OCR Project

OCR Programming Project

The project is a substantial piece of work which assesses a variety of different skills including the development and demonstration of
computational thought processes.

Students will need to choose a well defined user-driven problem. The choice of project must enable students to:
 meet all assessment requirements as contained in the specification
 use an appropriate programming language which is non-trivial and has a substantial coded element
 solve a problem sensibly within the constraints of resources available
 facilitate the successful completion of a whole task from its definition to its acceptance and evaluation by that user
 involve all elements of the skills of analysis, design, development and evaluation.

Evidence Generation: it is important that students establish thorough and robust working practices at an early stage. The projects should contain
as standard the following:
 Title
 Contents list
 Description of investigation
 Justification of investigation
 Analysis, design and methods used
 Evaluation
 Bibliography
 Pages numbered

Appropriate annotated evidence should be used to support the report – eg screen dumps or photographs taken of screen layouts. It is important
that students generate their own individual, authentic evidence to show that they have met key assessment criteria. Any evidence submitted to
demonstrate the development of solution must be able to be assessed without the use of any specific hardware or software.

Students will be expected to analyse, design, develop, test, evaluate and document a program written in a suitable programming language. The
underlying approach to the project is to apply the principles of computational thinking to a practical coding problem. Students are expected to
apply appropriate principles from an agile development approach to the project development.

While the project assessment criteria are organised into specific categories, it is anticipated the final report will document the agile development
process, and elements for each of the assessment categories will appear throughout the report.

The programming project will be submitted in the form of a report that will contain the solution to a problem, selected by the student and school,
written in a suitable programming language.
3.1. Analysis of the problem (10 marks)  a
3.1.1 Problem identification 3.2.3 Describe the approach to testing
 Describe and justify the features that make the problem  Identify the test data to be used during the iterative
solvable by computational methods development and post development phases and justify the
 Explain why the problem is amenable to a computational choice of this test data.
approach. 3.3 Developing the solution (25 marks)
3.1.2 Stakeholders 3.3.1 Iterative development process
 Identify and describe those who will have an interest in the  Provide annotated evidence of each stage of the iterative
solution explaining how the solution is appropriate to their development process justifying any decision made.
needs (this may be named individuals, groups or persona  Provide annotated evidence of prototype solutions
that describes the target end user). justifying any decision made.
3.1.3 Research the problem 3.3.2 Testing to inform development
 Research the problem and solutions to similar problems to  Provide annotated evidence for testing at each stage
identify and justify suitable approaches to a solution. justifying the reason for the test.
 Describe the essential features of a computational solution  Provide annotated evidence of any remedial actions taken
explaining these choices. justifying the decision made.
 Explain the limitations of the proposed solution. 3.4 Evaluation (20 marks)
3.1.4 Specify the proposed solution 3.4.1 Testing to inform evaluation
 Specify and justify the solution requirements including  Provide annotated evidence of testing the solution of
hardware and software configuration (if appropriate). robustness at the end of the development process.
 Identify and justify measurable success criteria for the  Provide annotated evidence of usability testing (user
proposed solution. feedback).
3.2 Design of the solution (15 marks) 3.4.2 Success of the solution
3.2.1 Decompose the problem  Use the test evidence from the development and post
 Break down the problem into smaller parts suitable for development process to evaluate the solution against the
computational solutions justifying any decisions made. success criteria from the analysis.
3.2.2 Describe the solution 3.4.3 Describe the final product
 Explain and justify the structure of the solution.  Provide annotated evidence of the usability features from
 Describe the parts of the solution using algorithms the design, commenting on their effectiveness.
justifying how these algorithms form a complete solution to 3.4.4 Maintenance and development
the problem.  Discuss the maintainability of the solution.
 Describe usability features to be included in the solution.  Discuss potential further development of the solution.
 Identify key variables / data structures / classes justifying
choices and any necessary validation.

3.1. Analysis of the problem (10 marks)

3.1.1 Problem identification

 Describe and justify the features that make the problem solvable by computational methods
 Explain why the problem is amenable to a computational approach.

3.1.2 Stakeholders
 Identify and describe those who will have an interest in the solution explaining how the solution is appropriate to their needs (this may
be named individuals, groups or persona that describes the target end user).

3.1.3 Research the problem

 Research the problem and solutions to similar problems to identify and justify suitable approaches to a solution.
 Describe the essential features of a computational solution explaining these choices.
 Explain the limitations of the proposed solution.

