Assessment 1: Project Definition and Scope The report defines the problem, describing the background and context, and detailing the scope of the projectto be undertaken. The report for project definition and scope should be in the area of computer networking, cloud computing and/or security and consider topics such as Network Design

Assessment Brief: ICT3054 Capstone Industry Project A
Trimester 1, 2024

Assessment Overview

Assessment Task Type Weighting Due Length ULO
Assessment 1: Project Definition and Scope
The report defines the problem, describing the background and context, and detailing the scope of the project to be undertaken. Individual

10% Week 3
1500 words ULO1
ULO2
Assessment 2: Requirements
Analysis
Students submit a report covering their requirements analysis for the project. Individual
20% Week 6
1500 words ULO2
ULO3
Assessment 3: Project Reflection
Reflection on the student’s journey in the unit focused on (a) the skills and knowledge they were able to draw on from earlier parts of the course; (b) the areas where they needed development and how they addressed those; (c) how they would approach a project like this next time; (d) considerations for BIS3006 IS Capstone Industry Project B Individual
30% First:
Week 7 and
Second:
Week 12

2*1000 words ULO5
Assessment 4: Report and Oral
Defence
Students prepare and the Project
Design, Feasibility Analysis, and Initial Implementation Plan and present and defend their solution design through an oral defence. Group

Invigilated
40% Week 11

3000 words

Presentation 15 minutes maximum;
15 slides
maximum
(1500 word equiv.) ULO1
ULO2
ULO3
ULO4
equiv. – equivalent word count based on the Assessment Load Equivalence Guide. It means this assessment is equivalent to the normally expected time requirement for a written submission containing the specified number of words.

Note for all assessments tasks:
• Students can generate/modify/create text generated by AI. They are then asked to modify the text according to the brief of the assignment.
• During the preparation and writing of an assignment, students use AI tools, but may not include any AI-generated material in their final report.
• AI tools are used by students in researching topics and preparing assignments, but all AI-generated content must be acknowledged in the final report as follows:
Format
I acknowledge the use of [insert the name of AI system and link] to [describe how it was used]. The prompts used were entered on [enter the date in ddmmyyy:] [list the prompts that were used]
Example
Tools
I acknowledge the use of ChatGPT https://chat.openai.com to create content to plan and brainstorm ideas for my assessment. The prompts used were entered on 18 March, 2023:
• What are some key challenges in running an online business?

Assessment 1: Project Definition and Scope

Due date: Week 3
Group/individual: Individual
Word count/Time provided: 10%
Weighting: 1500 words
Unit Learning Outcomes: ULO1, ULO2

Assessment 1 Detail
Assessment 1: Project Definition and Scope
The report defines the problem, describing the background and context, and detailing the scope of the project to be undertaken. The report for project definition and scope should be in the area of computer networking, cloud computing and/or security and consider topics such as Network Design, IT Security, Routing and Switching, Virtualization Technologies, Server Administration & Maintenance, Cloud Applications, Cloud Computing Business Models and others.
Assessment 1 Marking Criteria and Rubric
The assessment will be marked out of 10 and will be weighted 10% of the total unit mark. The marking criteria and rubric are shown on the following page.

Assessment 1 Marking Criteria and Rubric

Marking Criteria Not Satisfactory
(0-49% of the criterion mark) Satisfactory
(50-64% of the criterion mark) Good (65-74% of the criterion mark) Very Good
(75-84% of the criterion mark) Excellent (85-
100% of the
criterion mark)
Criterion -1 (1 mark) Does the business case is established for the project proposal, and the project scope described in the field of computer networking and/or security. Business case is not established for the project proposal, and the project scope is not described Business case is established for the project proposal, and the project scope generally described Business case is established for the project proposal, and the project scope described Business case is established for the project proposal, and the project scope clearly described Business case is established for the project proposal, and the project scope clearly and specifically described .
Criterion-2 (1 mark) Does project charter identifies your goals the clientwants your project to achieve in computer networking and/or security and items that are in and out of scope for this particular project Project charter is not identifies your goals the clientwants your project to achieve and items that are in and out of scope for this particular project Project charter is generally identifies your goals the client wants your project to achieve and items that are in and out of scope for this particular project Project charter is identifies your goals the clientwants your project to achieve and items that are in and out of scope for this particular project Project charter is clearly identifies your goals the clientwants your project to achieve and items that are in and out of scope for this particular project. Project charter is clearly and specifically identifies your goals the clientwants your project to achieve and items that are in and out of scope for this particular project

