MODULAR PROGRAMME – ASSESSMENT SPECIFICATION

Module Code! UFCFN6- Run! Module Title !

30-2 23/24 IT PRACTICE: COLLABORATIVE PROJECT

Module Leader Module Coordinator ! Module Tutors!

N/A Nadeem Akhtar, Aisha
Nadeem Akhtar

Assessment and Element Number ! Weighting: (% of the Module's assessment) !

PORT1 + Presentation 75% + 25%

Element Description! Total Assignment time !

Task 1: Portfolio (MO1, MO2, MO3, MO4, MO5) 10 weeks
Weightage 75%
Task 2: Presentation (MO1, MO4, MO6)
weightage 25%

Module Learning  MO1 Analyse and communicate a

Outcomes range of social and technical
phenomena affecting information
practice in a real workplace
 MO2 Understand information systems
lifecycle from discovery, analysis and
modelling of the requirements (the
needs) to implementation,
assessment, maintainability and
sustainability
 MO3 Investigate, analyse, model and
make a small change in information
use through socio-technical change,
working semi-autonomously and
professionally with others throughout,
using agile methods
 MO4 Identify, select, justify, use and
evaluate methods, tools, techniques
and technologies from across a range
based on their suitability
demonstrating reflective practice
 MO5 Define, plan, execute, monitor,
control and review a live project
following systematic methodologies in
compliance with business and industry
standards, demonstrating self and
team management as well as effective
human communications
 MO6 Identify and demonstrate a
practical understanding of the
 alignment of technology with business
needs, applying standard practices for
IT service management like
Information Technology Infrastructure
Library (ITIL)
Module Details
Date Issued to Students ! Date to be Returned to Students
16-10-2023
19/01/2023

Submission Place! Submission Date !

16/12/2023
Moodle
Submission Time!

12.00 am
Dates

Portfolio of project deliverables with interim submission deadlines – see below

Deliverables

Module Leader Signature: Nadeem Akhtar

Late submission of work for assessment

If students encounter unexpected difficulties, a 48-hour late submission window is
available to all students, during which they can submit their assignment without
penalty.
An assignment cannot be submitted after the late submission window has ended.
Failure to submit the assignment within the 48-hour late submission window will
result in a non- submission being recorded.

Introduction, aims and objectives

This assessment features a team-based information’s systems/technology (IS/IT) project with an

investigation and requirements analysis phase, a phase featuring a detailed design for an IS/IT
change then a phase to develop the desired change, or a proof of concept for an agreed and
suitable solution.

The aim is to give students the opportunity to investigate a live IS/IT situation, identify
improvements to that situation and then help bring about at least one improvement with their
host. The objectives are that by the end of the project, students will have: -
• carried out a thorough requirements analysis for an IS/IT project, sponsored by a third-party,
leading to the production and agreement on a project initiation document (PID) for an IS/IT
change or improvement project;
• employed, refined and evaluated their own toolkit of methods, techniques and tools, using a
socio-technical approach to IS in context;
• communicated effectively with host1 (ITS), their client2, the relative stakeholders, and exhibited
professional conduct;
• demonstrated excellence in team-working and planned, monitored, controlled and reviewed
their own project;
• produced and handed the agreed deliverables including any documentation as specified by ITS,
and your academic supervisor;
• produced excellent documentation that is fit for purpose; and complies with a high
presentational standard;
• reflected on the quality and quantity of their individual contributions to the team effort, and
documented their reflection.

Students will work as members of a consultancy team they are allocated to. Each will get an
individual mark. Marks are not finalized until the end of the module, but informal assessment
feedback and advice, based on the evidence of team and individual work submitted to teams’
portfolios (Wikis), will be available after each project stage (phase) - phases and deadlines are
provided below.

Project phases, deadlines and deliverables

The above objectives are to be obtained by each team throughout the lifecycle of their project.
Project deliverables are generally as follows:
➡ Work methodology; planning, initiation, working arrangements.
➡ Requirements Analysis and Project Description Document / Project Initiation Document
(including scoping, resource planning, budget estimation and timescale estimation) - signed
off by ITS project and academic supervisors.
➡ Design of IS/IT change/improvement, using appropriate modelling tools and a Technical
Impact Assessment (TIA), if required.
➡ Additional agreed deliverables between team and ITS project supervisor which could
include a feasibility study, documentation, training material(s), detailed design,
development and/or implementation, report, etc.

1 Host refers to your ITS contact; in some places we use “ITS supervisor”.

2 Client refers to project’s beneficiary (a UWE’s department or unit to whom the project is to be
done) – it may be the ITS itself.
The above deliverables (or a subset of them) are to be agreed with ITS project and academic
supervisors, and should be handed in by the deadlines specified in the phases 1 and 2 (see phases
and dates below). The specific deliverables for each phase can vary depending on the allocated
project. Each team is expected to create their own project plan at the start of phase 1, and then
monitor progress, making adjustments as needed, throughout the project. Students are given
considerable discretion over the precise tasks, milestones and deliverables to incorporate in their
project plan.

