Student Details ( Student should fill the content)

Name

Student ID

Scheduled unit details

Unit code

Unit title Principles of Programming

Unit enrolment details Year 1
Study period 2020/21
Lecturer

Mode of delivery Full Time

Assignment Details

Nature of the Assessment Practical Project

Topic of the Case Study Software to decide the Winners of a Game competition
Learning Outcomes covered LO1,LO2,LO3,LO4
Word count 2000
Due date / Time 2/12/2021
Extension granted? Yes No Extension Date
Is this a resubmission? Yes No Resubmission Date
Declaration
I certify that the attached material is my original work. No other person’s work or ideas have been used without
acknowledgement. Except where I have clearly stated that I have used some of this material elsewhere, I have not
presented it for examination / assessment in any other course or unit at this or any other institution

Name/Signature Date
Submission
Return to:
Result
Marks by Name of the Assessor Agreed Mark
Assessor
Signature of the Assessor

Page 1 of 9
Learning Outcomes
This assessment is designed to demonstrate a student’s completion of the following
Learning Outcomes:

 Interpret software requirements from given scenario.

 Structure programs using key programming constructs.
 Identify and implement modular elements of programs.
 Demonstrate an appreciation of the key principles of user-centric design to design and
develop appropriate user interfaces.

EDGE

The Cardiff Met EDGE supports students in graduating with the knowledge, skills, and
attributes that allow them to contribute positively and effectively to the communities in
which they live and work.
This module assessment provides opportunities for students to demonstrate development
of the following EDGE Competencies:
ETHICAL Creating software for to find the winners of a game competition
DIGITAL The ability to use code to solve real-world problems.
GLOBAL Demonstrate an understanding of how culture and user-diversity
can be considered in software design.
ENTREPRENEURIAL Creative expression of technical skills to support people within a
public organisation.

Assessment Requirements / Tasks (include all guidance notes)

This is the second assessment for CIS4003 Principles of Programming. It is an individual piece of
work and is compulsory.
You are tasked with producing a piece of software using Java.
This practical piece of work is worth 50% of your module marks.
IT society of ABC campus organized a computer gaming competition for all ABC students to raise
funds for the annual blood donation campaign. Rules for the competition were as follows,
 Each player should play two games as Game 1 and Game 2
 One player can play one game only once

Individual player’s results were recorded in a text file with the Player Number, Player Name and the
Batch Number. Score of the game 1 and the time taken to finish the game 2 also will be recorded in

Page 2 of 9
the same file. Competition was held during two consecutive days as the number of players is high.
Resulted Text File is given below.

IT Society is willing to select the best 3 players of both games and the best performers in each game
and attractive prizes will be offered for those winners.

You are requested to develop a Java application using proper programming techniques to select the
winners of the competition including following functions,
1. Proper authentication to the system(Login)
 Use user name and password to login
2. Read File
 Read data from the text file “GameZone Results.txt” given above and store them in
an array in a suitable manner.
3. Game Winners
 Player with maximum Game1_Score should be the winner of game 1
 Player with minimum Game2_Time(Sec) should be the winner of game 2
4. Game2 Score
 score for Game 2 should be calculated using following criteria,
 If Time taken to finish the game is 30 seconds, 80 marks will be allocated.
 For each second above 30 seconds, 2 marks should be reduced.

Page 3 of 9
  For each second beneath 30 seconds, 3 marks should be added.
5. Best 3 All-rounders
 Find the average score of each player of both games and select 3 players with
highest average scores as the best 3 players of the event. (Use Game2 score
calculated in the above function.)
6. Print Winners File
 Best 3 players and the winners of each game should be printed to a file as “Winners
of GameZone.txt”.
7. Help
 System usage guidelines for new users
8. Exit from the system
(More functionality can be included)

Systems developer should be responsible of developing an accurate system to fulfil above

requirements. More functionality could be added to show the creativity and to expand the system.
Assumptions should be mentioned clearly.

You will demonstrate your project in the final seminar of the term where you will receive some
verbal feedback on your project. You will also need to upload a single zip file containing:

 Project Files
 A 1,200-word report containing annotated screenshots, outlining the thinking behind the
design of the software and the user interface and any testing carried out. All of this should
be supported by references to academic theory.

Page 4 of 9
Assessment Criteria

Description Max Awarded

Functionality of Login 15
The user should be able to login into the system by
providing valid username and password.The Login
details must be derived from a text file.
Functionality of Read and write from text file 15
The system should be able read game details from the
text file as well as write winners details back to the
same text file
Functionality of Select the Winners of the game 15
The system must be able select the best 3 players of
both games and the best performers in each game
accurately from the results provided.

Evidence of Testing 10
There should be clear evidence of a logical approach
to both user and functional testing. Minimal errors
should occur during the typical use of this software.
User-Interface Design 15
The user interface should be designed using principles
of good UI design, with design decisions being
justified in the report, with references to good quality
academic sources of information.
Professional Coding Standards 30
Code should be well organsied and logically
structured. Naming conventions of variables and
controls should be used. Code should also be
appropriately commented to support future
development.
Total 100

Page 5 of 9
Submission Details

Please see Moodle for confirmation of the Assessment submission date.

