Form 1.3: Due by Oct 7 11:59pm
Email to Baris Aydinlioglu (email@example.com).
This form has three sections. You must list the final list of errors in the first section, and the final list of faults in the second. Only one fault and error list must be submitted for each team! In the third section you should answer the questions which are provided. Each team member should submit a completed section 3.
Also rate the severity of the errors and the faults by assigning a rating for "importance" and "probability of causing a failure" based on the following scales:
- not important, designer should easily see the problem
- problem, if a failure occurs it should be easy to find and fix (e.g. change to 1 module)
- important, if a failure occurs, it could be hard to find and fix (e.g. change to several modules)
- very important, if a failure occurs, it could cause a redesign
Probability of causing failure:
- will not cause fault or failure, will be caught by designer
- could cause a failure but will most likely be caught by designer
- would cause a failure
Note: The Importance and Probability values for faults leading to an error you discovered need not match those of the error.
List the errors you discovered below, specifying which faults from the list below result from each of the errors. Take as much space as you need, and separate each error with a blank line.
Error # Associated Faults Importance Prob. Desc.
-------- ----------------- ---------- ----- -----
List the faults you discovered below, specifying the page number and the requirement in which each is found. Also state which error from the error list led you to each fault. Take as much space as you need, and separate each fault with a blank line.
Fault # Page # Reqt # Related Error Importance Prob. Desc.
------ ------ ------ ------------- ---------- ----- -----
Please answer the following questions. Your answers will be used to help us better understand the process, and will not impact the grading of this assignment:
- How much time did you take as a team to decide on the final lists (report just the time spent on discussing the lists, not including interruptions, breaks, or other non-related activities)?
- Did you feel that the individual fault and error lists were similar or rather different? Did this fact effect the amount of time you spent on discussion?
- Did the fact that all members of the team used a different perspective in finding faults in Assignment 4A have an effect on how easy it was to merge the lists?
__ the different perspectives on the team made it harder to merge
__ there was no difference due to the perspectives
__ the different perspectives on the team made it easier to merge
- Did the fact that all members of the team used a different perspective have an effect on how the meeting itself was run? For example, because of the different perspectives, did all three members have more equal input to the discussion? Did team members feel less able to discuss aspects of the document that their perspective did not deal with? Please describe any related issues you encountered.
- When you merged the individual lists into the team list, did you find it most helpful to:
__ merge faults first, and then discuss the associated errors
__ merge faults first, and then re-abstract the errors
__ merge errors first, and then discuss the associated faults
__ other (please explain)
- Due to meeting as a team, do you feel there were any resulting benefits to the fault and error lists (e.g. eliminated redundant faults and errors, improved descriptions, removed entries that weren’t really faults)? Were these benefits effected by having different perspectives for each of the team members, or were these the same as in Assignment 2C?
- Do you feel that there were benefits to actually meeting as a team and interacting with your teammates, which could not have been achieved if you simply reviewed your teammates’ fault and error lists?
- Do you feel that the error list you created as a team would be more or less useful for repairing the document than the error lists you created individually? Use the checklist to answer and then explain your reasoning below.
The individual error lists were:
__ more useful than the team version
__ not significantly different from the team version
__ less useful than the team version
- Due to meeting as a team, do you feel there were any benefits to you as reviewers? Do you feel you understand the document better now that you have seen your teammates’ work?
- Because of the team meeting, do you feel you understand what your teammates’ perspectives involved? Do you think that they understand yours? If the answer to either of these questions is yes, has this information been beneficial or helpful in any way?
- Due to meeting as a team, do you think you could do a better job of fixing the document than if you had only worked individually? Use the checklist to answer and then explain your reasoning below.
The team meeting:
__ would help if I had to repair the requirements
__ wouldn’t help if I had to repair the requirements
- What percentage of the faults in the document do you think were found by the team?
- What percentage of the errors in the document do you think were found by the team?
- Any additional comments?