Criterion-4 (8 marks) Does the Vision document demonstrate
the ability of spelling out the core idea and the business case justifying the development effort. Business case is not addressed and captures the business value of the proposed system. Business needs is not expressed.
Functional and Non- functional requirements are related to business needs and identified. Business case is addressed and vaguely captures the business value of the proposed system. Some Functional and Nonfunctional requirements are related to business needs and identified. Business case is addressed and captures the business value of the proposed system. Business needs expressed.
Functional and Non- functional requirements are related to business needs and identified. Business case is clearly addressed and captures the business value of the proposed system. Business needs clearly expressed.
Functional and Non- functional requirements are related to business needs and clearly and specifically identified. Business case is clearly and specifically addressed and captures the business value of the proposed system. Business needs clearly and specifically expressed. Functional and Non- functional requirements are related to business needs and clearly and specifically identified.

Assessment 2: Requirements Analysis

Due date: Week 6
Group/individual: Individual
Word count/Time provided: 1500 words
Weighting: 20%
Unit Learning Outcomes: ULO2, ULO3

Assessment 2 Detail
Assessment 2: Requirements Analysis
Students submit a report covering their requirements analysis for the computer networking, cloud computing and/or security project. Students provide a detailed discussion of the business requirements, functional requirements and technical requirements.

Assessments 2 Marking Criteria and Rubric
The assessment will be marked out of 20 and will be weighted 20% of the total unit mark. The marking criteria and rubric are shown on the following page.

Assessment 2 Marking Criteria and Rubric

Criterion (5 marks)
Technical requirements are correctly analyzed and documented Technologies that meet project
technical
requirements of project are identified, evaluated, and documented Key technical requirements have not been identified
Evaluation and documentation
omits key
technologies Key technical requirements are correctly identified and documented. Key technologies that are likely to have capacity to meet project requirements have been identified, evaluated, and documented Most technical requirements are correctly analysed and documented. Key technologies that are likely to have capacity to meet project requirements have been identified, accurately evaluated, and
professionally documented All technical requirements are correctly analysed and documented. Most technologies that are likely to have capacity to meet project requirements have been identified, accurately evaluated, and
professionally documented All technical requirements are correctly analysed and professionallydocumented All technologies that are likely to have capacity to meet project requirements have been identified, accurately evaluated, and professionally documented

Criterion (5 marks)
Does Functional requirements are correctly analyzed and documented? Does the behavioral models Show the dynamic behavior of a system as it is executing.
Show what happens or what is supposed. to happen when a system responds to a stimulus from its environment. No activity diagrams built Some activity diagrams built and clearly and significantly show the sequence of actions involved in processing input data and
generating an associated output. All state machine diagrams built and clearly and significantly
Shows how a system responds to external and internal events. All state machine diagrams built based on the assumption and that events may cause a transition from one state to another. Several activity diagrams built and clearly and significantly show the sequence of actions involved in processing input data and
generating an associated output. All state machine diagrams built and clearly and significantly
Shows how a system responds to external and internal events. All state machine diagrams built based on the assumption and that events may cause a transition from one state to another. Almost activity diagrams built and clearly and significantly show the sequence of actions involved in processing input data and
generating an associated output. All state machine diagrams built and clearly and significantly
Shows how a system responds to external and internal events. All state machine diagrams built based on the assumption and that events may cause a transition from one state to another. All activity diagrams built and clearly and significantly show the sequence of actions involved in processing input data and generating an associated output. All state machine diagrams built and clearly
and significantly Shows how a system responds to external and internal events. All state machine diagrams built based on the assumption and that events may cause a transition from one state to another.
Criterion (5 marks)
Does the NonFunctional requirements are
correctly analyzed and
documented? Does the analysis of nonfunctional
requirements demonstrate an
ability to identify,
quantify, prioritize,
and communicate required system qualities? No critical and
significant nonFunctional requirements Some critical
and significant non-
Functional requirements addressed and justified. Prioritization of them clearly and correctly justified against specific needs of project.
Costs and benefits of addressing all of them clearly identified and discussed in relation to specific needs of project. All critical and significant
external interfaces identified.
Several critical and
significant non-
Functional requirements addressed and justified. Prioritization of them clearly and correctly justified against specific needs of project. Costs and benefits of addressing all of them clearly identified and discussed in relation to specific needs of project. All critical and significant
external interfaces identified.
Almost critical and
significant non-
Functional requirements addressed and justified. Prioritization of them clearly and correctly justified against specific needs of project. Costs and benefits of addressing all of them clearly identified and discussed in relation to specific needs of project. All critical and significant
external interfaces identified.
All critical and significant Non-Functional requirements addressed
and justified. Prioritization of them clearly and correctly justified against specific needs of project. Costs and benefits of addressing all of them clearly identified and discussed in relation to specific needs of project. All critical and significant external interfaces identified.

