ATAR Notes: Forum
Archived Discussion => Technology => 2012 => End-of-year exams => Exam Discussion => Victoria => IT: Software Development => Topic started by: MJRomeo81 on November 16, 2012, 03:56:02 pm
-
How did you go? What was the case study like this year?
-
Smashed it, maybe... Sort of. I dunno... Managed to finish with 15 mins to spare, but they had some mean questions.
The algorithm questions where pretty generous although they weren't worth many marks and I'm not sure if writing a chunk of code is an acceptable solution given the question. Also not too confidant with a context diagram in the case study and not 100% sure I wrote my pseudo code correctly where they asked us to actually make our own following instructions in section B. But overall I don't think I could have lost many marks if any at all.
I can scan the case study insert if you want? Otherwise I have no copies of the exam unfortunatly.
-
The case study section asked you to fill in a UCD (first time ever) and a DFD (first in a long time). What was your answer to the DFD and UCD? Also, the test table asked for values to test the requirements form 3000 to 3999, what values did you provide? Does that imply inclusive, exclusive or one of each?
-
For test values I did above the range, below it, within it and edge values. UCD, I can't remember exactaly. There was no "DFD" it was a context diagram, which is like a DFD but a little difference. Well the only DFD was in the case study insert. What's the difference between a DFD and contrxt diagram? I was a little sketchy on that myself. I know gor one context diagrams shouldn't have data stores. I don't know if my validate process should have been added though.. That was one I didn't like. The other thing I added was data going to the CASSA from the AQADAS. A control signal I think that was. I think I definatly spent the most time on that context diagram. Both when I did my first run through and later when I was going over thing I went straight there and spent some time on it. It was doing my head in. I think it was worth 3 marks as well, so hopefully VCAA are kind enough when giving them out.
-
The other thing I added was data going to the CASSA from the AQADAS. A control signal I think that was. I think I definatly spent the most time on that context diagram. B
I was thinking that but the control signal comes from the mobile phone. If you use the DFD to help you, the only thing coming to/from the CASSA was the sensor_data.
Therefore all i added was the other data flow from an unknown source, symptom data. Added an external entity (asthmatic) and then the line with arrow head and I think that's 3 marks. May be two but can't see where else you can add something.
I feel like I went really well, max of a just a tiny number of marks lost, but it really is hard to tell. Some multi-choice i think were really borderline between two choices and some you may have had to know some official characteristics of a term whereas my version is wrong. I really hope I didn't make more than a few errors in each section, high 80s at least, but it really is hard to tell.
I think I'll still get an A+ which was 77% last year...
-
Oh sorry didn't answer you MJRomeo81,
Case study about researchers at Bigton researching asthma patients and their episodes in locations in Melbourne. Started off with some UCD/CD/DFD stuff, quite a bit at the start actually. Otherwise it kinda just progressed through the PSM, pretty standard (if you consider last year standard). Really can't remember what type of questions were ask, just questions about PSM really.
-
The other thing I added was data going to the CASSA from the AQADAS. A control signal I think that was. I think I definatly spent the most time on that context diagram. B
I was thinking that but the control signal comes from the mobile phone. If you use the DFD to help you, the only thing coming to/from the CASSA was the sensor_data.
Well I took the mobile phone as being a part of the AQADAS then from the diagram at the bottom of the first page I thought, aw ok, control signal. They didn't just tell us to use the DFD to fill out the Context diagram, I'm pretty sure they said you can also include anything else from within the case study. Talking about which, I just scanned it.
I'm sure most people still have their copy but for the benefit of those who didn't do the exam or didn't keep it. I have it attached here.
It's pretty much got one of the question their on the last page where we had to discuss advantages with each user interface I think and ultimate decide which one was best and justify why. I said the first one given if would fit the mobiles screen resolution as buttons are a lot safer and simpler for someone who will apparently be entering data whilst having an asthma attack. Also buttons for so few options in my opinion is always a nice choice to make.
-
The other thing I added was data going to the CASSA from the AQADAS. A control signal I think that was. I think I definatly spent the most time on that context diagram. B
I was thinking that but the control signal comes from the mobile phone. If you use the DFD to help you, the only thing coming to/from the CASSA was the sensor_data.
Well I took the mobile phone as being a part of the AQADAS then from the diagram at the bottom of the first page I thought, aw ok, control signal. They didn't just tell us to use the DFD to fill out the Context diagram, I'm pretty sure they said you can also include anything else from within the case study. Talking about which, I just scanned it.
I'm sure most people still have their copy but for the benefit of those who didn't do the exam or didn't keep it. I have it attached here.
It's pretty much got one of the question their on the last page where we had to discuss advantages with each user interface I think and ultimate decide which one was best and justify why. I said the first one given if would fit the mobiles screen resolution as buttons are a lot safer and simpler for someone who will apparently be entering data whilst having an asthma attack. Also buttons for so few options in my opinion is always a nice choice to make.
