specific,
measurable,
actionable and
relevant.
Good: reveals
attention to detail
and a reasonable
understanding of
the case through
distinct
requirements
developed, but
there are some
minor mistakes,
omissions and/or
inconsistencies.
Requirements
mostly accord with
the guidelines
taught in the unit,
and the principles
of being specific,
measurable,
actionable and
relevant.
Satisfactory:
reveals little
attention to detail.
There are some
important
inconsistencies,
omissions and
mistakes, and/or
some overlap with
starter list of
requirements.
Requirements
somewhat accord
with the guidelines
taught in the unit,
and principles of
being specific,
measurable,
actionable and
relevant.
Unsatisfactory:
lacks important
details, there are
significant
inconsistencies
and omissions, and
the relevance of
requirements
developed is
unclear.
Requirements
developed are not
clearly distinct from
starter list.
Most requirements
lack accordance
with the guidelines
taught in the unit,
and the principles
of being specific,
measurable,
actionable and
relevant.
Unsatisfactory:
the requirements
developed are
mostly unclear and
lack many
important details.
Many of the
requirements lack
clear relevance to
the case and/or
task. Requirements
developed are not
clearly distinct from
starter list.
Requirements do
not accord with the
guidelines taught in
the unit, and the
principles of being
specific,
measurable,
actionable and
relevant.
Unsatisfactory:
new requirements
are missing or
there are
significant
inconsistencies.
Use Case
Diagram +
Description
Flawless/
Exemplary:
flawless, deep
understanding of
users and their goals
Very good: does
not miss anything
important, shows a
deep
understanding of
Good: reveals
attention to detail,
but there are some
minor mistakes
and
Satisfactory:
reveals little
attention to detail,
there are some
important
Unsatisfactory:
lacks important
details, there are
significant
inconsistencies,
Unsatisfactory:
lacks many
important details,
there are many
significant
Unsatisfactory:
Diagram is either
missing or is
unrelated to the
case.
IFN552: Systems Analysis and Design – Assessment Task 1 Page 9 of 11
Apply
appropriate
UML
techniques to
clearly
describe
important
aspects of the
case in a Use
Case Diagram
Weighting:
27%
in using the system
and different use
cases, presentation
of all details, using
appropriate labelling
and correct
associations and
presenting a
cohesive view.
The description is
concise and relevant
to the case, and
reveals deep
understanding of the
overall purpose of
the Use Case
Diagram.
users and their
goals with
appropriate use
cases, and
provides a clear
presentation.
There are however
some very minor
modelling mistakes
or omissions.
The description is
concise and
relevant to the
case, and reveals
good
understanding of
the overall purpose
of the Use Case
Diagram.
inconsistencies in
modelling.
The description is
somewhat concise
and relevant to the
case, and reveals
some
understanding of
the overall purpose
of the Use Case
Diagram.
inconsistencies,
omissions and
mistakes in
modelling.
The description is
unrelated or
reveals little
understanding of
the overall purpose
of the Use Case
Diagram.
and the model is
difficult to
understand or
seem to be
somehow
irrelevant.
Description is
either missing or is
largely
unclear/irrelevant.
inconsistencies,
and large parts of
the model seems
unrelated or
unreadable.
Description is
either missing or is
largely
unclear/irrelevant.
No description
provided.
Activity
Diagram +
Description
Apply
appropriate
UML
techniques to
clearly
describe
important
aspects of the
case in an
Activity
Diagram
Weighting:
34%
Flawless/
Exemplary:
flawless, deep
understanding of the
system and all
elements,
presentation of all
details, reveals
modelling mastery
and cohesive view.
Excellent use of
relevant shapes,
demonstrating great
skill in balancing
detail with clarity.
Exceptional
description of the
Very good: does
not miss anything
important, shows a
deep
understanding of
the system and all
elements, and
provides a clear
presentation.
There are however
some very minor
modelling mistakes
or omissions.
Very good use of
relevant shapes,
demonstrating
good skill in
Good: reveals
attention to detail,
but there are some
minor mistakes
and
inconsistencies in
modelling the
system.
Good use of
relevant shapes,
demonstrating
reasonable skill in
balancing detail
with clarity.
Good description
of the diagram and
its purpose,
Satisfactory:
reveals little
attention to detail,
there are some
important
inconsistencies,
omissions and
mistakes in
modelling the
system.
Satisfactory use of
relevant shapes,
demonstrating
some skill in
balancing detail
with clarity.
Unsatisfactory:
lacks important
details, there are
significant
inconsistencies,
and the model is
difficult to
understand or
seems to be
somehow
irrelevant.
Somewhat
unsatisfactory use
of relevant shapes,
demonstrating little
skill in balancing
detail with clarity.
Unsatisfactory:
lacks many
important details,
there are many
significant
inconsistencies,
and large parts of
the model seems
unrelated or
unreadable.
Many of the
shapes used are
irrelevant/incorrect,
and there is no
balance of detail
and clarity in the
diagram.
Unsatisfactory:
Diagram is either
missing or is
unrelated to the
case
Missing description
of the diagram
IFN552: Systems Analysis and Design – Assessment Task 1 Page 10 of 11
diagram and its
purpose, highlighting
all relevant
assumptions. Very
clear communication
of important aspects
of the diagram.
balancing detail
with clarity.
Very good
description of the
diagram and its
purpose,
highlighting most
relevant
assumptions. Clear
communication of
important aspects
of the diagram.
highlighting some
relevant
assumptions.
Mostly clear
communication of
important aspects
of the diagram.
Acceptable
description of the
diagram and its
purpose but
relevant
assumptions are
overlooked.
Somewhat clear
communication of
important aspects
of the diagram.
Somewhat
inadequate
explanation of both
the purpose of the
diagram and the
related
assumptions.
Communication of
important aspects
of the diagram
lacks clarity.
Mostly inadequate
explanation of both
the purpose of the
diagram and the
related
assumptions.
Largely unclear
communication of
important aspects
of the diagram.
IFN552: Systems Analysis and Design – Assessment Task 1