Help with homework assignment

11/24/2016 1

System Development Life Cycle Research Paper

Purpose of this Assignment

This assignment gives you the opportunity to apply your research skills, analysis, and critical thinking skills to compare and contrast two different system development life cycle

(SDLC) models. This will provide you an opportunity to gain an in-depth understanding of

this important IT governance and management tool. This assignment specifically

addresses the following course outcome:

 Identify, define, and explain the concepts of information technology governance and

management.

Assignment

You will conduct some research to learn about the Waterfall Model of SDLC and another

model of your choosing. You will then describe both models and compare and contrast

them. Select one of the SDLC models listed below:

 Spiral Model

 Agile (Extreme Programming) Model  Evolutionary Prototyping Model

 Iterative and Incremental Model

Research and write a paper that describes the Waterfall Model and your chosen model. Your

descriptions should include each model’s purpose and structure (or characteristics) along with its strengths and weaknesses. It should describe the types of system development

efforts for which it is most appropriate. Then, compare and contrast your selected model

with the Waterfall Model. Finally, you will document the conclusions you reached from your

research, which may include such things as which model is "better," when each model should be used, whether one or the other should not be used, or whether it makes any

difference which one is used. The conclusions are your own and will be assessed according

to how well you defend them and how convincing your arguments are.

Your paper should be structured as follows:

I. Introduction

II. Waterfall Model (description, purpose, structure/characteristics, strengths and

weaknesses)

III. Chosen Model (description, purpose, structure/characteristics, strengths and

weaknesses) IV. Comparison of the Two Models (compare and contrast)

V. Conclusion (conclusions you drew from your research on the two models)

Your paper will be graded on both the accuracy and completeness of your descriptions; it

needs to clearly and completely define each model and its strengths and weaknesses. The comparisons will be graded based on the extent to which they are supported by facts and

are drawn from the descriptions. The conclusions should be well justified, and drawn from

the rest of the paper. Illustrations will enhance your paper if they contribute to an

understanding of the model.

Your paper should be 3-5 pages in length (not counting any cover sheet or reference

pages). The use of at least three external scholarly resources (other than class

materials) is required. You should use scholarly journals (rather than authorless website

11/24/2016 2

postings). If you need assistance with determining what a scholarly journal is, the UMUC

library is a very good source of information, accessed via the following link:

http://www.umuc.edu/library/libhow/articles.cfm. Remember to correctly cite and reference all sources using APA format.

Submit your paper in Word format via your Assignments Folder as an attached document

with your last name included in the filename.

Grading Rubric

Use the rubric below to be sure you have covered all aspects of this assignment.

Criteria

90-100% Far Above Standards

80-89% Above Standards

70-79% Meets Standards

60-69% Below Standards

< 60% Well Below Standards

Possible Points

Introduction

5 Points A sophisticated

introduction sets the stage for the

paper.

4 Points A well-written

introduction sets the stage for the

paper.

3.5 Points The introduction

adequately sets the stage for the

paper.

3 Points The introduction

does not adequately set

the stage for the paper.

0-2 Points No

introduction included.

5

Description of Waterfall Model

18-20 Points

Description of waterfall model

is accurate and thorough; includes

description, purpose, characteristics,

strengths and weaknesses; and demonstrates

sophisticated understanding of

course concepts.

16-17 Points

Description of waterfall model

is correct and complete; includes

description, purpose, characteristics,

strengths and weaknesses; and

demonstrates good

understanding of course concepts.

14-15 Points

Description of waterfall model

includes description, purpose,

characteristics, strengths and weaknesses; and

demonstrates adequate understanding of

course concepts.

12-13 Points

Description of waterfall model

may be incomplete, and/or may not

demonstrate adequate understanding

of course concepts.

0-11 Points

Description of waterfall

model is not included or little is

presented.

20

Description

of Chosen Model

18-20 Points

Description of chosen model is accurate and

thorough; includes description,

purpose, characteristics,

strengths and

16-17 Points

Description of chosen model is correct and

complete; includes description,

purpose, characteristics,

strengths and

14-15 Points

Description of chosen model includes

description, purpose, characteristics,

strengths and weaknesses; and

demonstrates

12-13 Points

Description of chosen model may be

incomplete, and/or may not demonstrate

adequate understanding

0-11 Points

Description of chosen model is not included

or little is presented.

20

11/24/2016 3

Criteria

90-100% Far Above Standards

80-89% Above Standards

70-79% Meets Standards

60-69% Below Standards

< 60% Well Below Standards

Possible Points

weaknesses; and

demonstrates sophisticated understanding of

course concepts.

weaknesses;

and demonstrates good

understanding of course

concepts.

adequate

understanding of course concepts.

of course

concepts.

Comparison

of the Two Models

23-25 Points

The comparison of the two models is clear,

compelling, and directly related to the models,

demonstrating a sophisticated understanding of

course concepts, analysis, critical thinking, and

synthesis.

20-22 Points

The comparison of the two models is clear,

and is directly related to the models,

demonstrating a good understanding

of course concepts, analysis, critical

thinking, and synthesis.

17-19 Points

The comparison of the two models is related to the

models; demonstrates adequate

understanding of course concepts, analysis, and

critical thinking.

15-16 Points

The comparison of the two models may not

be clear, may not be directly related to the

models; and/or may not demonstrate

adequate understanding of course

concepts, analysis, and critical thinking.

0-14 Points

Few or no comparisons are provided.

25

Conclusion

9-10 Points

Conclusion is convincing,

effective and drawn from the paper.

Demonstrates sophisticated analysis and

critical thinking.

8 Points

Conclusion is

effective and relevant. Demonstrates

analysis and critical thinking.

7 Points

Conclusion is

provided and is relevant.

6 Points

Conclusion is

somewhat effective and/or relevant.

0-5 Points

No conclusion

provided, or minimal effort demonstrated.

10

11/24/2016 4

External Research

9-10 Points

Three scholarly sources other

than the class resources are incorporated and

used effectively, contextualized, appropriately

researched and supported, and synthesized with

original arguments.

Sources used are credible, relevant, and

timely. Proper APA style is used for citations and

references.

8 Points

Three scholarly sources other

than the class resources are incorporated

and used effectively, appropriately

researched and supported, and support original

arguments. Sources used

are credible, relevant, and timely. Proper

APA style is used for citations and

references.

7 Points

Three scholarly sources other than

the class resources are properly incorporated and

used. Uses APA format for references and

citations.

6 Points

Three or fewer sources other

than the class resources may be used; may

not be scholarly sources; may not be properly

incorporated or used to support arguments; may

rely too heavily on the reporting

of external sources, and/or are not effective

or appropriate; and/or are not credible,

relevant, or timely. May not use APA format.

0-5 Points

No external research is

incorporated or reference listed is not

cited within text.

10

Format

9-10 Points

Paper reflects

effective organization and sophisticated

writing; follows instructions provided; is

written in third person; uses

correct structure, grammar, and

spelling; double- spaced and presented in a

professional format using Word.

8 Points

Paper reflects

effective

organization; follows

instructions

provided; is

written in third person; has few

errors in

sentence structure,

grammar, and

spelling; double-spaced,

and presented

in a professional

format.

7 Points

Paper has some

organization; may

have some errors in sentence

structure,

grammar and

spelling. Is double spaced and

written in third

person.

6 Points

Paper is not well

organized,

and/or contains several

grammar

and/or spelling

errors; and/or is not double-

spaced and

written in third person.

0-5 Points

Paper is very

poorly

written, has many

grammar

and/or

spelling errors, or

does not

convey the information.

10

TOTAL

Points Possible

100