Cardiff School of Computer Science and Informatics
Coursework Assessment Pro-forma
Module Code: CM2305
Module Title: Group Project
Lecturer: Prof Stuart Allen & Dr Martin Chorley
Assessment Title: Final Report
Date Set: 02/02/2023
Submission Date and Time: 11/05/2023 at 9:30am
Feedback return date: 08/06/2023
If you have been granted an extension for Extenuating Circumstances, then the
submission deadline and return date will be 1 weeks later than that stated above.

If you have been granted a deferral for Extenuating Circumstances, then you will be
assessed in the summer resit period (assuming all other constraints are met).
This assignment is worth 45% of the total marks available for this module. If
coursework is submitted late (and where there are no extenuating
circumstances):
1 If the assessment is submitted no later than 24 hours after the
deadline, the mark for the assessment will be capped at the minimum
pass mark;
2 If the assessment is submitted more than 24 hours after the deadline, a
mark of 0 will be given for the assessment.
Marks will be awarded to the individual student based on the quality of the group report,
the group presentation, the individual report and their contribution. Extenuating
circumstances submitted for the spring term project period will be considered pro-rata
for the contribution weighting for the group component. Extensions are only possible on
the individual report component.
All group members must be present at the presentation (you must complete an
extenuating circumstances form if you have a valid reason of being absent). Group
members absent without extenuating circumstances will receive zero marks for the
group presentation component. Extensions to the coursework submission date can only
be requested using the Extenuating Circumstances procedure. Only students with
approved extenuating circumstances may use the extenuating circumstances
submission deadline. Any coursework submitted after the initial submission deadline
without approved extenuating circumstances will be treated as late.
More information on the extenuating circumstances procedure can be found on the
Intranet: https://intranet.cardiff.ac.uk/students/study/exams-andassessment/extenuating-circumstances
By submitting this assignment you are accepting the terms of the following declaration:

I hereby declare that my submission (or my contribution to it in the case of group
submissions) is all my own work, that it has not previously been submitted for
assessment and that I have not knowingly allowed it to be copied by another
student. I understand that deceiving or attempting to deceive examiners by
passing off the work of another writer, as one’s own is plagiarism. I also
understand that plagiarising another’s work or knowingly allowing another
student to plagiarise from my work is against the University regulations and that
doing so will result in loss of marks and possible disciplinary proceedings1.
1 https://intranet.cardiff.ac.uk/students/study/exams-and-assessment/academic-integrity/cheating-andacademic-misconduct
Assignment
Group Report
The final group report must describe the final solution to the software development
problem set by the client as completed by the group. The contents depend on the
deliverables for this report specified in previous reports, discussions and requests from
the client, and further insights and developments since the last report. Depending on the
scale of the problem and the agreed deliverables, the final report may cover a prototype
solution, a particular aspect of a larger system or a complete system. The report should
be factual and you can assume that the reader is familiar with the previously submitted
documents and presentations.
The report must in particular address the following, based on the work completed,
considering the development methodology adapted by the group:
❖ An introduction providing an overview of the report’s contents and cover, as
necessary, refinements and modifications of the requirements, design and
implementation and the resulting impact on your work. Provide justifications for
any changes because of client requests or your insights into problem. Also state
clearly what your solution to the problem does and justify that your approach
shows overall major progress towards addressing the clients problem towards a
complete solution (discussing this with the client can help you determine what
they expect).
❖ Multiple sections detailing your work on the project since the interim report. The
sections and their contents depend on your development methodology, the work
you have actually undertaken, the project itself, and discussions with the client.
You should describe the overall software system as designed and implemented,
and the testing and evaluation of the implemented solution. Make sure that this
is a coherent document guiding the readers through its contents, enabling them
to follow your reasoning (do not simply provide a collection of individual, quite
unconnected pieces). These sections may cover some of the following points (no
need to repeat previously described material, but make sure you describe your
final solution).
❖ A description of the final system architecture and design. Use suitable diagrams,
based on appropriate standards such as UML, that clearly expose the static
structure of the system (e.g. class and component diagrams or EAR diagrams)
and its dynamic behaviour (e.g. sequence or other interaction diagrams, use
cases) on various detail levels (from the high-level architecture to the detailed
design).The overall structure of your software must be clear from this, but you do
not need to repeat detailed content from previous reports, but rather refer to it.
❖ Core implementation tasks may be described using pseudo code, activity or state
machine diagrams, as far as this has been extended since the last report. The
complete code implemented to solve the client’s problem must be provided in an
attached zip file. This is to show the more detailed structure of the code and be
able to judge what has been implemented. There is no need that the code is
executable/compilable by the client, but it must be readable.
❖ For testing explain the approaches used to ensure good quality code has been
developed. Clearly describe how the software has been tested from a user’s as
well as a developer’s perspective. Include test reports and discuss what of the
system is working and where issues still exist. As this is the final report, there
should be sufficient detail to judge how well your solution works, covering what it
does well and what it does not so well; in particular try to demonstrate where it
starts to fail.
❖ A justification and evaluation of the presented software system. Ensure your
report contains justifications for your design and implementation decisions and
evaluates the resulting software system based on the data obtained in the tests.
Clearly state any choices and assumptions that were made. Identify strengths as
well as limitations of your software system. Discuss how well your solution meets
the client’s requirements and realises the intended functionality. You could also
consider the business case for the project with details of how the solution could
be fully executed and supported and judge how far this is feasible. You may also
highlight where you have been influenced by legal, social, ethical and
professional issues, as far as not already discussed previously.
❖ Complete your report with a statement on future work and a clear set of
conclusions. Furthermore, the code for the final software must be included in an
archive with the report.
The group report must have no more than 10,000 words (~20 pages; this is a maximum,
not a target, for the main body of the report; actual length depends on the project, your
work and group size at the time of submission – discuss with client and module leader if
in doubt), with additional supporting material in the appendices, if necessary (these do
not count towards the word limit). Note that content is more important than word count
and a concise report is often better. There is no need to be exhaustive, covering all
things you have done (e.g. some material may be outdated), but instead try to give a
clear picture of your solution. It also does not have to be presented in an accurate
historical sequence, but rather focus on your findings and final solution.
If you are happy for your group final report to be made available as an example to the
following years, please indicate this on the title page of the submission (just put “We
grant permission to give future students of the CM2305 module access to this material
as example” at the bottom of the page) and make sure all authors agree to this. Only the
material submitted on learning central will be made available and only if you achieved a
