ICT912

PROGRAMMING
2023 - SUMMER
Unit outline
Name of unit
ICT912 Programming

Unit description
Upon completion of this unit, students will be able to analyse a complex computing problem and to
apply principles of software development to design and implement a solution. Students apply
software testing methods to ensure the proposed solution appropriately solves the problem.
Students will learn best practices of software development techniques to produce reliable, efficient
and reusable software components. In addition, the unit covers the fundamentals of writing effective
software documentation such as testing documentation to meet the industry needs. Students will
learn object-oriented programming concepts using a contemporary object-oriented programming
language to apply principles of software development.

SECTION 1: GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 Administrative details

Associated higher Duration Level Unit coordinator
education awards
Unit Coordinator/Lecturer:
Dr Madhumita Takalkar
E-mail:
madhumita.takalkar@cihe.edu.au
Master of Information One Semester 9
Technology
Head of the School of IT:
Assoc. Prof. John Ayoade (NSW)
E-mail:
john.ayoade@cihe.edu.au

1.2 Core or elective unit

Indicate if the unit is a:
☒ core unit
☐ elective unit
☐ other (please specify below):

1
ICT912 Programming (Summer 2023)
1.3 Unit weighting
Unit credit points Total course credit points
10 160

1.4 Student workload

No. timetabled hours per No. personal study hours per Total workload hours per
week week week
1 hr lecture + 2 hr practical 9 12

Additional English language support: all students undergo diagnostic testing in the first two weeks of
their course and are referred to specialists on a case-by-case basis. Students’ language development
is also monitored throughout the course with identified shortfalls resulting in a similar referral to
specialist support and mentoring.

1.5 Delivery mode

Tick all applicable delivery modes for the unit and provide details in the following text box: If
necessary or preferred, you may provide this information in a separate document, using the ‘Attach
evidence here’ function of the online form.
☒ Face to face on site
☐ E-learning (online)
☐ Intensive/block mode (where the unit or a face-to-face component is delivered in a block)
☐Mixed/blended
☐ Distance/independent learning (untimetabled)
☒ Full-time
☐ Part-time
☐ External
☐ Fast track
☐ Other (please specify)

1.6 Prerequisites and co-requisites

Are students required to have undertaken a prerequisite or co-requisite unit for this unit?
☐ Yes ☒ No
If YES, provide details of the prerequisite or co-requisite requirements below.

1.7 Other resource requirements

Do students require access to specialist facilities and/or equipment for this unit (for example, special
computer access, physical education equipment)?
☒ Yes ☐ No
If YES, provide details of specialist facilities and/or equipment below.
Java JDK 8 or above, Eclipse 2021 or later versions, NetBeans 8.0.2 or later versions

2
ICT912 Programming (Summer 2023)
 SECTION 2: ACADEMIC DETAILS

2.1 Unit Learning Outcomes (ULO)

Learning outcomes for the unit
On successful completion of this unit, students will be able to:
Construct and evaluate different algorithms and data structures to provide solutions for
ULO1
computing problems through a high-level object-oriented programming language
ULO2 Critically analyse software solutions in the contexts of reliability and efficiency
Appraise software engineering concepts effectively to create and test reliable and reusable
ULO3
solutions
ULO4 Develop documentation that conforms to industry standards

2.1.1 Course Learning Outcomes (CLO)

Graduates of the MIT will be able to:
CLO1 Communicate effectively with specialist and non-specialist audiences using a variety of
media
CLO2 Critically analyse complex problems requiring either software development or
cybersecurity to create solutions to address stakeholders’ needs
CLO3 Demonstrate a capacity for independent thinking, decision making, action, professional
behaviour, and exercising judgement within an ethical framework
CLO4 Interpret current discipline research to construct novel solutions to complex problems
through innovative practice

2.1.2 Graduate Attributes (GA)

CIHE Graduate Attributes:
GA1 Possess comprehensive knowledge in a disciplinary field and the practical and
professional skills to use this knowledge effectively in the workplace.
GA2 Identify problems and work pro-actively and creatively to develop solutions and to
generate, analyse and interpret different types of information.
GA3 Think logically and critically to analyse and problem solve.
GA4 Work with high levels of autonomy, demonstrating a capacity for independent thinking,
decision making and action.
GA5 Engage with others proactively and collaboratively for continued personal and
professional development.
GA6 Act ethically and with an awareness of cultural diversity.
GA7 Communicate at a professional level using a variety of forms and multiple media.