Assessment 3: Project Reflection

Due date: First: Week 7 and
Second: Week 12
Group/individual: Individual
Word count/Time provided: 2*1000 words
Weighting: 30%
Unit Learning Outcomes: ULO5

Assessment 3 Detail
Assessment 3: Project Reflection
Reflection on the student’s journey in the unit focused on (a) It has to include the logical (network topology, addressing, naming, VLANs, VPNs etc.) as well as the physical design (which equipment to use, chosen LAN and WAN technology etc) on from earlier parts of the course; (b) the requirements in part a for solution and provide information on how the design is to be implemented (Installation plans, user guides, administration plans etc.).; (c) The proposed designed model should be linked to the customer requirements set out in the Requirements Specification. So, a test plan is need to be provided to document the testing parameters for the system you are building to justify the system is evaluated against the system requirements documented in Assessment Item 2; (d) considerations for ICT3055 Capstone Industry Project B.

Assessments 3 Marking Criteria and Rubric
The assessment will be marked out of 30 and will be weighted 30% of the total unit mark. The marking criteria and rubric are shown on the following page.

Part-A
Marking Criteria Not Satisfactory
(0-49% of the criterion mark) Satisfactory
(50-64% of the criterion mark) Good
(65-74% of the criterion mark) Very Good
(75-84% of the criterion mark) Excellent
(85-100% of the criterion mark)
Criterion (5 marks)
Does the initial project Network Design architecture plan set an achievable schedule to achieve the desired project results? Does the Network Design match documented project requirements?
The plan is not clear regarding the project. The design fails to adequately address all key project requirements The plan fairly clearly and specific identifies the main structural components in a system and the relationships between them. The
plan is fairly clear in linking between the design and requirements model and the Design correctly addresses all key project requirements. The plan shows clearly when each architectural element and element of functionality will be delivered as iteration targets. All identified risk mitigation strategies are accounted for
Contingency planning is thorough. The plan clearly identifies the main structural components in a system and the relationships between them. The plan is clear in linking between the design and requirements model and the Design correctly addresses almost all (80%+) project requirements. The plan shows clearly when each architectural element and element of functionality will be delivered as iteration targets. All identified risk mitigation strategies are accounted for
Contingency planning is thorough. The plan clearly and fairly specific identifies the main structural components in a system and the relationships between them. The
plan is clear and fairly specific in linking between the design and requirements model will work but isn’t aligned with what happens in industry (with the exception of approved work arounds) . The plan shows clearly when each architectural element and element of functionality will be delivered as iteration targets. All identified risk mitigation strategies are accounted for
Contingency planning is thorough. The plan clearly and specific identifies the main structural components in a system and the relationships between them. The
plan is clear and specific in linking between the design and requirements model using an industry standard solution (with the expectation of approved work arounds). The plan shows clearly when each architectural element and element of functionality will be delivered as iteration targets. All identified risk mitigation strategies are accounted for
Contingency planning is thorough.

