Evaluation Criteria: Difference between revisions
From Ameise-en
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Objectives== | ==Objectives== | ||
The following objectives can be evaluated and | The following objectives can be evaluated and retrieved: | ||
* Project | * Project duration | ||
* Budget | * Budget | ||
* AFPs realised in the | * AFPs realised in the code as a percentage | ||
* Errors per KLOC | * Errors per KLOC | ||
* AFPs realised in the | * AFPs realised in the manuals as a percentage | ||
* Errors per page in the | * Errors per page in the manuals | ||
Objectives are the most important evaluation criteria. At the end of a simulation run, trainees want to know if they have managed the project within the budget, in time and if they have | Objectives are the most important evaluation criteria. At the end of a simulation run, trainees want to know if they have managed the project within the budget, in time and if they have achieved the AFPs required for the code and manuals. The evaluation component provides a textual description for every objective. | ||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
== | ==Completeness of Documents== | ||
This criterion gives an overview of the completeness of the documents( | This criterion gives an overview of the completeness of the documents(specification, system design, modul design, code, manuals) and is presented to trainees in the form of a diagram. | ||
==Remaining Errors in Documents== | ==Remaining Errors in Documents== | ||
Another important evaluation | Another important evaluation criterion gives an overview, how many errors are still left in the documents. You can distinguish the following evaluations: | ||
* Remaining errors | * Remaining errors in Documents | ||
* Remaining errors in the Specification | * Remaining errors in the Specification | ||
* Remaining errors in the System Design | * Remaining errors in the System Design | ||
* Remaining errors in the Module Design | * Remaining errors in the Module Design | ||
* Remaining errors in the Code | * Remaining errors in the Code | ||
* Remaining errors in the | * Remaining errors in the Manuals | ||
>> Back to: [[Classification of the Evaluation Criteria]] | >> Back to: [[Classification of the Evaluation Criteria]] | ||
| Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
==Efficiency of Reviews or Tests== | == Efficiency of Reviews or Tests== | ||
This criterion | This criterion relates the effort of reviews or tests, the errors found and the effort to correct these errors. These diagrams show at a glance, whether a review or test was performed efficiently or not. | ||
* Efficiency of the Specification Reviews | * Efficiency of the Specification Reviews | ||
| Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
* Efficiency of the Module Design Reviews | * Efficiency of the Module Design Reviews | ||
* Efficiency of Code Reviews | * Efficiency of Code Reviews | ||
* Efficiency of Manual Reviews | * Efficiency of Manual Reviews | ||
* Efficiency of Module Tests | * Efficiency of Module Tests | ||
* Efficiency of System Testing | * Efficiency of System Testing | ||
| Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
==Effectiveness of Reviews== | ==Effectiveness of Reviews== | ||
This evaluation criterion | This evaluation criterion relates to the errors still remaining in the documents located during reviews. Thereby, it can be determined if trainees have employed the proper reviewers. | ||
* Effectiveness of Specification Reviews | * Effectiveness of Specification Reviews | ||
* Effectiveness of System Design Reviews | * Effectiveness of System Design Reviews | ||
* Effectiveness of Modul Design Reviews | * Effectiveness of Modul Design Reviews | ||
* Effectiveness of Code Reviews | * Effectiveness of Code Reviews | ||
| Line 64: | Line 64: | ||
==Losses by Reviews or Tests== | == Losses by Reviews or Tests== | ||
This evaluation | This evaluation criterion shows the number of AFPs, which were lost during reviews and tests. This loss can be caused by a bad choice of reviewers.Therefore, the trainees should always consider the qualification of a reviewer. | ||
* Losses in Tests | * Losses in Tests | ||
* Losses in Reviews | * Losses in Reviews | ||
==Expenses== | ==Expenses== | ||
This evaluation criterion shows the expenses of each single phase (Specification, Design, Code, Test, Manual). | This evaluation criterion shows the expenses of each single phase(Specification, Design, Code, Test, Manual). | ||
| Line 82: | Line 81: | ||
==Authors of Documents== | ==Authors of Documents== | ||
This evaluation should check if trainees have used the | This evaluation should check if trainees have used the proper developers for the different phases. | ||
The following | The following evaluation options are available: | ||
* Author / authors of Specification | * Author / authors of Specification | ||
* Author / authors of System Design | * Author / authors of System Design | ||
* Author / authors of Module Design | * Author / authors of Module Design | ||
* Author / authors of the Code | * Author / authors of the Code | ||
* Author / authors of the | * Author / authors of the Manuals | ||
[[de:Bewertungskriterien]] | [[de:Bewertungskriterien]] | ||
Latest revision as of 15:48, 13 August 2013
Objectives
The following objectives can be evaluated and retrieved:
- Project duration
- Budget
- AFPs realised in the code as a percentage
- Errors per KLOC
- AFPs realised in the manuals as a percentage
- Errors per page in the manuals
Objectives are the most important evaluation criteria. At the end of a simulation run, trainees want to know if they have managed the project within the budget, in time and if they have achieved the AFPs required for the code and manuals. The evaluation component provides a textual description for every objective.
>> Back to: Classification of the Evaluation Criteria
Completeness of Documents
This criterion gives an overview of the completeness of the documents(specification, system design, modul design, code, manuals) and is presented to trainees in the form of a diagram.
Remaining Errors in Documents
Another important evaluation criterion gives an overview, how many errors are still left in the documents. You can distinguish the following evaluations:
- Remaining errors in Documents
- Remaining errors in the Specification
- Remaining errors in the System Design
- Remaining errors in the Module Design
- Remaining errors in the Code
- Remaining errors in the Manuals
>> Back to: Classification of the Evaluation Criteria
Efficiency of Reviews or Tests
This criterion relates the effort of reviews or tests, the errors found and the effort to correct these errors. These diagrams show at a glance, whether a review or test was performed efficiently or not.
- Efficiency of the Specification Reviews
- Efficiency of the System Design Reviews
- Efficiency of the Module Design Reviews
- Efficiency of Code Reviews
- Efficiency of Manual Reviews
- Efficiency of Module Tests
- Efficiency of System Testing
- Efficiency of Integration Tests
Effectiveness of Reviews
This evaluation criterion relates to the errors still remaining in the documents located during reviews. Thereby, it can be determined if trainees have employed the proper reviewers.
- Effectiveness of Specification Reviews
- Effectiveness of System Design Reviews
- Effectiveness of Modul Design Reviews
- Effectiveness of Code Reviews
- Effectiveness of Manual Reviews
>> Back to: Classification of the Evaluation Criteria
Losses by Reviews or Tests
This evaluation criterion shows the number of AFPs, which were lost during reviews and tests. This loss can be caused by a bad choice of reviewers.Therefore, the trainees should always consider the qualification of a reviewer.
- Losses in Tests
- Losses in Reviews
Expenses
This evaluation criterion shows the expenses of each single phase(Specification, Design, Code, Test, Manual).
Authors of Documents
This evaluation should check if trainees have used the proper developers for the different phases. The following evaluation options are available:
- Author / authors of Specification
- Author / authors of System Design
- Author / authors of Module Design
- Author / authors of the Code
- Author / authors of the Manuals