Well the AQADAS was the data server or whatever (I think) so did the control signal wouldn't actually interact with the AQADAS. Also made sense that because it the AQADAS only had 2 data flows in and none out (excluding the bit at the and with department or whatever) so I don't think control signal is right.
I chose phone 1 because it would be faster to enter in everything when it's on the one screen rather than extra menus. Also very effective data as it's all buttons etc and you can't incorrectly enter in data.
-
The case study section asked you to fill in a UCD (first time ever) and a DFD (first in a long time). What was your answer to the DFD and UCD? Also, the test table asked for values to test the requirements form 3000 to 3999, what values did you provide? Does that imply inclusive, exclusive or one of each?
I did 2999, 3000, 3001 and 3999. That tests all boundaries, expected data and invalid data.
-
The case study section asked you to fill in a UCD (first time ever) and a DFD (first in a long time). What was your answer to the DFD and UCD? Also, the test table asked for values to test the requirements form 3000 to 3999, what values did you provide? Does that imply inclusive, exclusive or one of each?
I did 2999, 3000, 3001 and 3999. That tests all boundaries, expected data and invalid data.
Didn't we have 5? I think I did 2999, 3000. 3500, 3999 and 4000. My short term memory is so bad. If anyone ever needs me to help them out in a life of death memory card matching game or something, you're done for.
-
The case study section asked you to fill in a UCD (first time ever) and a DFD (first in a long time). What was your answer to the DFD and UCD? Also, the test table asked for values to test the requirements form 3000 to 3999, what values did you provide? Does that imply inclusive, exclusive or one of each?
I did 2999, 3000, 3001 and 3999. That tests all boundaries, expected data and invalid data.
Didn't we have 5? I think I did 2999, 3000. 3500, 3999 and 4000. My short term memory is so bad. If anyone ever needs me to help them out in a life of death memory card matching game or something, you're done for.
Nope 4 test data.
-
I was pretty pleased with the exam. The programming focus was a bit better than previous years too.
I'm also pretty happy with the last two questions of section B - actually having to write out some pseudocode.
-
If you are sure of that I think now we may both lose a mark. You're 3001 in that case should have been a 4000. Then my 3500, which I am sure for 1 that I wrote down should have been that 2999 that I'm not entirely sure I wrote down. Well, unless the assessors are very generous with accepting answers that still have a sensible justification.
-
If you are sure of that I think now we may both lose a mark. You're 3001 in that case should have been a 4000. Then my 3500, which I am sure for 1 that I wrote down should have been that 2999 that I'm not entirely sure I wrote down. Well, unless the assessors are very generous with accepting answers that still have a sensible justification.
Well everything you wrote is right, it's just that they asked for 4 things not 5.... 4000 and 2999 have the same purpose so you are right it's just I don't see how you wrote 5 down...
-
I was pretty pleased with the exam. The programming focus was a bit better than previous years too.
I'm also pretty happy with the last two questions of section B - actually having to write out some pseudocode.
Yeah that annoyed me. I'm not sure I did the best job for that. I think I just pretty much made temporary vales to equal length and width then made each of them take on the temporary value of the other so that they swap. I didn't really include much in the way of control structure. Just had the above described within and Begin and End statement. ;D
-
If you are sure of that I think now we may both lose a mark. You're 3001 in that case should have been a 4000. Then my 3500, which I am sure for 1 that I wrote down should have been that 2999 that I'm not entirely sure I wrote down. Well, unless the assessors are very generous with accepting answers that still have a sensible justification.
Well everything you wrote is right, it's just that they asked for 4 things not 5.... 4000 and 2999 have the same purpose so you are right it's just I don't see how you wrote 5 down...
I mustn't have. I defiantly didn't add anything extra. I so maybe I didn't include the 2999. My brain is on holiday now though so you'll have to wait till it's back before I can be sure. :P
-
I was pretty pleased with the exam. The programming focus was a bit better than previous years too.
I'm also pretty happy with the last two questions of section B - actually having to write out some pseudocode.
Yeah that annoyed me. I'm not sure I did the best job for that. I think I just pretty much made temporary vales to equal length and width then made each of them take on the temporary value of the other so that they swap. I didn't really include much in the way of control structure. Just had the above described within and Begin and End statement. ;D
Begin
A <- 1
B <- 2
Repeat
A <- A + A
B <- B + 1
Until A >= B
End
Did that with same indentation as the pseudo code question later in section C.
-
I was pretty pleased with the exam. The programming focus was a bit better than previous years too.
I'm also pretty happy with the last two questions of section B - actually having to write out some pseudocode.
Yeah that annoyed me. I'm not sure I did the best job for that. I think I just pretty much made temporary vales to equal length and width then made each of them take on the temporary value of the other so that they swap. I didn't really include much in the way of control structure. Just had the above described within and Begin and End statement. ;D
Begin
A <- 1
B <- 2
Repeat
A <- A + A
B <- B + 1
Until A >= B
End
Did that with same indentation as the pseudo code question later in section C.
I was talking about the other question. But was that one greater than or equal to? -_-
-
I was talking about the other question. But was that one greater than or equal to? -_-
Yes it was.
