BIF-5-SDT: 2014-15

RESIT ASSIGNMENT

School of Business
Resit Coursework, 2014/15
BIF_5_SDT Systems Design Techniques
MODULE LEADER:
George Ubakanma (ubakang@lsbu.ac.uk)
LAB TUTORS:
Safia Barikzai (barikzas@lsbu.ac.uk )
David D Chen (chend@lsbu.ac.uk )

COURSE(S):
BSc Information Technology
HNC/D Information Technology
If not available please contact the course administrator
UG Course Admin: Paul Laurie (lauriepc@lsbu.ac.uk)
who will attempt to locate an academic member of staff who can advise.
This coursework is based on Individual submissions.
the coursework will be subject to LSBU late submission penalties.
An electronic copy, MS Word (doc/docx) format must be submitted via the resit assignment dropbox on
the module VLE site.

SUBMISSION DEADLINE: Mon 13 Apr 2015

BIF-5-SDT: 2014-15

RESIT ASSIGNMENT

London Fire Service (LFS).

The London Fire Service (LFS) is the authority responsible for running the London Fire and
Rescue response also providing civil defence and emergency planning in the capital. The area
protected by the authority is over 620 square miles and has a resident population of 7.4
million.
To carry out its duties, the LFS employs some 6000 staff, of which 5000 are operational
fire fighters. Staff are either firefighters (who have a safety certification number, and an
annual renewal date), admin staff (who
have a job description, and a grade) or
Senior officers (who have an area
command number, and a 24 hour contact
phone number).
Most staff are located at one of the 114
fire stations located strategically
throughout the Greater London area. The
Fire Stations are staffed 24 hours a day,
every day of the year. The management of
fire stations and a number of other
associated functions are organised into a live Area Command structure. These fire stations
are managed by the senior officers working in shifts with teams of fire fighters and admin
staff.
The command areas are aligned with groups of London boroughs and each area incorporates
a mix of buildings: city centre, commercial, industrial, residential and semi-urban
development. An Assistant Chief Fire Officer commands each area.
For each fire station in their area the Assistant Chief Fire Officer must ensure records
are maintained on:
All Staff having a serial number & personnel details (e.g. name, home address, home
phone number), Allocated Fire
Station.
Fire Station & address/location
phone no etc.
Between April 2010 and March 2012
the LFS attended nearly 366,000
incidents. Incidents are usually
reported to the LFS as a result of
emergency '999' telephone calls from
members of the public.
These ranged from rescue of animals and helping people shut in lifts, to fires where over
twenty fire appliances (fire engines or other LFS emergency rescue vehicles) are needed to
control the blaze; rescuing and releasing passengers trapped or injured in the wreckage of a
train crash.
The number of actual fires tackled by the LFS had fallen from 57,756 in 2010/11 to 46,208
in 2011/12.

BIF-5-SDT: 2014-15

RESIT ASSIGNMENT

Resources continue to be wasted on attendance to malicious/false call incidents that are

still running at a rate of over 20 per day. These calls waste valuable time that could be vital
in the event of a genuine incident elsewhere.
The control and mobilisation of appliances to incidents is handled by the LFS's highly
trained admin staff based in the Command & Mobilising Centre at the LFS's Headquarters
(HQ). The HQ computer-assisted control system opened in 2010 and mobilises the nearest
available appliance to an incident, providing a swift and efficient response to emergency
calls. Where possible the caller details are taken as part of the incident record. In addition
to taking '999' calls and ordering pumping appliances (fire engines) for incidents, admin
staff also arrange additional back-up facilities for complex incidents such as extra
breathing apparatus and other specialist equipment. They will also mobilise any appropriate
special support crew (different types of firefighter) such as a petroleum officer,
hazardous materials officer or a fire investigation team and monitor the
availability/despatch of the LFS's fleet of 'special appliances' (e.g. turntable ladders,
hydraulic platforms and specialist rescue units).
At each incident the Senior Officer (highest grade) attending will co-ordinate the actions
of all crews and appliances at the location of the incident. The Senior Officer will
inform/coordinate with the HQ admin staff regarding the type of appliances that are
needed to attend the incident. The senior
officer will also ensure that staff
attending the incident are assigned to
specific duties (e.g. fire-fighting, rescue
of casualties, taking statements from
casualties & witnesses, etc...) The senior
officer will also coordinate rescue
operations with other emergency services
e.g. Police, Ambulance, Coast Guard.
When

attending any incident the HQ command and control centre keeps:

A record of the Senior Officer attending the incident
A record of which appliances are attending the incident
A record of staff who are on board each appliance attending the incident
Type of Incident: Fire / Rescue / False Call
Incident location : outdoor / derelict building / residential single occupancy /
residential multiple occupancy / non-residential/ commercial / industrial
Call out Time, Arrival Time, All Clear Time, Date of incident
Fatal Casualty caused by - gas/smoke/burns/other.
Date of Birth of casualty. Gender of casualty. Time of Death
Injury caused by - gas/smoke/burns/other
Date of Birth of injured party. Gender of injured party
Statement Made - yes/no
Hospital Treatment required - outpatient / intensive care / casualty dept only /
burns-unit

You are required to design a new prototype information system suitable for all of LFS's
needs.
END OF CASE STUDY

BIF-5-SDT: 2014-15

RESIT ASSIGNMENT

This assignment contributes 100% of the coursework marks for the module
This assignment involves the production of UML design diagrams including, Use Case diagrams, Activity diagrams,
Class diagrams, State diagrams, and other associated documentation in relation to the attached case study.
The CASE tool Visual Paradigm is available (in the labs) and you are encouraged to use a case tool to produce your
work. This assignment repeats knowledge and skills covered during the module.

DELIVERABLE TASKS
Task
Weighting

Percentage

Construct (max 2) Use Case diagrams. Describe your diagram(s), explaining any decisions
you made concerning alternative ways of modelling the system. This may require separate
diagrams if subsystems are identified at an early stage. You should produce at least: An initial
diagram for the existing system and one or more separate diagrams for the proposed system
showing clear improvements over the existing system.

20%

Construct (max 2) Activity diagrams to accompany your use case diagram(s). Describe your
diagram(s), explaining any decisions you made concerning alternative ways of modelling the
system. Choose suitably complex examples. You should produce at least: An initial diagram for
the existing system and one or more separate diagrams for the proposed system showing
clear improvements over the existing system.

20%

Construct a Class diagram. Describe your diagram, comment on your classes and on
associations between classes, and particularly how you dealt with any complex associations.
Your diagram should also include attributes, key definitions, possible example method names
etc... (proposed system only).

10%

Create refined/decomposed Use Case & Activity diagrams for at least 2 subsystems (based
on your original Use case diagram(s)) . Describe your diagrams, explaining any decisions you
made concerning alternative ways of modelling the system. Full Use Case Descriptions are
acceptable as an alternative at this stage. (proposed system only).

10%

Create State Machine diagrams for at least 2 classes that are derived/used in your previous
diagram set. Make sure you choose classes & activities that are suitably complex (not too
simple!) Describe your diagrams, explaining any decisions you made concerning alternative
ways of modelling the system (proposed system only).

10%

Create other design diagrams: You are free to include other UML/design diagrams that you
feel may enhance the design of the proposed system. Examples might be Sequence,
Collaboration, Interaction Overview diagrams...etc. Storyboards for the user interface are also
permitted. However the choice made is yours and you must justify the inclusion of additional
diagrams in your narrative. (Given the limited marks available choose wisely).