mark of at least 65% and the mark will not be released. This of course has no influence
on the mark. Note, the copyright of the material is with all authors and you are free to
choose what to do with it.
Presentation
The presentation must discuss the core functionalities implemented by the
software and demonstrate clearly that this functionality is present. This means you must
have a demonstrable prototype running for the presentation. It should further discuss the
major challenges encountered during developing the software – this can include aspects
on the requirements, architecture, design, implementation, testing and a business case
as well as aspects on working in a team and the difficulties in dealing with realistic
clients. It is important that you select the aspects that were most challenging for your
specific project. The presentation should contain an overall evaluation of your software
stating how well it fulfils the client’s requirements and realises the intended
functionalities (linked to the demonstration). Focus on the most important aspects where
you performed particularly well or not so well. The presentation must not be longer than
40 minutes and you must arrange a suitable time with your client. There will be an extra
20 minutes reserved for questions from the client and general feedback on your project.
Optionally, you may produce videos and similar material in advance and share this with
the client to demonstrate part of your work, but this cannot replace the whole
synchronous session. It could rather cover a particular aspect, such as the
demonstration of a running system. Note, it is part of the overall length of your
presentation (your client may view this during the presentation, not in advance).
Individual Report
The individual report must discuss your contribution to the group work in the spring
term. You must show that you contributed to the group work, which will be determined
via the individual report and the contribution monitoring, conducted by the supervisor.
Discuss what tasks you have performed and provide evidence of your work (you may
refer to the group report for the actual work/results). Discuss how you approached these
tasks and how you interacted with other members, both in sharing your results and in
organising the team’s activities. Consider how well your existing skills were utilised and
what new skills you have learned. Then reflect on your overall performance and role in
the team and suggest what went well and hat you will be doing differently in future team
projects. The individual report must have no more than 1,500 words (~3 pages) – this is a
maximum, not a target and we expect about 2 pages (about one page per individual
report marking criteria listed below). It does not have to be exhaustive, but should
contain good examples of what you have done and discuss key aspects. Content over
1,500 words may be ignored for marking.
If you are happy for your individual final report to be made available as an example to the
following years, please indicate this on the title page of the submission (just put “I grant
permission to give future students of the CM2305 module access to this material as
example” at the bottom of the page). Only the material submitted on learning central will
be made available and only if you achieved a mark of at least 65% and the mark will not
be released. This of course has no influence on the mark. Note, the copyright of the
material is with the author and you are free to choose what to do with it.
Contribution
Given that you are expected to work about 100h in total for 10 credits and this is a 20
credit, two semester module, the expected total individual work on the group project is
about 6h per week during term time. Contribution is measured in hours and
recorded at the weekly group meetings with supervisor (of course there can be more as
needed without supervisor). At each group meeting, present the tasks you have
completed, with evidence that they are indeed complete. You then agree on whether the
task has been done and the amount of hours this is worth with the whole group present
at the meeting. The supervisor will record what has been agreed by the group and make
sure this is done fairly for everyone in the group. The weighting of the hours only needs to
be consistent for a group and is not compared to other groups. You must be present
(virtually or in-person) at the group meeting for this to be recorded. Recording outside the
meetings should not be done (with the exception of the last week after the meeting,
before the submission deadline where you can submit contributions to the supervisor by
e-mail and the supervisor will record this, but may check with the whole group). At the
meetings it is important the whole group (those present) considers and agrees with this
record and raises any concerns. Any disagreements will be considered by the supervisor
and settled by them; they can also raise their own concerns and suggest adjustment of
the records if there are issues. Every member of the group should be able to see their
and other members contribution. How to record the contribution is decided by the group
with the supervisor, but the agreed records can only be changed by the supervisor. If
there are any concerns, please contact the module leader.
Not everything that has been done may be suitable to report or contributes to the
solution in the end, but a task agreed to be executed for the project by the group is to be
recorded as contribution. The amount of hours a contribution is worth is to be agreed
with the group and moderated by the supervisor, as is seen fit for what has been
completed and the presented evidence. A task not agreed by the group may or may not
be accepted as contribution, in discussion with the group at the weekly supervisor
meetings.
Your contribution is measured with respect to the average hours and attendance as
described below to determine a weighting factor for the group mark. Note that your
contribution does not have to be evenly 6h for each week, but can be distributed
differently, depending on your tasks. This also means that you do not have to complete a
task for each week, but some tasks can be longer or shorter. You simply report each
week what has been completed for the task. Do take care that by the submission
deadline all relevant tasks for the final report have been recorded. Contribution is
measured per term (for interim and final report separately) and not carried over to the
next term.
Learning Outcomes Assessed