Submission will be by 4:00pm on the deadline day.
Any assessments submitted after the deadline will not be marked and will be recorded as
a Non-Attempt.
The assessment must be submitted as a zip file / pdf / word document through the Turnitin
submission point in Moodle
Your assessment should be titled with your Student ID Number, module code and
assessment id, e.g. st12345678 CIS4000 WRIT1

Feedback

Feedback for the assessment will be provided electronically via Moodle, and will normally
be available 4 working weeks after initial submission. The feedback return date will be
confirmed on Moodle.
Feedback will be provided in the form of a rubric and supported with comments on your
strengths and the areas which you improve.
All marks are preliminary and are subject to quality assurance processes and confirmation at
the Examination Board.
Further information on the Academic and Feedback Policy in available in the Academic
Handbook (Vol 1, Section 4.0)

Page 6 of 9
Marking Criteria

70 – 100% An excellent piece of software that shows a very good understanding of the
end-user and context. The software package has been designed in such a
(1st)
way that it demonstrates a very good understanding of the principles of
good UI design, has been tested and operates with limited functional or
code-errors. Code is very well organised, adhering to professional
standards, with appropriate use of naming conventions, modularisation
and commenting.
60-69% An good piece of software that shows a good understanding of the end-
user and context. The software package has been reasonably well designed
(2:1)
and shows some consideration of principles of good UI design. The
software has been tested and operates with limited functional or code-
errors. Code is well organised, largely adhering to professional standards,
with appropriate use of naming conventions, modularisation and
commenting.
50-59% A reasonably basic software that shows some understanding of the end-
user and context, although this is limited in places. The software package
(2:2)
has been reasonably well designed. The software has been tested but
operates with some functional and/or code-errors. Code is does not
extensively adhere to professional standards, including appropriate use of
naming conventions, modularisation and commenting.
40-49% A basic software that shows some but limited understanding of the end-
user and context. The software package has been very basically designed
(3rd)
with limited demonstration of an understanding of principles of good UI
design. The software has been tested but operates with some functional
and/or code-errors. Code does not extensively adhere to professional
standards, including appropriate use of naming conventions,
modularisation and commenting.
35-39% A very basic software that shows limited understanding of the end-user and
context. The software package has been very basically designed with
(Narrow
limited demonstration of an understanding of principles of good UI design.
Fail)
The software has not been sufficiently tested and operates with some
functional and/or code-errors. Code does not extensively adhere to
professional standards, including appropriate use of naming conventions,
modularisation and commenting.
<35% A poor project with limited inclusion of functionality in places. There is a
very basic interface included. The software has extensive errors and there
(Fail)
is limited to no evidence of testing. The code is poorly written with limited
consideration of professional practice.

Page 7 of 9
Additional Information

Referencing Requirements (Harvard)

The Harvard (or author-date) format should be used for all references (including images).
Further information on Referencing can be found at Cardiff Met’s Academic Skills website.

Mitigating Circumstances
If you have experienced changes or events which have adversely affected your academic
performance on the assessment, you may be eligible for Mitigating Circumstances (MCs).
You should contact your Module Leader, Personal Tutor or Year Tutor in the first instance.
An application for MCs, along with appropriate supporting evidence, can be submitted via
the following link to the MCs Dashboard
Applications for MCs should ideally be submitted as soon as possible after circumstances
occur & at the time of the assessment. Applications must be submitted before the relevant
Examination Board.
Further information on the Mitigating Circumstances procedure is available in the Academic
Handbook (Volume 1, Section 5)

Unfair Practice
Cardiff Metropolitan University takes issues of unfair practice extremely seriously. The
University has distinct procedures and penalties for dealing with unfair practice in
examination or non-examination conditions. These are explained in full in the University's
Unfair Practice Procedure (Academic Handbook: Vol 1, Section 8)
Types of Unfair Practice, include:
Plagiarism, which can be defined as using without acknowledgement another person’s
words or ideas and submitting them for assessment as though it were one’s own work, for
instance by copying, translating from one language to another or unacknowledged
paraphrasing. Further examples include:
 Use of any quotation(s) from the published or unpublished work of other persons,
whether published in textbooks, articles, the Web, or in any other format, which
quotations have not been clearly identified as such by being placed in quotation
marks and acknowledged.
 Use of another person’s words or ideas that have been slightly changed or
paraphrased to make it look different from the original.
 Summarising another person’s ideas, judgments, diagrams, figures, or computer
programmes without reference to that person in the text and the source in a
bibliography or reference list.
 Use of services of essay banks and/or any other agencies.
 Use of unacknowledged material downloaded from the Internet.

Page 8 of 9
  Re-use of one’s own material except as authorised by the department.
Collusion, which can be defined as when work that that has been undertaken with others is
submitted and passed off as solely the work of one person. An example of this would be
where several students work together on an assessment and individually submit work which
contains sections which are the same. Assessments briefs will clearly identify where joint
preparation and joint submission is specifically permitted, in all other cases it is not.
Fabrication of data, making false claims to have carried out experiments, observations,
interviews or other forms of data collection and analysis, or acting dishonestly in any other
way.

Page 9 of 9