10%

20%

Your final submitted document must include each task supported by a written critically evaluative narrative
(min: 1 full side of A4 per task). The narrative must discuss/critically evaluate your teams attempt at the
task.
Each task will be marked out of 10 and the mark multiplied by the task weighting shown to give a final
score

Evidence of Project Management &Self-Evaluation

This is an individual assessment.
Develop a Gantt chart to help clarify task scheduling, and deadlines (work breakdown),. These
may need to change depending on circumstances...
You must provide a narrative commentary self-evaluating your own development of each
deliverable.
You must also complete (and include in the final submission document) the self-evaluation
form, assessing/evaluating their own performance on the assignment.
NOTE: This exercise is initially concerned with analysing the organisation as documented in the Case Study.
However, you are not constrained by this, you must have suggestions & improvements for the proposed new
system, these must be included in your work. You should be quite clear where you have made such suggestions, and
refer to them in your narrative.
An indication of the assessment criteria in respect of each of these tasks can be found below. The lecture notes and
recommended text for the Module are also a guide to the work expected.

100%

BIF-5-SDT: 2014-15

RESIT ASSIGNMENT

Evidence of Project Management & Self-Evaluation

This is an individual assessment.
Develop a Gantt chart to help clarify task scheduling, and deadlines (work breakdown),. These may need
to change depending on circumstances...
You must provide a narrative commentary self-evaluating your own development of each deliverable.
You must also complete (and include in the final submission document) the self-evaluation form,
assessing/evaluating their own performance on the assignment.
Ensure that you leave sufficient time to meet the submission deadline.

SUBMISSION DEADLINE: see cover page

Work that is identified as non-original (in respect of another team or any other source) will be
subject to investigation (possibly via Turnitin ) in accordance with University Regulations on
academic integrity. This is not intended to discourage you from discussing your work with other
teams. In fact, such discussion may well be beneficial provided that the final work is clearly
original.
This team assignment contributes 100% of the coursework marks for the module

BIF-5-SDT: 2014-15

RESIT ASSIGNMENT

Marking Criteria Guidelines

The following will be used as guidelines in marking the assignment, and are broadly consistent with the
criteria used in honours degree classification. Each task results in a mark on a 0-10 scale, which is
multiplied by a weighting in order to obtain a score for that task.
rd

rd

st

2:2

2:1

0-4
(0-39%)

4-5
(40-49%)

5-6
(50-59%)

6-7
(60-69%)

7- 10
(70-100%)

UNSATISFACTORY

SATISFACTORY

GOOD

VERY GOOD

EXCELLENT

USE CASE
DIAGRAMS

Significant notational
and interpretation errors

Notational errors, poor

interpretation.
Work specified in
narrative commentary

Notation correct,
reasonable
interpretation.
Work specified in
narrative
commentary

Excellent in all respects, use

of CASE tool. Supporting
narrative accurate and
perceptive.
Narrative, evaluative and
appropriately critical of how
well the task was done.

ACTIVITY
DIAGRAMS

Significant notational
and interpretation errors

Notational errors, poor

interpretation.
Work specified in
narrative commentary

Notation correct,
reasonable
interpretation.
Work specified in
narrative
commentary

CLASS DIAGRAM

Weak diagram with

substantial errors in
selection of entities.

Essentially correct
diagram notation but
probably weak
interpretation.
Work specified in
narrative commentary

SUBSYSTEM USE
CASE /ACTIVITY
DIAGRAMS

Little or no attempt at
decomposition .

Poor decomposition ,
Work specified in
narrative commentary

Diagram that is
basically correct and
interprets scenario
reasonably. Could
have errors in m:n
decomposition..
Work specified in
narrative
commentary
A basic
understanding of the
distinction between
physical and logical
modelling
Work specified in
narrative
commentary

Notation correct,
reasonable
interpretation, good
supporting narrative
Narrative commentary
show evidence of
progressive appropriate
updates
Notation correct,
reasonable
interpretation, good
supporting narrative.
Narrative commentary
show evidence of
progressive appropriate
updates
All aspects
fundamentally correct
including m:n resolution,
relationship naming,
primary and foreign
keys. Narrative
commentary show
evidence of progressive
appropriate updates
Reasonable
understanding of
decomposition.
Narrative commentary
show evidence of
progressive appropriate
updates

