Republic of the Philippines

Mindanao State University

TAWI-TAWI COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY AND OCEANOGRAPHY
INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY

VISION MISSION GOALS OBJECTIVES

A university in the Sulu Archipelago
renowned for Fisheries, Marine
and Environmental Sciences, and
other Disciplines
 PROVIDE relevant quality education especially to
the Muslims and other indigenous groups
 PROMOTE environmental conservation and
sustainable utilization of fisheries and marine
resources
 DEVELOP and transfer new knowledge and
innovative technology to the community
 ENGAGE stakeholders in peace and socio-economic
development endeavors
A premier Institute in ICT  To produce IT professionals who
education and are equipped with lifelong
innovation in the knowledge and have strong desire
Southernmost part of for leadership in their field of
the country specialization
 To become involved in providing
timely and relevant solutions
through ICT to assist in addressing
concerns of the community
 To strengthen its advocacy for
green ICT for social transformation
and development

INSTRUCTOR’S INFORMATION
Name Contact Number
Email Address Consultation Hours
COURSE INFORMATION
Course Code CCC 181 Course Title APPLICATIONS DEVELOPMENT AND EMERGING Credit Units 3
TECHNOLOGIES

Course Description Development of applications using web, mobile, and emerging technologies with emphasis on requirements managements, interface
design, usability, testing, deployment including ethical and legal considerations.

Course Requisites CCC151 Course Schedule and Venue

 COURSE OUTCOMES

1. Apply computing and other knowledge domains to address real-world problems (Graduate Outcome: IT01)
2. Understand best practices and standards and their applications. (Graduate Outcome: IT02)
3. Analyze complex problems, and identify and define the computing requirements appropriate to its solution. (IT103)
4. Identify and analyze user needs and take them into account in the selection, creation, evaluation and administration of computer-based systems.
(Graduate Outcome: IT04)
5. Design, implement, and evaluate computer-based systems, processes, components, or programs to meet desired needs and requirements under
various constraint (IT05).
6. Integrate IT solutions into the user environment effectively. (IT06)

LEARNING PLAN

Learning Outcomes Content/topic Learning strategies and Week Learning Assessment Tools
activities Resources and Methodologies
1. Do self-introduction. Lecture, Oral Discussion
1
2. Familiarize the MSU-TCTO
vision and mission, and the IT
program outcomes; and
3. Read and understand the
course guide of the learning
module.

LO1. learn the fundamentals of Lecture, Oral Discussion 2 Quizzes,

Hypertext Markup Assignments, Oral
Language (HTML), Questioning
Cascading Style Sheets Overview of Software and
(CSS), the Internet and Hardware Technology
The World Wide Web,
Java Script, and Android
Development;
LO2. select and use a defined What is Emerging Technology? Lecture, Oral Discussion 3 Quizzes,
coding, documentation writing, Assignments, Oral
and licensing standards in a Questioning
sufficiently complex software
project where coding idioms and
mechanisms for implementing
designs to achieve desired
properties such as reliability,
efficiency, and robustness are
practiced with respect to legal
and ethical considerations;
LO3. apply specifications for a Lecture, Oral Discussion 4 Quizzes,
software development effort Assignments, Oral
that precisely articulates the Questioning
functional requirements,
expected execution paths, and Evolution of the World Wide
the explicit use of cutting edge Web (WWW)
and emerging technologies,
which includes hardware
devices and software library
APIs;
LO4. undertake, an inspection of Basic Fundamentals of Hypertext Lecture, Oral Discussion, 6-7 Quizzes,
the source code and unit testing Markup Language Guided and Independent Programming
of the functional units of a Programming
sufficiently complex software
project.
Cascading Style Sheet (CSS) Lecture, Oral Discussion, 8-9 Quizzes,
Guided and Independent Programming
Programming

Planning Your Website Lecture, Oral Discussion, 10 Quizzes,

Guided and Independent Programming
Programming
 Web Interactive Lecture, Oral Discussion, 11-12 Quizzes,
Guided and Independent Programming
Programming

