Software Architecture and Testing CT059-3.

5-2 Assignment

Page 1 of 3

ASIA PACIFIC UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY AND

INNOVATION
Level 2
CT059-3.5-2 - Software Architecture and Testing
Assignment
Learning Outcome
1. Decide the aims and objectives, deliverables and scope of typical IT Software
architectural styles.
2. Evaluate and deploy a software architecture for a software development project
3. Analyze the software architecture using ATAM, ARID and SAAM.
How to proceed with your assignment:
Organise yourselves into groups of not more than 3 students.
Answer all questions.
Work with your group.
In week 13, you will lead a presentation to present your findings and considered
opinions to your lecturer and your peers.
o In the week following your presentation, submit a final documentation of your
findings and considered opinions.
o
o
o
o

CASE STUDY
Eazy Travel Tour Planning System
Eazy Travel is a local travel agency specialising in providing holiday packages to various
destinations in Malaysia, Singapore and other South East Asia countries. Currently the
travel and tour arrangements are done via convention way at its office in Bukit Jalil.
When a customer wishes to book a travel or tour package, he or she will meet with a tour
consultant or any representative of the travel agency. The two parties would then discuss
and negotiate details like price, travel arrangement, accommodation, ticketing and any
other relevant information. All the necessary tasks and transactions such as payment, tour
scheduling, issuing of travel documents, etc are done at the agency office.
The travel agency is now planning to implement a system which could allow its
customers to make their own travel arrangements at their convenience. The management
has hired you to analyse and design a solution which would helped the agency and their
customer manage the necessary travel needs

Level 2

Asia Pacific University of Technology & Innovation

Software Architecture and Testing CT059-3.5-2 Assignment

Page 2 of 3

Research Questions
1. Study the above case study and present primary graphical view of the
architecture. Discuss about the graphical view and include any assumptions made.
Suggest suitable software architecture. Can you generalize your answer to
establish criteria for whether or not a project is ready for an architecture
evaluation?
2. One of the benefits the client perceived from ATAM exercise was the chance to
achieve consensus among the stakeholders about which system enhancement to
tackle first. Suppose that was your only goal. Propose a new method, and define
its steps, phases, participants and artifacts.
3. The SAAM is a relatively simple architecture evaluation method that was created
to operationalise the vague claims of modifiability, robustness, portability and so
forth that people typically make for their architecture. Plan an implementation
strategy using SAAM for your software architecture evaluation. Clearly identify
and evaluate the steps involved.
4. Pick a design from your software development projects and walk through a small
ARID exercise on it. Identify the designer who would represent it during the
review. Choose the stakeholder you would want to review. Propose a set of
scenarios that exemplify its usage.

Level 2

Asia Pacific University of Technology & Innovation

Software Architecture and Testing CT059-3.5-2 Assignment

Page 3 of 3

Assessment Criteria
Each question carries 25 marks. Each question will be assessed on the following criteria:
1. Introduction (5 marks)
2. Maturity of arguments explanation, justification, usage of examples and etc.
(15 marks)
3. Conclusion and recommendation (5 marks)
The workload matrix should indicate the contribution of each individual for each required
question (shown in %age form) and should be signed off by each team member. It is
advisable for all group members to contribute in all questions.
Sample Workload Matrix
No.
1
2
3
4

Description
Question 1
Question 2
Question 3
Question 4

Student 1

Student 2

Student 3
100%
100%
100%
100%

Signature

Final Documentation
The final documentation of your assignment should be a comb binding copy with an
appropriate cover page stating:
APU Logo
Subject title
Topic of assignment

Intake code
Your group No.
Student ID number.

To address the subject satisfactorily for each question length should be a maximum of
1,500 words [excluding diagrams and appendices]. The documentation has to be wordprocessed, printed on single side A4 size paper with 1.5 line spacing.
You will not be assessed on presentation skills. We are looking primarily for quality of
research, supporting evidence for your arguments, and mature value judgements about the
assignments subject matter.

Level 2

Asia Pacific University of Technology & Innovation

Software Architecture and Testing CT059-3.5-2 Assignment

Page 4 of 3

Performance Criteria
Grade
General
0-49%

50-64%

Assessment Guidelines
Pass answers are expected to be legible, tidy, well organised and written
in clear, understandable English. Students who grossly exceed the word
limit will be penalized.
Superficial analysis, concepts and language of the subject are absent or
scant. Irrelevant regurgitation of text book. Ideas are poorly expressed.
Many key issues are ignored. Concepts and language of the subject are
used but are often confused in application and or explanation. Some key
issues are ignored.
Some understanding of the relevant models and concepts. Some elements
of an appropriate structure are present. Restricted analysis of some issues.

65-74%

Evidence of reading and research. Understanding of the application of

appropriate models and concepts is demonstrated. Key issues are
identified and analysed, although this may be restricted at times. Some
sources are acknowledged.

75-79%

Evidence of wider reading. The assignment effectively interprets the

information and exhibits the integration of ideas across the subject area.
The assignment has credible recommendations. A systematic approach to
development and evaluation is used. Most sources are acknowledged and
referenced using Harvard system.
and Arguments are clear and convincing. Confident integration of theory and
practices is demonstrated. Consistent referencing to sources using the
Harvard system.

80%
above

Level 2

Asia Pacific University of Technology & Innovation