7. Design a software system to meet given requirements.
8. Implement and test a software system based on a design.
9. Evaluate how well a software system meets given requirements.
10. Reflect on their experience of working in a team and their individual contributions to
    the project.
    Criteria for assessment
    Your client will mark your group report and presentation, your supervisor will mark the
    individual report and assess your contribution, according to the following criteria:

• Group report (80% of individual mark, weighted by contribution):
• Overall quality of the solution to the software development problem, considering the
  following as suitable for the work undertaken under the chosen development
  methodology, the problem to be addressed and the client requirements (35% of group
  report mark).
• Software architecture and data design: clear overall structure of the system, suitable
  decomposition, extensible and modular weakly-coupled, cohesive components,
  identification of essential data aspects, clear component interactions/interfaces and
  internal structure.
• Implementation: appropriate and effective data structures and algorithms for
  interesting functionalities; well structured, clean easy to maintain and well readable
  code; description of functionalities implemented, suitable to solve the problem.
• Testing: clear concise test plan and test cases; suitable test/use cases show that
  the code is correct and the software executes the required functionality well; evidence
  showing how well code passes the tests.
• Evidence that the work has been implemented as a team showing efforts of how to
  integrate the components.
• Overall report shows that an appropriate solution has been found (or a good reason
  why this was not possible is given) and any changes to the project have been clearly
  justified and suitably addressed.
• Justification and evaluation of work executed for the project (35% of group report
  mark).
• Clear justifications for any decisions are given, indicating choices made with
  justification and clearly stated assumptions.
• Clear evidence of how well the software meets the client’s requirements and
  executes the intended functionalities.
• Identification of strengths and limitations of the proposed solutions, based on clear
  acceptance criteria and suitable evidence.
• Well justified conclusions and concise discussion of future work.
• Presentation (30% of group report mark).
• Coherent and detailed presentation of the solution to the problem, focusing on
  major challenges of the particular project, including a demonstration of the running
  software.
• Evidence of testing and evaluation with clear statements of what the system is
  capable, and what not, clearly linked to the client’s requirements.
• Individual Report (20% of individual mark):
• Role in the team (50% of individual report mark).
• Learning and Professional Development (50% of individual report mark).
• Contribution to the group report and project work with evidence in the individual
  report and from the contribution monitoring data (to determine percentage of group
  report mark making up 80% of the individual mark).
  All main criteria carry the weight as indicated above for your total mark and will be
  evaluated on the following scale:
  1st: 70-100% Excellent rigorous, methodical, analytic, content
  meets all requirements of the work, very few
  errors/omissions.
  2.1: 60-69% Good competent, reasoned, coherent, content very
  sound, few errors/omissions.
  2.2: 50-59% Fair satisfactory, relevant, content meets many
  of the required elements, some
  errors/omissions
  3rd: 40-49%): Pass Passable, basic relevant content,
  weaknesses in execution, errors/omissions.
  Fail: 1-39%): Fail not passable, evident weaknesses, gaps in
  content, evident errors/omissions.
  None: (0%) None Indicates that the topic has not at all been
  covered
  Also see the Client and Supervisor Feedback Forms below.

Feedback and suggestion for future learning
Feedback on your coursework will address the above criteria. Feedback and marks will
be returned by the return date specified above via learning central to every individual
student covering the group as well as the individual report and the contribution. You will
see this feedback and your individual mark as part of the individual report feedback, not
he group report.
Client and supervisor will provide formal feedback about your reports explaining any
concerns they may have and their expectations regarding the aims and objectives and
deliverables. All reports and marks will be moderated by the module leader. You will
further get informal feedback from your supervisor in your meetings and further
comments will be provided by the client directly after the presentation.
Feedback from this assignment will be useful for any future project work, such as the
final year project.
Feedback Instructions for the Client
Complete the feedback form below by replacing the @XXX@ markers with appropriate
comments, scale rating and marks. Provide a rating from the scale above for each subcriterion of the main criteria and justify these in the comments section. All marks should
be in rounded to integer percentages.
Note, complete the report in plain text ASCII or UTF8 encoding. Do not change the format
to anything else or the report will be returned to you. You may use markdown formatting
(https://github.com/adam-p/markdown-here/wiki/Markdown-Cheatsheet).
Return the completed feedback report (without this section, the coursework instructions
in the previous section and the individual report section) by e-mail to
thottamvalappils@cardiff.ac.uk with the subject “CM2305 FGR Group @NUMBER@”.
You will also get the individual mark reports from the supervisor with the subject
“CM2305 IIR Group @NUMBER@” for moderation and discussion if there are any
concerns. After you agreed, send this (together or separately) by e-mail to
thottamvalappils@cardiff.ac.uk in a single zip file with subject “CM2305 FIR Group
@NUMBER@” (if send separately from FGR).
Deadlines for the completion of this will be send with an e-mail closer to marking.
Contact the module leader before the deadline if these are not achievable to discuss
alternatives (with this you have been warned).
Copies of the contents of this proforma will be copied to the group as part of the formal
feedback to this assessment.

