Case Study 1: Introduction to Software Architecture

cs_draft_.docx

Home >Information Systems homework help >Case Study 1: Introduction to Software Architecture

Case Study 1: Introduction to Software Architecture

Due Week 2 and worth 100 points

Read the following case studies in the article titled “An Introduction to Software Architecture” and complete this case study assignment. Note: The article in PDF format can be found in the online course shell.

· 4.1 Case Study 1: Key Word in Context

· 4.2 Case Study 2: Instrumentation Software

· 4.3 Case 3: A fresh View of Compilers

The article is an overview of the topic of software architecture and contains several brief case studies in Chapter 4. Each case study offers its own attributes in regard to the approach of software architecture that the author is addressing and when read together it allows for compressions to be made.

Write a five to six (5-6) page paper in which you:

1. Identify both the similarities and the challenges that the architects faced in each of the cases.

2. Compare and contrast each architectural solution and determine which solution provided the optimal results in the first case study titled “Key World in Context”. Justify your answer.

3. Compare and contrast the differences in architecting systems that are specific to a particular domain versus systems that are far less domain specific.

4. Explain how developing domain-specific software affects the planning and testing phases of the software development life cycle.

5. Given the flow of process involved with compiling code, select another application which is not related to compiling or intercepting code that could borrow from either architecture of compliers presented in the third case. Justify your selection.

6. Explain how architecting systems provide a means to deliver a product that was in line with the requirements based on the information you gathered from the three (3) cases.

Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:

· Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.

· Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.

The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:

· Describe, develop, and implement software testing strategies and plans.

· Use technology and information resources to research issues in the delivery of software solutions.

· Write clearly and concisely about topics associated to software architecture techniques using proper writing mechanics and technical style conventions.

Grading for this assignment will be based on answer quality, logic/organization of the paper, and language and writing skills, using the following rubric.

Points: 100	Case Study 1: Introduction to Software Architecture
Criteria	Unacceptable Below 60% F	Meets Minimum Expectations 60-69% D	Fair 70-79% C	Proficient 80-89% B	Exemplary 90-100% A
1. Identify both the similarities and the challenges that the architects faced in each of the cases. Weight: 10%	Did not submit or incompletely identified both the similarities and the challenges that the architects faced in each of the cases.	Insufficiently identified both the similarities and the challenges that the architects faced in each of the cases.	Partially identified both the similarities and the challenges that the architects faced in each of the cases.	Satisfactorily identified both the similarities and the challenges that the architects faced in each of the cases.	Thoroughly identified both the similarities and the challenges that the architects faced in each of the cases.
2. Compare and contrast each architectural solution and determine which solution provided the optimal results in the first case study titled “Key World in Context”. Justify your answer. Weight: 20%	Did not submit or incompletely compared and contrasted each architectural solution and did not submit or incompletely determined which solution provided the optimal results in the first case study titled “Key World in Context”. Did not submit or incompletely justified your answer.	Insufficiently compared and contrasted each architectural solution and insufficiently determined which solution provided the optimal results in the first case study titled “Key World in Context”. Insufficiently justified your answer.	Partially compared and contrasted each architectural solution and partially determined which solution provided the optimal results in the first case study titled “Key World in Context”. Partially justified your answer.	Satisfactorily compared and contrasted each architectural solution and satisfactorily determined which solution provided the optimal results in the first case study titled “Key World in Context”. Satisfactorily justified your answer.	Thoroughly compared and contrasted each architectural solution and thoroughly determined which solution provided the optimal results in the first case study titled “Key World in Context”. Thoroughly justified your answer.
3. Compare and contrast the differences in architecting systems that are specific to a particular domain versus systems that are far less domain specific. Weight: 15%	Did not submit or incompletely compared and contrasted the differences in architecting systems that are specific to a particular domain versus systems that are far less domain specific.	Insufficiently compared and contrasted the differences in architecting systems that are specific to a particular domain versus systems that are far less domain specific.	Partially compared and contrasted the differences in architecting systems that are specific to a particular domain versus systems that are far less domain specific.	Satisfactorily compared and contrasted the differences in architecting systems that are specific to a particular domain versus systems that are far less domain specific.	Thoroughly compared and contrasted the differences in architecting systems that are specific to a particular domain versus systems that are far less domain specific.
4. Explain how developing domain-specific software affects the planning and testing phases of the software development life cycle. Weight: 15%	Did not submit or incompletely explained how developing domain-specific software affects the planning and testing phases of the software development life cycle.	Insufficiently explained how developing domain-specific software affects the planning and testing phases of the software development life cycle.	Partially explained how developing domain-specific software affects the planning and testing phases of the software development life cycle.	Satisfactorily explained how developing domain-specific software affects the planning and testing phases of the software development life cycle.	Thoroughly explained how developing domain-specific software affects the planning and testing phases of the software development life cycle.
5. Given the flow of process involved with compiling code, select another application which is not related to compiling or intercepting code that could borrow from either architecture of compliers presented in the third case. Justified your selection. Weight: 15%	Did not submit or incompletely gave the flow of process involved with compiling code, selected another application which is not related to compiling or intercepted code that could borrow from either architecture of compliers presented in the third case. Did not submit or incompletely justified your selection.	Insufficiently gave the flow of process involved with compiling code, selected another application which is not related to compiling or intercepted code that could borrow from either architecture of compliers presented in the third case. Insufficiently justified your selection.	Partially gave the flow of process involved with compiling code, selected another application which is not related to compiling or intercepted code that could borrow from either architecture of compliers presented in the third case. Partially justified your selection.	Satisfactorily gave the flow of process involved with compiling code, selected another application which is not related to compiling or intercepted code that could borrow from either architecture of compliers presented in the third case. Satisfactorily justified your selection.	Thoroughly gave the flow of process involved with compiling code, selected another application which is not related to compiling or intercepted code that could borrow from either architecture of compliers presented in the third case. Thoroughly justified your selection.
6. Explain how architecting systems provide a means to deliver a product that was in line with the requirements based on the information you gathered from the three (3) cases. Weight: 15%	Did not submit or incompletely explained how architecting systems provide a means to deliver a product that was in line with the requirements based on the information you gathered from the three (3) cases.	Insufficiently explained how architecting systems provide a means to deliver a product that was in line with the requirements based on the information you gathered from the three (3) cases.	Partially explained how architecting systems provide a means to deliver a product that was in line with the requirements based on the information you gathered from the three (3) cases.	Satisfactorily explained how architecting systems provide a means to deliver a product that was in line with the requirements based on the information you gathered from the three (3) cases.	Thoroughly explained how architecting systems provide a means to deliver a product that was in line with the requirements based on the information you gathered from the three (3) cases.
7. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements. Weight: 10%	More than 8 errors present	7-8 errors present	5-6 errors present	3-4 errors present	0-2 errors present