Part-B
Marking Criteria Not Satisfactory
(0-49% of the criterion mark) Satisfactory
(50-64% of the criterion mark) Good
(65-74% of the criterion mark) Very Good
(75-84% of the criterion mark) Excellent
(85-100% of the criterion mark)
Criterion (5 marks) Does the structural models show logical groupings of objects (network topology, addressing, naming, VLANs, VPNs etc.) and the physical groupings of objects (which equipment to use, chosen LAN and WAN technology etc) into coherent subsystems? There is no design (logical and physical) diagrams . Some design (logical and physical) diagram with each subsystem shown as a package with enclosed objects. Several design (logical and physical) diagrams with each subsystem shown as a package with enclosed objects. Almost design (logical and physical) diagrams with each subsystem shown as a package with enclosed objects. All design (logical and physical) diagrams with each subsystem shown as a package with enclosed objects.
Criterion (5 marks) Does the dynamic models build in early stage of the Network Design process? Sequence models are not designed Some Sequence models
clearly and specifically designed and showed the object interactions. All State machine models clearly and specifically designed
and showed how
individual objects change their state in response to events. Several Sequence models clearly and specifically designed and showed the object interactions. All State machine models clearly and
specifically designed
and showed how
individual objects change their state in response to events. Almost Sequence models clearly and specifically designed and showed the object interactions. All State machine models clearly and
specifically designed
and showed how
individual objects change their state in response to events. All Sequence models clearly and specifically designed and showed the object interactions. All State machine models clearly and specifically designed
and showed how
individual objects change their state in response to events.
Criterion (5 marks) Does the interfaces specify so that objects and subsystems can be designed in parallel.? Component interfaces are not defined.
Some Component interfaces defined precisely so that other objects can use them. All system and user interfaces defined. . Several Component interfaces defined precisely so that other objects can use them. All system and user interfaces defined. Almost Component interfaces defined precisely so that other objects can use them. All system and user interfaces defined. All Component interfaces defined precisely so that other objects can use them. All system and user interfaces defined.

Criterion (5 marks)
Does the proposed
Network Design Implementation plan match documented project requirements Implementation plan would not allow an IT professional to implement your design and meet most project requirements with some minor clarifications Implementation plan would allow an IT professional to implement your design and meet most project requirements with some minor clarifications Implementation plan would allow an IT professional to implement your design and meet all project requirements with some minor clarifications Implementation plan would allow an IT professional to implement your design and meet all project requirements with minimal clarifications Implementation plan would allow an IT professional to implement your design and meet all project requirements without any further clarifications
Criterion (5 marks) Testing parameters for evaluation of system performance against business, functional, non-functional and technical requirements are correctly identified and analysis Testing parameters will not allow for accurate testing of one or more essential business, functional and technical requirements Testing parameters will allow for accurate testing of essential business, functional and technical requirements Testing parameters will allow for accurate testing of key business, functional and technical requirements Testing parameters will allow for accurate testing of most business,
functional and technical requirements Testing parameters will allow for accurate testing of all business, functional and technical requirements

Assessment 4 Marking Criteria and Rubric

Assessment 4: Report and Oral Defense

Due date: Week 11
Group/individual: Group
Word count/Time provided: 3000 words
Weighting: 40%
Unit Learning Outcomes: ULO1, ULO2, ULO3, ULO4

Assessment 4 Detail
Assessment 4: Report and Oral Defense
Students prepare and the Project Design, Feasibility Analysis, and Initial Implementation Plan and present and defend their solution design through an oral defense.
Assessments 4 Marking Criteria and Rubric
The assessment will be marked out of 40 and will be weighted 40% of the total unit mark. The marking criteria and rubric are shown on the following page.