2.2 Topics included in the unit

Topics included in the unit
Week Topic Tutorial Assessment Week
An Introduction to problem solving
1
and algorithm design
Lab Exercise 1
2 Data Type, variables, operators
Formative not graded

3
ICT912 Programming (Summer 2023)
 Control statements:
Lab Exercise 2
3 Decision making and Looping
Formative not graded
structures
Assessment 1:
4 Arrays and Strings Lab Exercise 3
Formative graded
Functions, procedures Lab Exercise 4
5
Formative not graded
Object-oriented programming Lab Exercise 5
6 (OOP): Class, object, attribute, Formative not graded Assessment 2: Part 1
constructor, destructor, method
Advanced OOP concepts: Assessment 1:
7 sub-class, inheritance, Lab Exercise 6
Abstract and interface classes Formative graded
Lab Exercise 7
8 Exception Handling
Formative not graded
Lab Exercise 8
9 Multithreading
Formative not graded
Lab Exercise 9
10 Graphical User Interface and Testing Assessment 2: Part 2
Formative not graded
Version control for software Assessment 1:
11 development and Lab Exercise 10
software documentation Assessment 2: Part 3
12 Revision
Assessment 2: Part 4
13 Exam period Assessment 3:
Practical Exam

2.3 Assessment Summary and Constructive Alignment

Students will receive feedback and the mark within 14 days of the assessment submission deadline
or prior to the submission date for the following Assessment item, whichever is the earlier date.

Assessment tasks

Type When assessed – Weighting Cross Contributes Contributes

year, session, and (% of total reference to Course to
week marks for to learning Learning Graduate
unit) outcomes Outcomes Attributes
Lab exercises (formative and Weeks 4,7,11 20% ULOs 1, 2, 3 CLO2, CLO3, GA1, GA2,
Individual) Invigilated (in-class) CLO6 GA3, GA4
Students will deliver a portfolio of
small programming tasks (including
writing/debugging/testing
programs) via lab exercises and
weekly tasks.
Problem Solving (formative, staged Part 1: 50% ULOs 1,2,3,4 CLO1, CLO2, GA1, GA2,
and Group) Analysis, Design: CLO3, CLO6 GA3, GA4,
Students will work in groups of 2 to Week 6 GA5
propose and implement a software
application for a (hypothetical) Part 2:
business to solve their existing Implementation and
problems. The project consists of Testing: Week 10
several stages as below:
• Analysing the problem Part 3:

4
ICT912 Programming (Summer 2023)
 • Designing the solution Documentation and
• Implementing the code final delivery: Week
• Testing the code 11
• Creating a graphical user interface
Part 4:
• Documenting the code and Individual report:
creating a user guide Week 13
• Self-evaluation of the product
After each stage, students will be
given a mark for that stage and
receive feedback.
Each group must submit the
program and related documents and
demonstrate their work in class.
At the end, each team member must
submit an individual reflection.
Each student will complete the
team’s contribution form, explain
what their roles and responsibilities
are in the assessment and state the
percentage of each member’s
contributions and each student will
be marked accordingly. The lecturer
will manage this process. Total word
count for all documents is 4000
words.
Practical exam (Individual) Exam Period 30% ULO 1, 2, 3 CLO2, CLO3, GA1, GA2,
The exam will be conducted in the Invigilated (in-class) CLO6 GA3, GA4
computer lab. Students will be
invigilated. Students will be asked to
write a program to solve a given
problem. They will be also given
some codes to debug and test. They
will then write an evaluation of their
solutions.