CM2305 – Final Group Report and Presentation Client Feedback – Group:

@NUMBER@
List names of students attending the presentation (important for contribution monitoring,
do not skip and make sure it is accurate; e.g. take a screenshot of the participants list
and fill this in here):

• @NAME1@
• @NAME2@
• @NAME3@
• @NAME4@
• @NAME5@
• @NAME6@
• @NAME7@
• @NAME8@
  Overall Quality of the Solution to the Software Development Problem (35%)
• The report clearly states the functionalities implemented by the software and shows
  that the group understood the problem and produced an appropriate solution: @SCALE@
• The achieved software solution is sufficiently complex given the overall problem and
  resources available: @SCALE@
• The quality of the software architecture, detailed design, implementation, testing,
  reported as suitable for the chosen development methodology and the fact that this is
  the final report on delivering the solution: @SCALE@
• There is evidence that the work has been implemented as a team showing efforts of
  how to integrate the various work components: @SCALE@
  Comments: @COMMENTS@
  Mark: @MARK@ / 100%
  Justification and evaluation (35%)
• The group provided appropriate justifications for their decisions and clearly stated any
  choices and assumptions that were made: @SCALE@
• The team identified strengths, weaknesses and limitations of their suggested solution
  with suitable evidence: @SCALE@
• There is a discussion of how well the software meets the client’s requirements and
  executes the intended functionalities with clear evidence: @SCALE@
• There are concrete, practical and reasonable suggestions for future work, arising from
  the evaluation: @SCALE@
  Comments: @COMMENTS@
  Mark: @MARK@ / 100%
  Presentation (30%)
• The presentation provided a coherent and detailed view of the software, focusing on
  the major challenges and issues of the particular project, including a demonstration of
  the running software: @SCALE@
• There was a discussion of how well the software meets the client’s requirements and
  executes the intended functionalities with clear statements of what the system is
  capable of and what not, with clear evidence: @SCALE@
  Comments: @COMMENTS@
  Mark: @MARK@ / 100%

Total group report mark

Total Mark: @GTOTAL@ / 100% (weighted average of above percentages)
Feedback Instructions for the Supervisor
Complete the feedback form below by replacing the @XXX@ markers with appropriate
comments, scale rating and marks. Provide a rating from the scale above for each subcriterion of the main criteria and justify these in the comments section. Indicate in
particular why you have chosen the level and what the student could do to improve it to
the next level. All marks should be in rounded to integer percentages. @SELECT_ONE@
indicates to pick one of the options and delete the rest.
Note, complete the report in plain text ASCII or UTF8 encoding. Do not change the format
to anything else or the report will be returned to you. You may use markdown formatting
(https://github.com/adam-p/markdown-here/wiki/Markdown-Cheatsheet).
Create a zip file with the feedback reports for the individual students for each group to
return the completed feedback reports (without the coursework instructions, the client
feedback report above and this section) by e-mail to the group’s client with the subject
“CM2305 FIR Group @NUMBER@”. The group’s client will moderate the marks, discuss
them with you, and then send it to the module leader.
Deadlines for the completion of this will be send with an e-mail closer to marking.
Contact the module leader before the deadline if these are not achievable to discuss
alternatives (with this you have been warned).
For the contribution section, comment on the overall contribution of the student to the
project during the reporting period and whether the student has contributed to the
project as much as their team members. For this use the contribution monitoring data
from the group meetings as described above. At each group meeting record who
attended it and also take note of the tasks and the associated hours each student
worked on the project, as agreed by the group. Contribution should only be recorded at
the weekly meetings by people present (virtually or in-person; with the exception of the
last week after the meeting, before the submission deadline where students can submit
contributions to the supervisor by e-mail and the supervisor will record this, but may
check with the whole group). All group members should have access to these records,
but the supervisor is the only one who can edit them. Make sure the records are fair and
consistent and challenge the group if you have concerns. The tasks and hours claimed
should be reasonable and be accepted by the whole group (as present at the meeting).
As general guide, each student is expect to work about 6h per week on the project in
total during term time, not necessarily evenly distributed over the term. The individual’s
contribution is compared to the group average (not other groups).
Copies of the contents of this proforma will be copied to the individual student as part of
the formal feedback to this assessment.