Java Script Lecture, Oral Discussion, 13-14 Quizzes,

Guided and Independent Programming
Programming

Android Development Lecture, Oral Discussion, 15 Quizzes,

Guided and Independent Programming
Programming

Final Project 16

COURSE REQUIREMENTS AND POLICY

Course Requirements

Class Policy Policies

 1. Your instructor may or may not explicitly check attendance every day. How-ever, if you are caught exceeding your allowable
cuts for the semester, you may be given a grade of 5.
2. In case you cut, it will be your responsibility to know the material covered for the day. The instructor reserves the right to give
unannounced quizzes or graded lab exercises at any time.
3. No makeup tests will be given unless you can present a medical certificate or an immediate member of your family died.
Make up tests will solely be on the teacher’s discretion.
4. Playing games is strictly prohibited during class hours. Web browsing and doing email are also prohibited, unless done in
connection with the current lecture or lab topic and allowed by the teacher.
5. Use of communication devices is prohibited during class hours. Please turn them off during class.
6. Class requirements are due during class hours, unless otherwise specified. Late submission will merit deductions as specified
by the teacher.
7. Cheating will not be tolerated. Cheating in any requirement will result in a minimum penalty of having a grade of 0 for that
requirement. Duplicated projects/lab exercises will merit penalties for both the student who copied and the student from
whom the work was copied.
8. Additional policies, with due consultation with the students, may be implemented by the teacher to adapt to the class
environment. Students are advised to be aware of such updates, and to ask their instructor if anything is unclear.

GRADING SYSTEM TEXBOOK & SUPPLEMENTARY READINGS

References:
Grading Scheme
The rate will be determined based on the following scheme: 1. Erich Gamma, Richard Helm, Ralph Johnson, and John Vlissides,
Prelim - 20% Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object- Oriented Software,
Midterm - 20%
Addison-Wesly, 1994
Final Grade - 20% 2. Stephen G. Kochan, Programming in Objective-C 2.0, Addison-Wesley, 2009
Quizzes - 15%
3. George Reese, Cloud Application Architectures: Building
Laboratory Activities - 25%
Total - 100% Applications and Infrastructure in the Cloud, O’Reilly Media, 2009.
4. Wei-Meng Lee, Beginning Android Tablet Application Development, Wrox,
Score Criteria 2011.
Rubrics:
5. Stephen Fishman JD, Legal Guide to Web and Software Development, Nolo
Essay The answer is complete; sufficient detail will be 2007.
evaluated base provided to support assertions; answer on the rubrics
15
shown below. focuses only on issues related to the
question; actually correct
The answer is brief with insufficient
10 detail. Unrelated issues were introduced
and/or minor errors in content.
The answer is incomplete. Excessive
5 discussion of unrelated issues and/or
significant errors in content.
0 The essay did not answer the question.

Laboratory activities will be evaluated on the rubrics shown

below.
Score Criteria
20 - The program is complete
- Produce correct results of the program
- Program code is well organized and observes abstraction
- Meets all the specifications required
- Complete documentation of the program code
 - Submitted the work on or before the due date
- The program is complete
- Produce correct results of the program
- Program code is well organized and observes abstraction
15
- Meets all the specifications required
- Lacking/no documentation of the program code
- Submitted the work 1 week after the due date
- The program is only halfway done
- Produce incorrect results of the program
- Program code is hardly organized and observes abstraction
10
- does not meet all the specifications required
- no documentation of the program code
- submitted the work 2 weeks or much later after the due date
- The program is only a small portion of what is required
- Produce incorrect results of the program
- Program code is a cramp or dirty code
5
- does not meet all the specifications required
- no documentation of the program code
- submitted the work 2 weeks or much later after the due date
0 - Failed to submit program output

Final Projects will be evaluated base on the rubrics shown below.

Requirement / Assessment Task Maximum
Points
 Software Requirements, Design and Execution
40
Plan
Software Implementation, Tests and Soft
40
Deployment
Laboratory Presentation/Activities 20
TOTAL 100

Criteria Exemplar Acceptable Developing Beginning No Output

y 3 2 1 0
4
Program The The code The code The code Program
Correctness applicatio works for sometimes often fails, that does
n meets typical fails for even for not run
all the input, but typical typical and/or
requireme fails for input. Many input. Most implement
nts minor parts of the indicated ed
specified special program restrictions correctly
in the cases; the implementa were (based on
project major tion violate violated. specificatio
specificati requirement indicated ns and
on. The s are met restrictions restrictions
code is though and some )
syntactica some minor parts of the automatical
lly and ones are solution are ly gets 0
logically not. Some not for this
correct for implementa implemente course
all cases. tion on the d using output.
program appropriate
violates programmin
indicated g
restrictions. constructs.
Effective Answers Answers to Answers to Correct Failure to
 Communica to questions questions understandi explain and
tion / questions are correct, are correct, ng of the justify
Concept are but some but cannot problem workings
Understandi correct, justification justify but was of the code
ng reasonabl s provided solution(e.g unable to submitted
e and are weak. ., solution explain will
reflective via trial and workings automatical
of the error rather of code ly merit 0
code. The than proper provided. for this
justificati understandi course
ons ng and output.
provided application
are sound. of concepts)
Readability The code The code is Not all Minimal No internal
is fairly easy functions/ internal documentat
exception to read. program documentat ion and
ally well features ion and code is not
organized have proper code readable.
and very internal readability.
easy to documentati
follow. on.
Prepared by: Checked by: Approved:

__________________________________ __________________________________
_________ _________
Department Chairperson College Dean