A logical order for the submission of the deliverables is provided herein - the deadlines are fixed
as milestones for deliverables:

PHASE 1 [CONCEPTION, INITIATION, DEFINITION AND PLANNING]

• establishing a working relationship with your host and their client, leading to documented
working arrangements and communications protocols;
• analysing the requirements for the client; their current situation and the required change,
functions, their needs and business goals.

[Deliverables]
➡ [Deadline: 28 Oct 2023 12am] Project Initiation Document (including scope, goals, agreed
deliverables, resource planning, budget estimation and timescale estimation, amongst
others) - signed off by ITS project and academic supervisors. Please note that a template for
a PID will be provided.

PHASE 2 - [EXECUTION AND CONTROL]

COMPLETION DEADLINE: 25 Nov 2023 12AM - see additional note on milestones below

Execution and delivery against the pre-defined objectives identified in your project initiation
document and plan. In this phase you will:
(a) Execute the project in accordance with your plan, maintaining engagement with the host
(and their client if necessary), demonstrating accountability to your supervisor and a
commitment to reflective practice throughout.
(b) Hand over all the pre-agreed deliverables to your host, including relevant documentation
and/or report including research outcomes and future recommendations, and conclude
host contact.
The phase must also focus on ITS’ acceptance testing and sign-off, allowing for adequate time. This
should be well planned in advance for completion of any development work and acceptance
activities. Final deliverables will generally include:
➡ Complete design of IS/IT change/improvement solution, using appropriate modelling and
design tools and development.
➡ Additional agreed deliverables between team and ITS project supervisor; feasibility study,
documentation, training material(s), detailed design, development and/or implementation,
report, etc.
Note: This phase must include two m ilestones (completion deadlines 10/11/2023 and
20/11/2023 respectively) which are for you to define. They will generally be focused on interim
delivery against the pre-defined objectives identified in your project initiation document, including
project follow-up and sustainability-focused activities, though in some projects they might
alternatively or in addition involve further in-depth investigation or analysis, design, prototyping,
feasibility work or other activities.

PHASE 3 - LEARNT LESSONS REPORT

DEADLINE: 17 Dec 2023 12AM
1. Review the actual host deliverables as compared with original objectives, explaining and
analysing all differences rigorously.
2. Consider the impact of your deliverables on the host and evaluate self-critically the
prospects for maintenance and ongoing IS/IT improvement resulting from your work.
3. Review and reflect on the methods, tools, techniques and technologies you chose, their
effectiveness and how they could be improved if you were starting again now.
4. Review your host communications and project conduct, and identify what improvements
you would make if starting again now.
5. Review all project management outcomes compared with plans, and how your project
management methodology could be improved.
6. Formally review your team-working as compared with plans.
7. Identify explicitly any/all other learning outcomes including unexpected ones that may not
fit into the above.
8. Tabulate and critically evaluate the quantity and quality of all individuals' contributions to
the team effort.
9. Each student is required to append an individual report of no more than 1000 words
reflecting critically on the professional development process you have been involved in this
year. You should reflect on your contributions, challenges, learning outcomes and how you
you would handle similar tasks/challenges in the future. You should also reflect on how, in
your project team, different roles interacted, and how you might improve multi-role team
work in the future.

[Deliverables]
Learnt Lessons report on the whole project phases (1-2) and milestones including the above review
outcomes – your host is NOT to be given a copy (deadline 17 Dec 2023 12am). NOTE: in constructing
the final report you should at minimum summarise previous work throughout as a synthesis of your
entire project, but to avoid repetition you may include cross-references to previous deliverables,
providing these are explicit and enable the reader to refer back with ease to earlier material.

Assessment criteria

You are assessed on your entire portfolio in accordance with the following criteria:-

1) Client and requirements analysis (investigation) (15%)

 2) Methodology - appropriateness of the methods, tools, techniques and technologies
evaluated, chosen and applied to the project as well as compliance with ITS agreed criteria
(20%)
3) Deliverables; appropriateness, timing, quality and detail (25%)
4) Host communications and conduct (10%)
5) Team and project management (10%)
6) Documentation - quality, presentation and organization (10%)
7) Individual reflection (10%)
8) Presentation (25%)

Assessment process
Each team is expected to maintain carefully their portfolio throughout phases 1 to 3 (via your
team's Moodle) as this will provide the main source of evidence in assessment at the end of the
module.

The documents in the portfolio should be “indexed” by constructing a team Moodle with pages
for each phase and links to the documents in the File Exchange (or an accessible filesharing
drive).

Each document in the portfolio should be “signed” indicating the key contributors to it: who was
responsible for writing the document, practical work, research, quality control and any other
significant aspect.