CM2305 – Final Individual Report Supervisor Feedback

Student: @NAME@
Student Id: @ID@
Group: @NUMBER@
Supervisor: @NAME@

Role in the team (50%)

@SELECT_ONE@
Excellent: Comprehensive review of activities/roles within the team; excellent,
detailed examples have been provided which clearly show contribution to the team.
Good: Good review of activities/roles within the team; good examples of
contribution to the team have been provided.
Fair: A reasonable set of activities/roles has been discussed; some examples of
contributions to the team have been provided, although these may lack some detail.
Pass: Few activities/roles have been presented; few examples of contributions to
the team have been provided.
Fail: Inadequate activities/roles have been presented; no/inadequate examples of
contributions to the team have been provided.
None: Role in the team has not been addressed at all or dominantly, verifiably false
claims have been made.
Mark: @MARK@ / 100%
Learning and Professional Development (50%)
@SELECT_ONE@
Excellent: Comprehensive discussion of key learning experience is provided;
excellent examples have been provided to illustrate how each of the learning
experiences have developed a range of knowledge and skills; a clear understanding is
provided of how knowledge and skills obtained through undertaking a team project are
likely to contribute to the student’s professional development.
Good: Good discussion of key learning experience is provided; good examples have
been provided to illustrate how most of the learning experiences have developed a range
of knowledge and skills; a good understanding is demonstrated of how knowledge and
skills obtained through undertaking a team project are likely to contribute to the
student’s professional development.
Fair: Provided a reasonable discussion of knowledge and skills obtained; examples
have been provided to illustrate how some of the learning experiences have developed
knowledge and skills; a reasonable understanding is provided of how knowledge and
skills obtained through undertaking a team project are likely to contribute to the
student’s professional development.
Pass: Little discussion of knowledge and skills acquired; few examples have been
provided to illustrate how learning experiences have developed knowledge and skills;
little understanding is provided of how knowledge and skills obtained through
undertaking a team project are likely to contribute to the student’s professional
development.
Fail: No/inadequate discussion of knowledge and skills acquired; no/inadequate
examples have been provided to illustrate how learning experiences have developed
knowledge and skills; no/inadequate understanding is provided of how knowledge and
skills obtained through undertaking a team project are likely to contribute to the
student’s professional development.
None: Learning and professional development has not been addressed.
Mark: @MARK@ / 100%
Total individual report mark
Overall comments on report:
@COMMENTS@
Total Mark: @ITOTAL@ / 100% (average of above percentages)

Contribution to Project

Attendance at Supervisor Group Meetings (30%)
List the average number of meetings the group members attended and the number of
meetings the individual attended.
Average attendance: @AVG_ATTENDANCE@
Individual attendance: @ATTENDANCE@
Attendance: @ATTENDANCE/AVG_ATTENDANCE@
Contribution to the Group’s Work (70%)
List the average number of hours group members and the hours the individual student
worked for the groups as recorded in the weekly group meetings.
Average hours: @AVG_HOURS@
Individual hours: @HOURS@
Work: @HOURS/AVG_HOURS@

