A Level Computer Science: Unit 3 - Programming Project

Analysis (maximum 10 marks)

1–2 marks
The candidate will have:
Identified some features that make the problem
solvable by computational methods.
Problem Identification

Identified suitable stakeholders for the project and

described them and some of their requirements.
Stakeholders

Identified some appropriate features to incorporate

into their solution.
Research Problem

Identified some features of the proposed

Essential Features computational solution.

Identified some limitations of the proposed solution.

Limitations
Identified some requirements for the solution.
Solution
Requirements

Identified some success criteria for the proposed

Success Criteria solution.

Design (maximum 15 marks)

1–4 marks
The candidate will have:

Decompose Problem

Define Structure

Algorithms Described elements of the solution using algorithms.

Described some usability features to be included in

Usability Features the solution.

Variables / Data Identified the key variables / data structures /

Structures / classes (as appropriate to the proposed solution).
Validation

Identified some test data to be used during the

Iterative Test Data iterative or post development phase of the process.

Post Development
Test Data

Development (maximum 15 marks)

1–4 marks
The candidate will have:
Development Provided evidence of some iterative development
Evidence for a coded solution.

Prototyping Solution may be linear.

Code Modules Code may be inefficient.

Code Comments Code may not be annotated appropriately.

Variables / Structure
Names Variable names may be inappropriate.

Validation There will be little or no evidence of validation.

Reviewed There will be little evidence of review during the

development.

Testing: Developmental (maximum 10 marks)

1–2 marks
The candidate will have:

Testing Evidence Provided some evidence of testing during the iterative development process.

Failed Tests

Testing: Evaluative (maximum 5 marks)

1 marks
The candidate will have:

Provided evidence of some post development

Final Testing Evidence testing.

Usability Testing

Evaluation (maximum 15 marks)

1–4 marks
The candidate will have:

Commented on the success or failure of the solution

with some reference to test data.
Evaluate Success
Criteria

Evaluate Usability
Features
Limitations &
Maintenance

The information is basic and communicated in an

Evidence / Structure / unstructured way. The information is supported by
Relevance limited evidence and the relationship to the
evidence may not be clear.
ming Project Name:

3–5 marks 6–8 marks

Described the features that make the problem Described the features that make the problem
solvable by computational methods. solvable by computational methods and describe
why it is amenable to a computational approach.

Identified suitable stakeholders for the project and Identified suitable stakeholders for the project and
described how they will make use of the proposed described them and how they will make use of the
solution. proposed solution and describe why it is appropriate
to their needs.

Researched the problem looking at existing solutions Researched the problem in depth looking at existing
to similar problems identifying some appropriate solutions to similar problems identifying and
features to incorporate into their solution. describing suitable approaches based on this
research.

Identified the essential features of the proposed Identified and described the essential features of the
computational solution. proposed computational solution.

Identified and described some limitations of the Identified and explained any limitations of the
proposed solution. proposed solution.
Identified most requirements for the solution. Specified the requirements for the solution including
(as appropriate) any hardware and software
requirements.
Identified some measurable success criteria for the Identified measurable success criteria for the
proposed solution. proposed solution.

5–8 marks 9–12 marks

Broken the problem down systematically into a Broken the problem down systematically into a
series of smaller problems suitable for series of smaller problems suitable for
computational solutions describing the process. computational solutions explaining the process.

Defined the structure of the solution to be

developed. Defined in detail the structure of the solution to be develop

Described the solution fully using appropriate and Described the solution fully using appropriate and
accurate algorithms. accurate algorithms explaining how these algorithms
form a complete solution to the problem.

Described the usability features to be included in the Described, explaining choices made, the usability
solution. features to be included in the solution.

Identified the key variables / data structures / Identified and justified the key variables / data
classes (as appropriate to the proposed solution) structures / classes (as appropriate to the proposed
and any necessary validation. solution) explaining any necessary validation.

Identified the test data to be used during the

iterative development of the solution. Identified and justified the test data to be used during the iterative develop

Identified any further data to be used in the post Identified and justified any further data to be used in the post develo
development phase.

5–8 marks 9–12 marks

 Provided evidence of each stage of the iterative
Provided evidence for most stages of the iterative development process for a coded solution relating
development process for a coded solution describing this to the break down of the problem from the
what they did at each stage. analysis stage and explaining what they did at each
stage.
Provided evidence of some prototype versions of
their solution.

