| | | | | | REV 3 Date 1 FEB 2016 |
| | Evaluator Name(s) |
| | Evaluation Date (MM/DD/YYYY) |
| | Evaluation Submission Date (MM/DD/YYYY) |
| | Program Name |
| | Developer Name(s) |
| | Program Revision Date (MM/DD/YYYY) |
| | Grade Scale: 0 - Unacceptable; 1 - Poor; 2 - Satisfactory; 3 - Good; 4 - Excellent |
| | Criteria | Grade | Weight for criterion | Comments |
| Basic Standards | Compilation: Does the code compile without errors? | 0 | 15% |
| | Execution: Does the code execute without errors? | 0 | 15% |
| | Meets Specification: Does the algorithm do what the assignment said it should do? | 0 | 15% |
| | Logic Quality: Is logic flow, such as the use of sequence, selection, and repetition, in a clear, concise, and effective manner? | 0 | 15% |
| User Interaction | UI Display: Are user inputs clearly marked on the screen? Are user outputs clearly displayed? Are there controls included that are not being used? | 0 | 15% |
| | Validation: Are there checks for valid input type and data format? Are there boundary checks for data ranges? Are Exceptions handled in a Try-Catch block effectively? | 0 | 5% |
| Style | Indentation: Is indentation used correctly to illustrate the structure of the program? | 0 | 5% |
| | Identifiers: Do identifiers logically describe use? | 0 | 5% |
| | Naming Conventions: Is there a consistent naming convention? | 0 | 5% |
| | Comments: Do comments explain processing that is not obvious? Are there headers included? | 0 | 5% |
| | Cumulative Grade out of Max of 4.00 | 0.00 | 100% |
ehmagrzm7i
quality_control_sheet_ltb_rev_3.xls