Rationale for how assessment tests the achievement of the different learning outcomes

The assessment processes outlined here ensure that students will receive continual and timely feedback to
develop their knowledge.
ULOs 1,2 and 3
Lab exercises help students to gain hands-on experiences in analysing computing
Assessment 1:
problems and designing software solutions (UOL 1) and implementing and evaluating
Lab Exercises
the software application (ULO 2) via testing. During lab activities, students have
opportunities to discuss their proposed solutions with their lecturer and receive
feedback. Students can also apply software testing techniques to ensure the efficiency
and reliability of their software application (ULO 3) and practice software
documentation techniques to help them track activities with their projects and help
others to understand their design, implementation and testing process.
Lab exercises are good means of reinforcing students’ learning.
ULOs 1, 2, 3, and 4
Groups of 2 students will be working on a computing problem to propose a software
Assessment 2: solution. They complete the project in several stages. First, they gain insight into the
Problem Solving problem to propose a suitable solution (ULO 1). Second, They implement the software
application (ULO 2). Third, they test the software (ULO 3). Fourth, they need to
document the project (ULO 4) and finally, they write a report to discuss how the
proposed solution can efficiently solve the problem (ULO 4).

5
ICT912 Programming (Summer 2023)
 ULOs 1, 2, and 3
Assessment 3: The practical exam evaluates the abilities of each student individually in analysing and
Practical Exam solving problems (ULO 1), writing and testing codes (ULO 3) and evaluating software
solutions (ULO 2).

2.4 Prescribed and recommended reading

Prescribed reading:
Schildt, H. (2021) Java: the Complete Reference, Twelfth Edition, McGraw-Hill Education.

Recommended reading:
• Althoff, C. (2016) The Self-Taught Programmer: The Definitive Guide to Programming
Professionally Kindle, First Edition, Triangle Connection LLC.
• Giebas, D.,Wojszczyk, R. (2021) Detection of Concurrency Errors in Multithreaded Applications
Based on Static Source Code Analysis. IEEE Access, 9, 61298 - 61323.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3073859
• Kinsman, T., Wessel, M., Gerosa, M. A.,Treude, C. (2021) How Do Software Developers Use GitHub
Actions to Automate Their Workflows? 2021 IEEE/ACM 18th International Conference on Mining
Software Repositories (MSR) (pp. 420-431). Madrid, Spain: IEEE.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/MSR52588.2021.00054
• Sinaga, A. M., Pratama, Y., Siburian, F. O., Pradamain S, K. J. F. (2021) Comparison of Graphical
User Interface Testing Tools. Journal Of Computer Networks, Architecture and High Performance
Computing, 3(2). doi:https://doi.org/10.47709/cnahpc.v3i2.951

2.5 Grade descriptions

Grade Level /Quality of work Code Range
High Distinction (outstanding performance) HD 85% and above
Distinction (very high level of performance) D 75-84%
Credit (high level of performance) C 65-74%
Pass (competent level of performance) P 50-64%
Fail F below 50%

2.6 Academic misconduct – plagiarism, collusion and cheating

Crown Institute of Higher Education upholds the principle that academic integrity relies on the
application of honesty in all scholarly endeavour. Students of CIHE will conduct themselves in their
academic studies honestly and ethically and are expected to carefully acknowledge the work of others
in all their academic activities. According to the student academic integrity and honesty policy and
procedure CIHE uses Turnitin as a system of assessment submission in order to assess student work
for originality.

2.6.1 Types of academic misconduct

Academic misconduct involves cheating, collusion, plagiarism or any other conduct that deliberately
or inadvertently claims ownership of an idea or concept without acknowledging the source of the
information. This includes inappropriate use of digital or information technology to complete an
assessment task, including but not limited to:
i. generating content using artificial intelligence; or
ii. using paraphrasing or translation software to disguise plagiarism, collusion, contract
cheating or other academic integrity breach.

6
ICT912 Programming (Summer 2023)
 Or any form of activity that negates the academic integrity of the student or another student and/or
their work.

Plagiarism occurs when students fail to acknowledge that the ideas of others are being used.
Specifically, it occurs when:
i. Other people’s work and/or ideas are paraphrased and presented without a
reference;
ii. Other students’ work is copied or partly copied;
iii. Other people’s designs, codes or images are presented as the student’s own work;
iv. Phrases and passages are used verbatim without quotation marks and/or without a
reference to the author or source;
v. Lecture notes are reproduced without due acknowledgement.

Cheating occurs when a student seeks to obtain an unfair advantage in an examination or in other
written or practical work required to be submitted or completed for assessment.
Collusion (unauthorised collaboration) involves working with others without permission to produce
work which is then presented as work completed independently by the student. Collusion is a form of
plagiarism. Students should not knowingly allow their work to be copied.
Students should be familiar with the Student Academic Integrity and Honesty Policy available on the
CIHE website.