Assessment 4 Marking Criteria and Rubric

Marking Criteria Not Satisfactory
(0-49% of the criterion mark) Satisfactory
(50-64% of the criterion mark) Good
(65-74% of the criterion mark) Very Good
(75-84% of the criterion mark) Excellent
(85-100% of the
criterion mark)
Criterion (2.5 marks) Does the revised Vision give a clear idea of the business case and final functional, non- functional, and technical requirements of the project The Vision has not been updated even though the expected outcomes of the project clearly need to be revised. The Vision has been partially updated to reflect a few changes in project scope. The Vision has been updated to reflect some changes in project scope. The Vision has been updated to reflect most changes in project scope. The Vision has been thoroughly updated to reflect any and all changes in project scope.
Criterion (2.5 marks) Does the report demonstrate the skills in Feasibility Analysis? Does the revised requirement model clearly define the functional, non- functional, and data requirements for the project? Report hasn’t provided a demonstration about the skills in
Feasibility Analysis. The requirement model has not been updated even though the functional, non- functional, and data requirements for the project clearly need to be revised. Reporting demonstrates the
basic skills in Feasibility Analysis, and present and justified their solution. The requirement model provided with an explanation. The requirement model has been thoroughly updated to reflect any and few changes in functional, non- functional, and data. requirements for the Reporting demonstrates competent or basic skills in Feasibility.
Analysis, and present and justified their solution. The requirement model provided with an explanation. The requirement model has been thoroughly updated to reflect some changes in functional, non- functional, and data requirements for the Reporting demonstrates high-level skills in Feasibility Analysis, and present and justified their solution. The requirement model provided with an explanation. The requirement model has been thoroughly updated to changes in functional, non- functional, and data requirements for the Reporting demonstrates highly advanced skills in Feasibility Analysis, and present and justified their solution. The requirement model provided with an explanation. The requirement model has been thoroughly updated to reflect all changes in functional, non- functional, and data requirements for the project?

Criterion (2.5 marks) Does the report demonstrate the skills
in Initial
Implementation Plan?
Does the revised Master Test Plan clearly indicate the overall testing strategy, the priority, level of effort, basic techniques, and coverage to be achieved in each type
of testing, as well as acceptance and remediation procedures? Report hasn’t provided a demonstration about
the skills in Initial
Implementation
Plan. The master test plan does not set out a reasonable plan for testing. Reporting demonstrates the
basic skills in Initial
Implementation Plan
and present and justified their solution. The initial plan provided with an explanation. The master test plan sets out a plan for testing during the remaining development. Reporting demonstrates
competent or basic
skills in Initial
Implementation Plan and present and justified their solution. The initial plan provided with an explanation. The master test plan sets out a prioritized, reasonable, and achievable plan for testing during the remaining development. Reporting demonstrates
high-level skills in Initial
Implementation Plan and present and justified their solution. The initial plan provided with an explanation. The master test plan sets out a good quality,
prioritized, justified, reasonable and achievable plan for testing during the remaining development. The master test plan sets out a prioritized, reasonable, and achievable plan for testing during the remaining development. Reporting demonstrates highly advanced skills in Initial Implementation Plan and present and justified their solution. The initial plan provided with an explanation. The master test plan sets out a very high quality, well thought out, clearly prioritized, well justified,
reasonable and achievable plan for testing during the remaining development.
Criterion (2.5 marks) Does the report demonstrate the skills in Project Design? Does the revised executable Network Design
Architectural of your project clearly identified? Report hasn’t provided a demonstration about the skills in Project
Design Reporting demonstrates the
basic skills in Project Design, present and justified their solution Reporting demonstrates competent or basic skills in Project Design, present and justified their solution Reporting demonstrates high-level skills in
Project Design, present and justified their solution. The executable architecture implements the proposed architecture, with no
significant elements missing Reporting demonstrates highly advanced skills in Project Design, present and justified their solution. The fully implements the proposed architecture, with no missing elements.

Criterion (2 marks) Does the proposed architecture formulate set of goals and describes the philosophy? The goals and philosophies haven’t explained Some goals that the architecture needs to meet in its structure and behavior, and philosophies well explained. The Issues that drive the philosophy identified Several goals that the architecture needs to meet in its structure and behavior, and philosophies well explained. The Issues that drive the philosophy
identified Almost goals that the architecture needs to meet in its structure and behavior, and philosophies well explained. The Issues that drive the philosophy identified All goals that the architecture needs to meet in its structure and behavior, and philosophies well explained. The Issues that drive the philosophy identified.
Criterion (2marks) Does the proposed architecture identified and link to the requirements? The critical architecturally significant requirements not correctly identified Some critical architecturally significant requirements correctly identified and link to the requirements that must be implemented to realize the architecture. Several critical architecturally significant requirements correctly identified and link to the requirements that must be implemented to realize the architecture. Almost critical architecturally significant requirements correctly identified and link to the requirements that must be implemented to realize the architecture. All critical architecturally significant requirements correctly identified and link to the requirements that must be implemented to realize the architecture.
Criterion (2 marks)
Does the proposed Network Design architecture listed the assumptions and dependencies that drive architectural decisions? Does the proposed architecture Listed the decisions that have been made? The list of the assumptions and dependencies not provided. A comprehensive list of the assumptions and dependencies, and list of decisions and constraints identified. Decisions completely consistent with goals and philosophies, sensible, and well justified with reference to specific needs of project. A comprehensive list of the assumptions and dependencies, and list of decisions and constraints identified. Decisions completely consistent with goals and philosophies, sensible, and well justified with reference to specific needs of project. A comprehensive list of the assumptions and dependencies, and list of decisions and constraints identified. Decisions completely consistent with goals and philosophies, sensible, and well justified with reference to specific needs of project. A comprehensive list of the assumptions and dependencies, and list of decisions and constraints identified. Decisions completely consistent with goals and philosophies, sensible, and well justified with reference to specific needs of project.

