Summary Report on Software Quality Tools and Techniques

Software Quality Planning, Software Quality Assurance and Software Monitoring and Control are the
main activities to ensure the quality software that are being built.
Instructions
1. Choose one of the main activities above. – Software Quality Assurance
2. Identify articles/journals about the activity and the tools and techniques used in the activity.
(At least 2 main articles)
3. Read and understand the articles/journals.
4. Write a summary about the chosen activity. (Maximum of 2 pages (EXCLUDING REFERENCE
PAGE) on 1.5 spacing with font size 12 – Times New Roman).
a. The summarization should describe the objective or purpose of the activity, the
role of the activity in ensuring software quality, who should hold the
responsibility to execute the activity, the process/sub activities/procedures of
the activity, the tools and techniques used and the outcome from the activity.
b. Summarize in detail TWO (2) tools/ techniques used in the activity. The
summarization of each tool/techniques should include the description of the
tool/technique, the purpose of the tool/technique, and how this tool/technique
helps in the activity (or specific sub activity)
5. The report should include the following sections: –
a. Introduction
i. An overview of the chosen activity in Software Quality
ii. A statement of the preview on your assignment
b. Summary of the chosen activity
c. Summary of the tools/techniques of the chosen activity
d. Conclusion
i. Summarizes the key points of your report and your opinions/arguments
e. References
TIPS – A good Summary report
A great summary is easy to read and explains all of the main points in the original. Important
points to remember:
 The main idea of the article is conveyed clearly and concisely
 The summary is written in the unique style of the writer
 The summary is much shorter than the original document
 The summary explains all of the important notions and arguments
 The summary condenses a lot of information into a small space
Rubrics
No Criteria (5-6)
1 Introduction (15%) Demonstrate satisfactory
understanding on the main
points discussed in the article
The points, arguments and
findings are corretly
discussed, satisfactory linked
and discussed with little
critical integration and logical
reasoning.
Points presented was mostly
correct, but not clearly
presented
The points, arguments and
findings are corretly
discussed, satisfactory linked
and discussed with little
critical integration and logical
reasoning.
Points presented was mostly
correct, but not clearly
presented
3 Conclusion (15%) Summarizes the key points
Some language is inaccurate
and unclear
Grammar lacked of
cohesiveness
Some cited works, both text
and visual, are done in the
correct format.
Inconsistencies evident.
Done in the correct format
with some errors. Includes 4
major references (e.g.
science
journal articles, books, but no
more than two internet sites.
Periodicals available on-line
are not considered internet).
Language is accurate, clear
and concise throughout
Major problems with the
grammar
Grammar not cohesive Grammar of high standard Grammar of very high standard
4 Language (5%) Unclear expression Language is often inaccurate
and unclear
Most language is accurate,
clear and concise
3 Summarization – The
tools/technoques used (30%)
The points, arguments and
findings are fragmented,
incorrectly and illogically linked.
The points, arguments and
findings are correctly discussed
with little logical reasoning and
poorly linked.
The points, arguments and
findings are correct, clearly and
critically discussed with concise
and logical reasoning.
Little or no useful points
presented
Points incorrect at times and/or
not relevant, ideas difficult to
follow
Correct and mostly useful points
and presented in clear and
concise form
Demonstrate very limited
understanding on the main
points discussed in the article
Demonstrate some
understanding on the main
points discussed in the article
Demonstrate considerable
understanding on the main
points discussed in the article
Demonstrate thorough
understanding on the main
points discussed in the article
(0-2) (3-4) (7-8) (9-10)
2 Summarization – The activity (30%) The points, arguments and
findings are fragmented,
incorrectly and illogically linked.
The points, arguments and
findings are correctly discussed
with little logical reasoning and
poorly linked.
The points, arguments and
findings are correct, clearly and
critically discussed with concise
and logical reasoning.
Missing to summarizes most of
the key points
Missing to summarizes some of
the key points
Summarizes the key points
presented in clear and concise
form
Summarizes the key points
presented in clear and succint
form
The points, arguments and
findings are correct,
consistently clear and critically
discussed with concise and
logical reasoning.
Little or no useful points
presented
Points incorrect at times and/or
not relevant, ideas difficult to
follow
Correct and mostly useful points
and presented in clear and
concise form
High quality, correct and mostly
useful points and presented in
clear and succint form
The points, arguments and
findings are correct,
consistently clear and critically
discussed with concise and
logical reasoning.
High quality, correct and mostly
useful points and presented in
clear and succint form
4 Citation and References (5%) Missing citation Few cited works, both text
and visual, are done in the
correct format.
All cited works, both text and
visual, are done in the correct
format with no errors.
Irrelevance and inconsistence
All cited works, both text and
visual, are done in the correct
format with no errors.
All cited work are relevance and
consistence
Missing or the only
sites are internet sites and/or
not academically sources
Done in the correct format
with many errors. Includes 3
major references (e.g. science
journal articles, books, but no
more than two internet sites.
Periodicals available on-line
are not considered internet
sites.)
Done in the correct format
with few errors. . Includes 5
major references (e.g. science
journal articles, books, but no
more than two internet sites.
Periodicals available on-line
are not considered internet).
Done in the correct format
with no errors. Includes more
than 5 major references (e.g.
science journal articles,
books, but no more than two
internet sites. Periodicals
available on-line are not
considered internet sites)