Contribution Weight

Calculate a numerical contribution as the 30%,70% weighted average of the above
percentages.
Contribution: @0.3 * ATTENDANCE + 0.7 * WORK@
Use this value as a guide to decide on the contribution factor below as indicated by the
scale. The contribution weight must be inside the intervals indicated below to justify the
relevant factor. You may use your digression to adjust the factor within the indicated
percentage range for the interval.
@SELECT_ONE@
Excellent: Contribution >= 1.0
Student contributed fully, at least as much as most involved in the project. (100%, in
exceptional circumstances more, where contribution >= 1.1 – may indicate group is not
fully collaborating, but can also reward individuals putting in a lot of effort into the
project; the total mark is always capped at 100%).
Good: 1.0 > Contribution >= 0.8
Student contributed about as much as everyone else involved in the project. (100%,
expected level of contribution – may also indicate that collaboration in the group works
well).
Fair: 0.8 > Contribution >= 0.6
Student contributed less than most involved in the project, but still made some notable
contribution. (75%-99%, should be an exception – may indicate that there are some not
sufficiently contributing to the group work even if the group is overall working well and
there are no serious concerns).
Pass: 0.6 > Contribution >= 0.4
Student contributed little to the project, but has been involved in some activities. (50%-
74%, should be very exceptional – may indicate that the group has some members
contributing minimally to the work damaging overall group performance and that there
are some serious concerns about the members on this level, and this may have to be
consider for group report mark).
Fail:: 0.4 > Contribution > 0
Very little contribution from the student and student was only remotely involved. (1-49%,
not expected – indicates student has not been participating in the project during the
reporting period, possibly due to extenuating circumstances, which must be reported
separately; will have to be considered for the group report mark).
None: Contribution = 0
Student was not present and has not contributed anything. (0%, indicates that student
was effectively not a member of the team; may point toward serious problems in the
team or extenuating circumstances, which must be reported separately; will have to be
considered for the group report mark).
Comments: @COMMENTS@
Contribution factor: @FACTOR@ / 100%

Overall Individual Mark

To be moderated and completed by module leader.
Contribution weight: @FACTOR@
Group report total: x @GTOTAL@ x 80%
Individual report total: + @ITOTAL@ x 20%
Total: = @TOTAL@ out of 100%
Submission Instructions
Group Report (one per group)
Description Type Name
Group Report Compulsory One PDF (.pdf) GroupReport_[group
number].pdf
Supporting material for the
group project
Compulsory Zip file [Group_number].zip
Individual Report
Description Type Name
Individual Report Compulsory One PDF (.pdf) IndividualReport_[student
number].pdf
A nominated team member should submit your coursework on learning central as a
single PDF document by the submission date and time above. Prior to handing in make
sure all documentation have been collected. All deliverables, especially the final sources,
must also be submitted in a single zip archive. Make sure the material produced for the
presentation is also submitted and consistent with the presentation in that zip file as
well. All team members must have seen and agreed to the final version of the
documents. Make sure the report clearly mentions your group number, a list of all
members of the group (with full name and student id as on learning central), the project
title the group has chosen, and the name of your client and supervisor on the title page
of your report.
A presentation on the final report, including a demonstration of the software solution,
must be given to the client in the time listed above under “submission dates and time”.
The group must arrange a suitable time with the client in advance. This should be done
via e-mail (clearly state the group you are representing). Typically the meeting would be
on MS Teams, in-person or a hybrid of in-person and online, depending on all
participants’ availability. Other meeting platforms can be used if more suitable and
accessible by all required participants. The supervisor may optionally attend the
presentation. Nominate specific member(s) of the team responsible to arrange the
meeting. If there are any problems with this, please contact the module leader.
Every member of the group must submit a final individual report as a single PDF
document by the submission date and time above on learning central. Make sure the
individual report contains your full name, as on learning central and your student id and
the group number you are a member of in the title/front-matter of your report.
Any code submitted will be run on [SPECIFY UNIVERSITY SYSTEM e.g a system equivalent
to those available in the Windows/Linux laboratory] and must be submitted as stipulated
in the instructions above.
Staff reserve the right to invite students to a meeting to discuss coursework submissions
Support for assessment
Questions about the assessment can be asked on https://stackoverflow.com/c/comsc/
and tagged with module code CM2305, or at the end of the lectures.

https://www.cardiff.ac.uk/study/undergraduate/courses/course/msci-in-computer-science