STATE DIAGRAM

Probably a weak attempt

at decomposition with
inconsistencies

inconsistencies
between Diagrams .
Work specified in
narrative commentary

A basic working
knowledge of the role
of states/transitions
Work specified in
narrative
commentary

OTHER DESIGN
DIAGRAMS

Significant notational
and interpretation errors

Notational errors, poor

interpretation.
Work specified in
narrative commentary

Notation correct,
reasonable
interpretation.
Work specified in
narrative
commentary

PROJECT
MANAGEMENT

Little or no evidence
presented

Minimal evidence
presented . A few
narrative commentary
minimal BB activity

Essentially correct
use of narrative
commentary/BB,
probably some
omissions.
Work allocation
specified in narrative
commentary

MARKS

TASK

A good use of
states/transitions, with
balancing
Narrative commentary
show evidence of
progressive appropriate
updates
Notation correct,
reasonable
interpretation, good
supporting narrative
Narrative commentary
show evidence of
progressive appropriate
updates
Use of PM techniques
full and accurate. Well
presented narrative
commentary/work
allocation, good use of
time/resources
Narrative commentary
show evidence of
progressive appropriate
updates

Excellent in all respects, use

of CASE tool. Supporting
narrative accurate and
perceptive.
Narrative evaluative and
appropriately critical of how
well the task was done.
All aspects correct or only
very minor errors/omissions.
Supporting narrative
accurate and perceptive.
Narrative
commentary/Narrative,
evaluative and appropriately
critical of how well the task
was done.
Sound grasp of the
significance of modelling
techniques, Good supporting
narrative
Narrative
commentary/Narrative,
evaluative and appropriately
critical of how well the task
was done.
Diagrams very accurate.
Good supporting narrative
Narrative
commentary/Narrative,
evaluative and appropriately
critical of how well the task
was done.
Excellent in all respects, use
of CASE tool. Supporting
narrative accurate and
perceptive.
Narrative, evaluative and
appropriately critical of how
well the task was done.
Absolute accuracy and
completeness/ consistency,
in Narrative commentary and
BB logs.
Narrative
commentary/Narrative,
evaluative and appropriately
critical of how well the task
was done.
PM excellent in all aspects.

BIF-5-SDT: 2014-15

RESIT ASSIGNMENT

BIF_5_SDT Student Self-Evaluation Form

Student name:

Student number:

Assignment Title:

This section repeats in brief the assessment criteria detailed on previous pages. The extent to which these
are demonstrated by you determines your mark. Using these criteria, tick the box that best indicates the
level of achievement you feel you have achieved with regard to each of them.
rd

Assessment Tasks

rd

2:2

2:1

st

UNSATISFACTORY

SATISFACTORY

GOOD

VERY GOOD

EXCELLENT

USE CASE
DIAGRAMS

0-39%

40-49%

50-59%

60-69%

70-100%

ACTIVITY
DIAGRAMS

0-39%

40-49%

50-59%

60-69%

70-100%

0-39%

40-49%

50-59%

60-69%

70-100%

0-39%

40-49%

50-59%

60-69%

70-100%

0-39%

40-49%

50-59%

60-69%

70-100%

OTHER DESIGN
DIAGRAMS

0-39%

40-49%

50-59%

60-69%

70-100%

PROJECT
MANAGEMENT

0-39%

40-49%

50-59%

60-69%

70-100%

CLASS DIAGRAM

SUBSYSTEM USE
CASE /ACTIVITY
DIAGRAMS
STATE DIAGRAM

PLEASE COMMENT ON AREAS IN WHICH YOU FEEL THAT

YOU HAVE PERFORMED WELL

Students Signature

PLEASE COMMENT ON AREAS YOU FEEL THAT YOU

NEED TO DEVELOP

Date