Criterion (2 marks)
Does the proposed Network Design architecture described the mechanisms? The architectural mechanisms are not listed. Some architectural mechanisms are listed and described the current state of each one. Mechanisms related to architecturally significant requirements. Several architectural mechanisms are listed and described the current state of each one. Mechanisms related to architecturally significant requirements. Almost the architectural mechanisms are listed and described the current state of each one. Mechanisms related to architecturally significant requirements. All the architectural mechanisms are listed and described the current state of each one. Mechanisms
related to architecturally significant requirements.
Criterion (12 marks) Does the test plan give a clear idea of the acceptance testing?
All features to be tested, features not
to be tested,
resource requirements, testing schedule, test writing, test coverage, test deliverables, pre- requisite for test execution, bug reporting and tracking mechanism, test metrics identified in the test plan. Some features to be tested, features not to be tested, resource requirements, testing schedule, test writing, test coverage, test deliverables, pre- requisite for test execution, bug reporting and tracking mechanism, test
metrics identified in the test plan. Several features to be tested, features not to be
tested, resource requirements, testing schedule, test writing, test coverage, test deliverables, pre- requisite for test execution, bug reporting and tracking mechanism, test metrics identified in the test plan.
Almost features to be tested, features not to be tested, resource requirements, testing schedule, test writing, test coverage, test deliverables, pre- requisite for test execution, bug reporting and tracking
mechanism, test
metrics identified in the test plan. All features to be tested, features not to be tested, resource requirements, testing schedule, test writing, test coverage, test deliverables, pre- requisite for test execution, bug reporting and tracking mechanism, test metrics identified in the test plan.

Criterion (2.5 marks) Logical sequence and ease of presentation. Use of available time and overall organization of the seminar. There is no Logical sequence Audience cannot understand some of the presentation.
because there is no
sequence of information and either falls short or goes over the time limit. Audience has difficulty following presentation because student jumps around but is close to being on time. Presents information in logical sequence that the audience can follow and delivered close to time given. Presents information in logical, interesting sequence that the audience can easily follow and delivered on time.
Criterion (5 marks)
Audience engagement and interest maintained. Expertise and ability is shown to justify results and conclusions to peers. Audience
engagement and interest haven’t maintained Demonstrates just a basic does grasp of information about the project throughout the report; Student reads all of report with no eye contact or the video sounds like a prepared speech. Student mumbles or incorrectly pronounces terms, and speaks too quietly audience members or viewers to hear. Demonstrates comfort with explanations, but fails to elaborate at times in the report. Student occasionally uses eye contact, but still reads most of report from notes or the screen. Student’s voice is low. Student incorrectly pronounces terms. Audience members or viewers have difficulty hearing all the presentation. Demonstrates ease with explanations and willing to elaborate at times in the report. Student maintains eye contact most of the time but frequently returns to notes. Student’s voice is clear. Student pronounces most words correctly. Most audience members or viewers can hear the presentation. Demonstrates full knowledge (more than
required) with explanations and elaboration of the project in the report; Maintains eye contact with audience or the camera, seldom returning to notes. Student uses a clear voice that all audience members or viewers
can hear the presentation.
Criterion (2.5marks) Audience Interaction and Impact Skills How well the questions were handled in the ‘live’ seminar. The questions were handled Cannot answer all questions about subject. Able to answer only rudimentary questions from the audience. Answers to all questions but fails to elaborate at times. Answers all questions with detailed explanations and elaboration.

Get Instant Help on WhatsApp