Other evidence that will be taken into account during assessment is:-

1) your supervisor's weekly supervision record, including attendance and key advice given;
2) feedback from the ITS project supervisor, which tutors will request after phase 2;

3) responses to a confidential survey of individual contributions to the team and their relative
value.
A team mark will initially be decided from the available evidence. This will then be adjusted where
appropriate to reflect the distinct contributions of individual team members.

Assessment will be conducted by at least two tutors, i.e. your supervisor and at least one other. It
may also be scru2nised by others during modera2on, including external examiners. This means
that your portfolio must be readily navigable and meaningful to a general academic audience, not
just your own supervisor.

Marking Criteria

Indicative marking grid

The following table of team performance benchmarks gives an indication of marking standards.
Team performance benchmarks / Approximate 'tariffs' for individual adjustments
Criterion Unsatisfactory or poor
performance (fail or 3rd class
standard approx.)
Client and requirement Partial attempt at analysis and
analysis modelling. Narrow approach to
creation of a minimal, technical
(IT) system with inadequate
attention to functional,
nonfunctional and/or business/
organisational requirements.
Methodology Little attempt to demonstrate
more than a common sense
approach to methods, tools,
techniques, and/or only slavish
adherence to established
methods evident
Deliverables Deliverables were not fit for
purpose, left un-tested, and
appeared disconnected from
the real business context. Some
objectives were achieved but
the original goals were limited,
deliverables were minimalistic
and not obviously aligned with
the need
Host communications Poor or ill-timed attempts made
and conduct to communicate and/or
inadequate standards of
conduct demonstrated and/or
unresponsive to host or
supervisor feedback and advice
Team and project Team-working not considered in
management any depth before, during or at
the end of the project; project
planning completed without
evidence of ongoing control,
review or adjustment, and/or on
a purely informal basis
Satisfactory performance
(2(ii) standard approx.)
Reasonable approach to the
core analysis of client and
requirements. A good range
of requirements are
explored but not completely
so.
Reasonable attempts made
to deploy and develop
methodological awareness
and appropriate use of
toolkit
Good quality design and
delivery was evident with
scope to show more effective
business alignment and/or
efficiency. Some competent
technical work was done but
training and other social
needs were given short
shrift, leaving doubts about
quality and appropriateness
Satisfactory communications
but with weaknesses in
managing expectations
and/or timing and/or
conduct and/or use of
feedback and advice
Some attempts made to
introduce formality and
control into team-working
and/or project management
but without obvious rigour
Good or excellent performance (2(i)
or 1st class standard approx.)
Rigorous client and requirements
analysis. Host requirements are
clearly identified and analysed, with
functional, non-functional and
business requirements identified
and analysed, as appropriate.
Full reflective commitment to the
use of a methodology toolkit
demonstrated , with adaptability,
new learning, innovation and
appropriate decision-making evident
High quality deliverables were
produced that were convincingly
scoped across the socio-technical
spectrum and addressed business
needs well. A comprehensive IS
solution is produced using
professional design standards that
effectively and efficiently aligned
with the identified needs.
Excellence and professionalism
consistently demonstrated in
managing the host interface and all
communications and expectations;
highly responsive to feedback and
advice
Rigorous team-working standards
set, monitoring and maintained;
highly effective project planning,
monitoring and
control demonstrated
Documentation Documentation Professional standard of
Little if any attempt made to presentation employed with few if
demonstrates some
present and organise reports or any errors, good or excellent
commitment to accepted
other documents according to a audience differentiation, all
standards but this is
good presentational standard, documentation well maintained
incomplete, and/or errors
with minimal or inadequate
remain and/or audience
audience analysis and general
differentiation only partially
disorder.
attempted

Individual reflection Factual reporting only on
individual contribution, and
career development and
planning with little attempt at
interpretation or reflection.
A sound attempt at reflection
on individual contribution,
identifying what could have
been improved and lessons
for future projects.
Excellent, in-depth and perceptive
reflection, identifying what could
have been improved and lessons for
future projects, soundly based on
evidence of individual contribution.

Likely adjustment
Characteristics of individual contribution
range
Student has been a follower/passenger/mostly disengaged from the
Major -ve
project and/or has failed consistently to contribute in line with team
adjustment (up to
norms/ expectations, despite support and allowance being given (or in
-100% of team
extreme cases has not in practice contributed to the assessment even
mark elements)
though name is shown)
Student has demonstrated distinctly lower quality and quantity of
contributions than team norm in several areas, and/or has been Moderate -ve
disengaged from the project for significant periods/in significant ways, adjustment (-10 to
despite supportive attempts by team to re-engage or enhance -20 marks)
performance
Student has generally pulled her/his weight as a team player and made
Minor +ve or -ve
contributions broadly on a par with team norms, but has demonstrated
adjustment (+ or -
somewhat higher or lower quality/quantity contributions in one or two
5 to 10 marks)
tasks or project aspects
Moderate or
Student has contributed beyond team norms and expectations, without major
gate-keeping, and demonstrated practical and intellectual leadership +ve adjustment
throughout (+10 to +20 marks
or more)