2.6.2 Statement of the use of Artificial Intelligence

CIHE does not totally ban the use of AI. We recognize that AI tools such as ChatGPT have applications
that foster student learning and understanding and if students use these tools to learn (just like they
would study with a classmate or ask a friend for advice), they are permitted to use these tools. There
might even be instances where some use of AI is encouraged or even required (TEQSA, 2023a).
However, digital information technology must only be used if the unit of study allows it. In the
instances where the use of AI is permitted, CIHE requires students to use AI models in ethical and
responsible ways that are consistent with institutional learning, assessment and academic integrity
policies and procedures, and the terms of use of the AI. Ethical and responsible use of generative AI
involves:
• Following institutional guidelines regarding the use of generative AI in any unit or course, and
an understanding that it may not be appropriate to use generative AI in all circumstances.
• Appropriately citing and referencing any text or output generated by AI in the assignment,
along with any other sources that are used. The student should clearly indicate where in the
assessment task AI-generated material is used.
• Understanding the AI tool’s limitations and using it in conjunction with other sources to verify
the credibility and reliability of the AI information generated. The student needs to check the
accuracy of all information generated by AI tools.
• Ensuring that final product is student’s own work, and not just copied from an AI generator.

2.6.3 Avoiding academic misconduct

CIHE follows the APA style of referencing. Seek support from library and academic staff on avoiding
academic misconduct and appropriate referencing.

2.7 Submission of assessment items

Students are required to submit assessment items at the time and date specified in this Unit Outline.
Assessment items submitted after the due date will be subject to a penalty unless the student has
been given prior approval in writing for an extension of time to submit that item.

7
ICT912 Programming (Summer 2023)
 Students will receive feedback and the mark within 14 days of the assessment submission deadline
or prior to the submission date for the following Assessment item, whichever is the earlier date.

2.7.1 Penalties for late submission

As we continue to learn to deal with COVID in our communities, and as life is getting back to normal,
CIHE will gradually be requiring more compliance in relation to the submission due dates. From
Summer Semester 2022, assessments will be penalised after 3 days past the due date (without an
approved extension or without approved mitigating circumstance) at a rate of 10% of the total mark
allocated to the assessment item per day. Therefore, any assessments submitted more than 12 days
after the due date will receive a Fail grade.

2.7.2 Extensions and alternative arrangements

Extensions to assignment deadlines (not including exams) based on mitigating circumstances shall be
at the discretion of the Lecturer for a unit. Mitigating circumstances are circumstances outside of the
student's control that have had an adverse effect on the student's work or ability to work. Extensions
of up to three days are permissible.
Students must email or otherwise write to the Lecturer prior to the due date for an assessment item.
The student must produce a copy of their work to date on the assessment, demonstrating that they
have commenced work.

2.7.3 Special consideration

Students requiring extensions in excess of 3 days must apply for special consideration. Students must
apply in writing with supporting documentation to the Course Coordinator for special consideration
within three days of the due date of the assessment item or exam (or the extended due date if an
extension has been granted).

2.7.4 Reasonable adjustment

Students with a disability may request reasonable adjustment to an assessment task to
accommodate their disability. Adjustments to assessment must take into account the special
characteristics of the student. Any adjustments made must be ‘reasonable’ so that they do not
impose an unjustifiable hardship upon CIHE.
A request for reasonable adjustment is made by the student in writing to the Course Coordinator for
the unit of study affected.

2.7.5 Resubmission
Where a student has completed all assessment tasks and marginally fails a unit of study (i.e. has
achieved a score of 46-49%) the Course Coordinator may recommend that the student be offered
the option of completing additional assessable work which, if completed at the prescribed standard,
will result in the student passing the unit. The grade awarded after the additional assessment is
finalised is limited to P or F. If the student does not take up the opportunity to complete additional
assessment work the grade remains as an F.
Students should be familiar with the Student Assessment Policy on the CIHE website.

2.8 Results
Students will be notified of their results via the learning management system. The aggregated mark
for the unit of study will be moderated. Moderation may result, in some cases, in a variation of the
final grade awarded to a student for the unit which is inconsistent with the individual marks awarded
to the student for individual assessment items.

8
ICT912 Programming (Summer 2023)