1 Enterprise Business Requirements 32569 Autumn 2017 Assignment 2 Inspection of Software Requirements Specifications (SRS) Submission Deadline: 10.00am Monday 22 May 2017 Maximum Mark: 10% of the overall assessment for this subject Objectives: 1, 2, and 3 in the subject outline Estimated Work load: For a team of 3 to 4 students, 5-7 hours per student Introduction This assignment will be carried out in teams that were formed for assignment 1. Each team will conduct a formal inspection of an existing software requirements specification (SRS) that will be sent to the group by the subject coordinator. The team will submit an inspection report as described below. Doing the assignment Your team will follow the steps below to perform the assignment: 1. Select an inspection method - The lecture notes offer a number of ways of organizing an inspection (e.g. see Slide 40 in Lecture 7). You will also need to gather any supporting documents, including checklists, role descriptions, defect recording forms, etc. While most of these will be made available on UTS online, you may have to conduct some research and make your own selection. 2. Familiarize yourselves with the inspection forms - There are forms for documenting the defects discovered before and during the inspection meeting, and forms for summarizing the findings afterwards. These forms will be available on UTS online under assignment 2 link. 3. Choose the roles for your team members - One person will need to chair the meeting (leader or moderator). Another person will need to document the findings during the meeting (recorder or scribe). Other roles (e.g. reader, inspectors) may be needed depending on your chosen inspection process. 4. Set a date, time, and place to conduct the inspection meeting - Make sure all team members are available, allocate at least 2 hours uninterrupted time, and a quiet place to work. 5. Prepare for the inspection - Each team member should prepare for the inspection meeting by carefully reading the specification before the meeting, and compiling an initial list of defects. 6. Conduct the inspection meeting - If your team is not prepared at the start of the meeting, or if a member of the team is not present, the leader should postpone the meeting, and arrange an alternative date.2 7. Summarize the findings after the meeting - Make sure someone (you may select a person who did not play a specific role as specified in 3 above for this task), collects all the forms together, and summarizes the defects discovered. 8. Write an inspection report – This report describes the inspection process you used, your key findings, and discusses any insights you gained, both on the SRS, and the nature of the inspection process. For example, if you had to do it again, what would you do differently? Resources To help you conduct an inspection you may need to use the following documents that are available on UTS online: • A Sample Inspection Process Description (inspection_process_model.pdf) • Inspections Moderator's Checklist (inspection_moderator_clist.pdf) To help you record the results of your inspection (and the preparation for it), you will need the following forms: • Inspections Typo Log (inspection_typo_log.pdf) • Inspections Issue Log (inspection_issue_log.pdf) • Inspections Summary Report Form (inspection_summary_report.pdf) • Inspections Lessons Learnt Questionnaire (inspection_lessons_learnt.pdf) Example checklists were covered in slide 43 of lecture 6: • Wiegers' Checklist for Inspecting Requirements http://www.processimpact.com/pr_goodies.shtml • NASA JPL's Checklist for Requirements • NASA JPL's Checklist for Functional Requirements • Firesmith's Checklist for Requirements Specifications You may wish to use the University of Maryland definition of defect classes (UMaryland-defectclasses.pdf) if you don’t like the defect types specified in Wiegers’ Inspection Issue Log form (inspection_issue_log.pdf). Submission Details You are required to submit the following deliverables for the inspection of the SRS that you were allocated: 1. Entry and Exit Criteria check list (1 Mark) 2. A description of the inspection process you used. This description must include: (a) what roles did your team members take on? (b) How did you structure the inspection meeting? (c) What activities were included in your process and why? (2 Marks) 3. The result of the inspection exercise. Use the relevant forms provided on UTS online and listed below to document your inspection results. Make sure that you use the relevant parts. Use continuation sheets if you run out of space on a form. (5 Marks)3 4. A reflection of your inspection practice and a discussion of the lessons learnt from your inspection exercise. What went well?, what went wrong?, what would you do differently? You may use the “Inspection lessons Learnt Questionnaire” document only as a guide to help you. But please note that you must write a full reflection of the entire assignment, not just answering those questions. (2 Marks) Your group will submit a soft copy of assignment on UTS-online (subject line should be [Assignment 2 - Group X] where X is your group number) and one hard copy to the Assignment boxes 57 or 58 on level 5 next to the Learning precinct) on 10 am Monday 22 May 2017. Your assignment will be marked and returned after 2 weeks. All submission for every development group will be in the following format: 1. The front page of every submission should include the “Assignment_submission” template provided on UTS Online. 2. The second page will consist of a checklist as identified below. An item that is “ticked” in the checklist indicates that this item is included in the submission. It is the group’s responsibility to ensure submissions are complete and all documents are secure. Groups who fail to provide all material in the checklist will be awarded a zero for that submission as it will not be marked. Checklist • The front page • Entry Criteria check list • Exit Criteria check list • A full description of the inspection process you used. • The result of the inspection exercise. • A discussion of the lessons learnt from your inspection exercise. • The SRS document that you have inspected. Penalties Failure to submit complete set: incomplete submissions will not be assessed and will result in the group being assigned zero for that submission. It is essential that groups ensure their submission is complete. Late submissions and presentation: Up to three marks will be deducted from the total assignment mark for unclear or untidy presentation. One mark per day will be deducted from the total assignment mark for late submissions, more than seven days late the assignment will receive zero. Special consideration, for late submission, must be arranged beforehand with the subject coordinator. Special Consideration If your performance in an assessment item has been affected by extenuating or special circumstances beyond your control you may apply for Special Consideration. Information on how to apply can be found at http://www.sau.uts.edu.au/assessment/consideration.html4 Extensions will only be considered if a group member is unable to attend meeting or submit work for more than one week because of legitimate misadventure (such as work problem, health problem or family problem) and the group has notified the subject coordinator at least one week in advance of the submission date. Overcoming Group Work Challenges It is not uncommon for groups to have difficulties working together, in both industry and at university. It is therefore necessary for students to behave in a professional manner while working on their assignments. If your group is having difficulty working together, the groups should follow the guideline detailed below: 1. Approach the person with whom you are having a problem and attempt to solve the problem individually. 2. Attempt to resolve the problem as a group. 3. If there is still a problem, then the group should approach the lecturer and ask her to arbitrate. You must do this as soon as it is apparent that the problem cannot be resolved by the group. 4. If the member continues to cause problems then the other members must write and sign a formal statement describing problem(s) and present it to the lecturer. She will then review the statement and a decision will be made on the most appropriate course of action to take (e.g. Normally, each group member will score the same mark, problem member may be given a lower mark than the rest of the group, or zero, for the assignment). Academic Standards All text written in assignments must be your own words, except for short, quoted, and clearly referenced sections. Text copied from web pages, articles or other sources, and not referenced, will be viewed as plagiarism and forwarded to the Faculty Conduct Committee as misconduct. More information is available in the subject outline. The Faculty penalty for proven and serial misconduct of this nature is zero marks for the Subject. For more information go to: . Bibliography Karl E. Wiegers, "Peer Reviews in Software: A Practical Guide", Addison-Wesley, 2001. (All the above forms were adapted from Karl Wieger's book, and are all available at http://www.processimpact.com/pr_goodies.shtml) The NASA Formal Inspections Guidebook and Standard are available from the NASA Software Technology Assurance Center at http://satc.gsfc.nasa.gov/fi/fipage.html The NASA Instructional Handbook for Formal Inspections http://sw-eng.larc.nasa.gov/process/documents/pdfdocs/inspection.pdf Philip Johnson's archive of formal technical review materials: http://www2.ics.Hawaii.Edu/%7Ejohnson/FTR/