Instructor: Cormac Flanagan
Office: Engineering 2 Building, room 367
Office Hours: Tuesdays, 11am-noon, or by
appointment.
Lectures: Tuesday and Thursday, 8:00am-9:45am, Cowell Com 134
Teaching Assistant: David Olsen
(dolsen at soe.ucsc.edu)
Please send David your email address to be added to the class mail list.
TA Office Hours: Wednesdays,
11:00-12:30pm, Baskin Lobby near coffee cart.
·
Project-Based Software Engineering: An
Object-Oriented Approach, by Evelyn Stiller and Cathie LeBlanc , Addison
Wesley, 2002, ISBN 0321362055. This book is available at the BayTree Bookstore.
· “The Mythical Man-Month”, by Frederick P. Brooks, Jr., Addison-Wesley, 1995.
· “Software Engineering. A Practitioner’s Approach”, by Roger Pressman.
· “Code Complete”, by Steve McConnell.
· “Extreme Software Engineering. A Hands-On Approach”, by Daniel H. Steinberg, Daniel W. Palmer.
Students are required to collaborate in teams of 4-6 people to undertake a significant software engineering project. The software project is structured as a collection of documentation and code deliverables. This project requires a substantial amount of work, and demands good teamwork. Here’s an example of a finished project.
Work in CS 115 is divided into two main components,
each contributing 50% of a student’s grade:
A necessary but not sufficient precondition for passing the course is passing both components.
The individual work component consists of the following parts:
· Class participation: 10%
· Paper reviews: 10%
o Each of six reviews is worth 2%. The lowest article review grade will be dropped at the end of the quarter.
· Three in-class quizzes: 24%
· Project reflection essay: 6%
There is no final exam.
Article reviews are due on paper at the beginning
of class. Late items receive no
credit.
Project deliverables are due on paper at the
beginning of class. Documents are
neat and clear, with proper English spelling and syntax is used throughout.
This is worth 10% of each deliverable.
Each project deliverable must be accompanied by a
group time recording log and group meeting notes. Include in these notes: agenda of
meeting, members present, discussion summary, time of meeting, location of
meeting, members' roles (moderator, notetaker, time keeper) during meeting. This is worth 10% of
each milestone.
Project deliverables must also be checked into
DForge/SVN (see Project Setup Guide) in
an obvious place and in a common format (eg. HTML, PDF, PostScript, plain
text). Handwritten or hand-drawn documents must be scanned.
Late items receive no credit. However, one project
deadline can be missed without penalty (one "get out of jail free" possibility)
if it is turned in at the next class.
Resubmission: To facilitate the project learning
experience, any project deliverable can be re-submitted to recover up to half
of the points lost on the original submission. The re-submission must be within
a week from when the original submission was returned, and must include (1) the
original, graded submission, (2) the new submission, and (3) a detailed
description of the differences between the two versions.
|
Wk |
Lecture |
Homework |
|
|
1 |
Jan 5 |
Intro, SE processes |
|
|
2 |
Jan 10 |
Read: Chapter 1 |
|
|
Jan 12 |
Initial Presentations |
Deliverable: project section |
|
|
3 |
Jan 17 |
Review: Paper prototyping |
|
|
Jan 19 |
Deliverable: Scenarios |
||
|
4 |
Jan 24 |
Quiz 1 |
Review: Decomposing |
|
Jan 26 |
Deliverable: Requirements |
||
|
5 |
Jan 31 |
Read: Practical UML |
|
|
Feb 2 |
Review: Software inspections |
||
|
6 |
Feb 7 |
Software inspections |
Deliverable: Design |
|
Feb 9 |
Design presentation Carcgame |
Review: Design Patterns |
|
|
7 |
Feb 14 |
Design presentation Victory and Throne |
|
|
Feb 16 |
Deliverable: Time and risk estimates |
||
|
8 |
Feb 21 |
Guest lecture: Stephen Freund |
Review: Aging |
|
Feb 23 |
Quiz 2 |
|
|
|
9 |
Feb 28 |
Deliverable: User manual |
|
|
Mar 2 |
Review: No Silver Bullet |
||
|
10 |
Mar 7 |
Deliverable: Unit tests |
|
|
Mar 9 |
Quiz 3 |
|
|
|
11 |
Mar 14 |
Final
presentations |
|
|
Mar 16 |
Final
presentations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deliverable: Acceptance Tests Carcgame: 11am Mar 27th,
Cowell Apartment PC/Mac Lab MintyFresh: 11am Mar 17th,
BE 109 Kraterbikes: 6pm Thursday 16th
BE 109 BattleBallz: Mar26th Cowell
Apartment PC/Mac Lab. What time?? Deliverable: Final Notebook Individual Project reflection |
· Teamwork Guide written by Ed Parrish
· Groups That Work More on groups, with tips for how to identify and resolve group problems
Any confirmed academic dishonesty including but not
limited to copying another's homework or article review, cheating on exams, and
copying project work without giving credit to the author of the work products,
will result in a no-pass or failing grade. Students are encouraged to read the campus policies regarding
academic integrity.
Occasionally, one or more group members contribute
less effort to the project than others. In CS 115, this is viewed as a
management challenge: how to motivate and coordinate under-performing team members.
Groups experiencing this problem are encouraged to meet with the Professor or
TA to discuss management tactics.
If, at the end of the quarter, multiple managerial approaches have been tried without success, it is possible to ask the Professor to assess the relative contributions of each team member. The Professor sends out an email questionnaire asking each member to rate the relative contributions of every team member (including themselves) by dividing 100 points among all team members. For example, if there are four team members, and each member contributed equally, each would receive 25 points. Based on this data, the Professor may, at his discretion, modify the total project grades of one or more team members.
Note that if no effort was made to attempt managerial solutions to the problem, then no reassessment of course grades will be permitted. This reflects the viewpoint that the situation reflects a failure to address an obvious managerial problem, as well as the failure of some team members to contribute their share of the work.