-
I was talking about the other question. But was that one greater than or equal to? -_-
Yes it was.
I should probably take your word for that but... I want to at least be able to go to bed tonight dreaming of a 50, so I better not dig to much into everything which I may have already. ::)
-
The case study section asked you to fill in a UCD (first time ever) and a DFD (first in a long time). What was your answer to the DFD and UCD? Also, the test table asked for values to test the requirements form 3000 to 3999, what values did you provide? Does that imply inclusive, exclusive or one of each?
I did 2999, 3000, 3001 and 3999. That tests all boundaries, expected data and invalid data.
The conditions were <3000 and >3999 so my test data was:
- 2999 (<3000)
- 3000 (=3000 AND <3999) [Lower Bound]
- 3999 (=3900 AND > 3000) [Upper Bound]
- 4000 (>3999)
Your test data doesn't account for >3999
-
The case study section asked you to fill in a UCD (first time ever) and a DFD (first in a long time). What was your answer to the DFD and UCD? Also, the test table asked for values to test the requirements form 3000 to 3999, what values did you provide? Does that imply inclusive, exclusive or one of each?
I did 2999, 3000, 3001 and 3999. That tests all boundaries, expected data and invalid data.
The conditions were <3000 and >3999 so my test data was:
- 2999 (<3000)
- 3000 (=3000 AND <3999) [Lower Bound]
- 3999 (=3900 AND > 3000) [Upper Bound]
- 4000 (>3999)
Your test data doesn't account for >3999
Okay well 2999 and 4000 serve the same purpose in my reasoning because they're both invalid data. 3000 and 3999 are borderline, there needs to be something in between. This is were i think reasoning comes in because generally you want before lower border, lower borer, inbetween borders, upper border and above upper border.
Technically 3000 and 3999 are both in the allowed values so they would count as just one.
-
3000 and 3999 are between?
-
3000 and 3999 are between?
Well technically anything below 3000 and above 3999 isn't in the allowed values so as those 2 are, they technically would serve the same purpose. The border is really not existent as it's not an equal to sign.
My reasoning for just using 2999 and not 4000 was that it was enough to test invalid data.
-
It's not simply to test "invalid data" as a value. You have to test all conditions. You need to make sure that anything under 3000 and over 3999 are invalid. If you don't test over 3999, how do you know that if someone inputs a number over 3999, like 4000, that it's going to return the correct value? There could be a logic error or something that you will never know because you didn't test it.
The boundaries are between: 2999 and 4000 at a minimum.
You need to test at least one value above and below to test both conditions, and at least two between.
-
It's not simply to test "invalid data" as a value. You have to test all conditions. You need to make sure that anything under 3000 and over 3999 are invalid. If you don't test over 3999, how do you know that if someone inputs a number over 3999, like 4000, that it's going to return the correct value? There could be a logic error or something that you will never know because you didn't test it.
The boundaries are between: 2999 and 4000 at a minimum.
You need to test at least one value above and below to test both conditions, and at least two between.
I used 2999 as my test and invalid data as my reasoning. I should be fine imo
-
It's not simply to test "invalid data" as a value. You have to test all conditions. You need to make sure that anything under 3000 and over 3999 are invalid. If you don't test over 3999, how do you know that if someone inputs a number over 3999, like 4000, that it's going to return the correct value? There could be a logic error or something that you will never know because you didn't test it.
The boundaries are between: 2999 and 4000 at a minimum.
You need to test at least one value above and below to test both conditions, and at least two between.
I used 2999 as my test and invalid data as my reasoning. I should be fine imo
We'll see. In my eyes you didn't test all conditions.
-
It's not simply to test "invalid data" as a value. You have to test all conditions. You need to make sure that anything under 3000 and over 3999 are invalid. If you don't test over 3999, how do you know that if someone inputs a number over 3999, like 4000, that it's going to return the correct value? There could be a logic error or something that you will never know because you didn't test it.
The boundaries are between: 2999 and 4000 at a minimum.
You need to test at least one value above and below to test both conditions, and at least two between.
I used 2999 as my test and invalid data as my reasoning. I should be fine imo
We'll see. In my eyes you didn't test all conditions.
Well i think that you need something between 3000 and 3999 which is expected, usual, non-boundary values.
-
It's not simply to test "invalid data" as a value. You have to test all conditions. You need to make sure that anything under 3000 and over 3999 are invalid. If you don't test over 3999, how do you know that if someone inputs a number over 3999, like 4000, that it's going to return the correct value? There could be a logic error or something that you will never know because you didn't test it.
The boundaries are between: 2999 and 4000 at a minimum.
You need to test at least one value above and below to test both conditions, and at least two between.
I used 2999 as my test and invalid data as my reasoning. I should be fine imo
We'll see. In my eyes you didn't test all conditions.
Well i think that you need something between 3000 and 3999 which is expected, usual, non-boundary values.
I would agree with you if the boundaries were : <= 3000 and >= 3999.