3.1.4 Specify the proposed solution

 Specify and justify the solution requirements including hardware and software configuration (if appropriate).
Identify and justify measurable success criteria for the proposed solution.
Analysis (maximum 10 marks)
1–2 marks 3–5 marks 6–8 marks 9–10 marks
The candidate will have:
Identified some features Described the features that Described the features that make the Described and justified the features that
that make the problem make the problem solvable by problem solvable by computational make the problem solvable by
solvable by computational methods. methods and why it is amenable to a computational methods, explaining why it
computational methods. computational approach. is amenable to a computational approach.
Identified suitable Identified suitable stakeholders Identified suitable stakeholders for Identified suitable stakeholders for the
stakeholders for the for the project and described the project and described them and project and described them explaining
project and described how they will make use of the how they will make use of the how they will make use of the proposed
them and some of their proposed solution. proposed solution and why it is solution and why it is appropriate to their
requirements. appropriate to their needs. needs.
Identified some Researched the problem Researched the problem in depth Researched the problem in depth looking
appropriate features to looking at existing solutions to looking at existing solutions to similar at existing solutions to similar problems,
incorporate into their similar problems identifying problems identifying and describing identifying and justifying suitable
solution. some appropriate features to suitable approaches based on this approaches based on this research.
incorporate into their solution. research.
Identified some features Identified the essential features Identified and described the essential Identified and described the essential
of the proposed of the proposed computational features of the proposed features of the proposed computational
computational solution. solution. computational solution. solution explaining these choices.
Identified some Identified and described some Identified and explained any Identified and explained with justification
limitations of the limitations of the proposed limitations of the proposed solution. any limitations of the proposed solution.
proposed solution. solution.
Identified some Identified most requirements Specified the requirements for the Specified and justified the requirements
requirements for the for the solution. solution including (as appropriate) for the solution including (as appropriate)
solution. any hardware and software any hardware and software requirements.
requirements.
Identified some success Identified some measurable Identified all measurable success Identified and justified all measurable
criteria for the proposed success criteria for the criteria for the proposed solution. success criteria for the proposed solution.
solution. proposed solution.
3.2 Design of the solution (15 marks)

3.2.1 Decompose the problem

 Break down the problem into smaller parts suitable for computational solutions justifying any decisions made.

3.2.2 Describe the solution

 Explain and justify the structure of the solution.
 Describe the parts of the solution using algorithms justifying how these algorithms form a complete solution to the problem.
 Describe usability features to be included in the solution.
 Identify key variables / data structures / classes justifying choices and any necessary validation.

3.2.3 Describe the approach to testing

Identify the test data to be used during the iterative development and post development phases and justify the choice of this test data.
Design (maximum 15 marks)
1–4 marks 5–8 marks 9–12 marks 13–15 marks
The candidate will have:
Broken the problem down Broken the problem down systematically Broken the problem down
systematically into a series of into a series of smaller problems suitable systematically into a series of
smaller problems suitable for for computational solutions explaining the smaller problems suitable for
computational solutions process. computational solutions, explaining
describing the process. and justifying the process.
Defined the structure of the Defined in detail the structure of the solution to be developed.
solution to be developed.
Described elements of Described the solution fully Described the solution fully using Described the solution fully using
the solution using using appropriate and accurate appropriate and accurate algorithms appropriate and accurate
algorithms. algorithms. explaining how these algorithms form a algorithms justifying how these
complete solution to the problem. algorithms form a complete
solution to the problem.
Described some Described the usability features Described, explaining choices made, the Described, justifying choices
usability features to be to be included in the solution. usability features to be included in the made, the usability features to be
included in the solution. solution. included in the solution.
Identified the key Identified the key variables / Identified and justified the key variables / Identified and justified the key
variables / data data structures / classes (as data structures / classes (as appropriate to variables / data structures / classes
structures / classes (as appropriate to the proposed the proposed solution) explaining any (as appropriate to the proposed
appropriate to the solution) and any necessary necessary validation. solution) justifying and explaining
proposed solution). validation. any necessary validation.
Identified some test data Identified the test data to be Identified and justified the test data to be used during the iterative development
to be used during the used during the iterative of the solution.
iterative or post development of the solution.
development phase of Identified any further data to be Identified and justified any further data to be used in the post development
the process. used in the post development phase.
phase.
3.3 Developing the solution (25 marks)

3.3.1 Iterative development process

 Provide annotated evidence of each stage of the iterative development process justifying any decision made.
 Provide annotated evidence of prototype solutions justifying any decision made.