Solution will have some structure. The solution will be modular in nature.

Code will be briefly annotated to explain key Code will be annotated to explain all key
components. components.
Some variable and/or structure names will be largely Most variables and structures will be appropriately
appropriate. named.
There will be evidence of validation for most key
There will be evidence of some basic validation. elements of the solution.

There will be evidence that the development was The development will show review at most key
reviewed at some stage during the process. stages in the process.

marks)
3–5 marks 6–8 marks

Provided evidence of testing at most stages of the

f testing during the iterative development process. iterative development process.

Provided evidence of some failed tests and the Provided evidence of some failed tests and the
remedial actions taken. remedial actions taken with some explanation of the
actions taken.

2 marks 3-4 marks

Provided evidence of final product testing for Provided annotated evidence of post development
function. testing for function.

Provided annotated evidence for usability testing.

5–8 marks 9–12 marks

Cross referenced some of the test evidence with the Used the test evidence to cross reference with the
success criteria and commented on the success or success criteria to evaluate the solution identifying
otherwise of the solution. whether the criteria have been met, partially met or
unmet.

Provided comments on how any partially or not met criteria could be addressed

Provided evidence of usability features.

Identified some limitations on the solution. Considered maintenance issues and limitations of
the solution.

The information has some relevance and is There is a line of reasoning presented with some
presented with limited structure. The information is structure. The information presented is in the most
supported by limited evidence. part relevant and supported by some evidence.
 Date:

9–10 marks Comment Mark

/10
Described and justified the features that make the
problem solvable by computational methods,
explaining why it is amenable to a computational
approach.

Identified suitable stakeholders for the project and

described them explaining how they will make use
of the proposed solution and explain why it is
appropriate to their needs.

Researched the problem in depth looking at existing

solutions to similar problems, identifying and
justifying suitable approaches based on this
research. 0
Identified the essential features of the proposed
computational solution explaining these choices.

Identified and explained with justification any

limitations of the proposed solution.
Specified and justified the requirements for the
solution including (as appropriate) any hardware
and software requirements.
Identified and justified measurable success criteria
for the proposed solution.

13–15 marks Comment Mark

/15
Broken the problem down systematically into a
series of smaller problems suitable for
computational solutions, explaining and justifying
the process.

e structure of the solution to be developed.

Described the solution fully using appropriate and

accurate algorithms justifying how these algorithms
form a complete solution to the problem.

Described, justifying choices made, the usability 0

features to be included in the solution.

Identified and justified the key variables / data

structures / classes (as appropriate to the proposed
solution) justifying and explaining any necessary
validation.

to be used during the iterative development of the solution.

rther data to be used in the post development phase.

13–15 marks Comment Mark

/15
 Provided evidence of each stage of the iterative
development process for a coded solution relating
this to the break down of the problem from the
analysis stage and explaining what they did and
justifying why.
Provided evidence of prototype versions of their
solution for each stage of the process.
The solution will be well structured and modular in
nature.
Code will be annotated to aid future maintenance of 0
the system.
All variables and structures will be appropriately
named.
There will be evidence of validation for all key
elements of the solution.

The development will show review at all key stages

in the process.

9–10 marks Comment Mark

/10

Provided evidence of testing at each stage of the

iterative development process.
0
Provided evidence of any failed tests and the
remedial actions taken with full justification for any
actions taken.

5 marks Comment Mark /5

Provided annotated evidence of post development

testing for function and robustness.
0
notated evidence for usability testing.

13–15 marks Comment Mark

/15

Used the test evidence to cross reference with the

success criteria to evaluate the solution explain how
the evidence shows that the criteria has been fully,
partially or not met in each case.

y or not met criteria could be addressed in further development.

Provided evidence of the usability features justifying

their success, partial success or failure as effective
usability features.
Provided comments on how any issues with partially 0
or unmet usability features could be addressed in
further development.
 0

Considered maintenance issues and limitations of

the solution.
Described how the program could be developed to
deal with limitations of potential improvements /
changes.
There is a well developed line of reasoning which is
clear and logically structured. The information
presented is relevant and substantiated.

Total Mark 0