3.3.2 Testing to inform development

 Provide annotated evidence for testing at each stage justifying the reason for the test.
 Provide annotated evidence of any remedial actions taken justifying the decision made.
Developing the coded solution (maximum 25 marks)
Iterative development of a coded solution (maximum 15 marks)
1–4 marks 5–8 marks 9–12 marks 13–15 marks
The candidate will have:
Provided evidence of Provided evidence for most Provided evidence of each stage of Provided evidence of each stage of the
some iterative stages of the iterative the iterative development process for iterative development process for a
development for a development process for a a coded solution relating this to the coded solution relating this to the break
coded solution. coded solution describing what break down of the problem from the down of the problem from the analysis
they did at each stage. analysis stage and explaining what stage and explaining what they did and
they did at each stage. justifying why.
Solution may be linear. Provided evidence of some prototype Provided evidence of prototype versions
versions of their solution. of their solution for each stage of the
process.
Code may be inefficient. Solution will have some The solution will be modular in The solution will be well structured and
structure. nature. modular in nature.
Code may not be Code will be briefly annotated to Code will be well annotated to explain Code will be well annotated to aid future
annotated appropriately. explain key components. all key components. maintenance of the system.
Variable names may be Some variable and/or structure Most variables and structures will be All variables and structures will be
inappropriate. names will be largely appropriately named. appropriately named.
appropriate.
There will be little or no There will be evidence of some There will be evidence of validation There will be evidence of validation for
evidence of validation. basic validation. for most key elements of the solution. all key elements of the solution.
There will be little There will be evidence that the The development will show review at The development will show review at all
evidence of review development was reviewed at most key stages in the process. key stages in the process.
during the development. some stage during the process.

Testing to inform development (maximum 10 marks)

1–2 marks 3–5 marks 6–8 marks 9–10 marks
The candidate will have:
Provided some Provided some evidence of Provided evidence of testing at most Provided evidence of testing at each
evidence of testing testing during the iterative stages of the iterative development stage of the iterative development
during the iterative development process. process. process.
development process. Provided evidence of some Provided evidence of some failed tests Provided evidence of any failed tests
failed tests and the remedial and the remedial actions taken with and the remedial actions taken with full
actions taken. some explanation of the actions taken. justification for any actions taken.
3.4 Evaluation (20 marks)

3.4.1 Testing to inform evaluation

 Provide annotated evidence of testing the solution of robustness at the end of the development process.
 Provide annotated evidence of usability testing (user feedback).

3.4.2 Success of the solution

 Use the test evidence from the development and post development process to evaluate the solution against the success criteria from
the analysis.

3.4.3 Describe the final product

 Provide annotated evidence of the usability features from the design, commenting on their effectiveness.

3.4.4 Maintenance and development

 Discuss the maintainability of the solution.
 Discuss potential further development of the solution.
Evaluation (maximum 20 marks)
Testing to inform evaluation (maximum 5 marks)
1 mark 2 marks 3–4 marks 5 marks
The candidate will have:
Provided evidence of some Provided evidence of final Provided annotated evidence of post Provided annotated evidence of post
post development testing. product testing for function. development testing for function. development testing for function and
robustness.
Provided annotated evidence for usability testing.

Evaluation of solution (maximum 15 marks)

1–4 marks 5–8 marks 9–12 marks 13–15 marks
The candidate will have:
Commented on the Cross referenced some of the Used the test evidence to cross Used the test evidence to cross reference
success or failure test evidence with the success reference with the success criteria to with the success criteria to evaluate the
of the solution with criteria and commented on the evaluate the solution identifying solution explaining how the evidence shows
some reference to success or otherwise of the whether the criteria have been met, that the criteria has been fully, partially or
test data. solution. partially met or unmet. not met in each case.
Provided comments on how any partially or not met criteria could be addressed in
further development.
Provided evidence of usability features. Provided evidence of the usability features
justifying their success, partial success or
failure as effective usability features.
The information is Provided comments on how any issues with
basic and partially or unmet usability features could be
communicated in addressed in further development.
an unstructured Identified some limitations of the Considered maintenance issues and limitations of the solution.
way. The solution.
information is Described how the program could be
supported by developed to deal with limitations of
limited evidence potential improvements / changes.
and the The information has some There is a line of reasoning presented There is a well developed line of reasoning
relationship to the relevance and is presented with with some structure. The information which is clear and logically structured. The
evidence may not limited structure. The information presented is in the most part relevant information presented is relevant and
be clear. is supported by limited evidence. and supported by some evidence. substantiated.