Assignment - Responses to Mass Transit System (MTS) Design Peer Review
Scenario: You are continuing your work as part of a project team that has been directed to help improve the design of a Mass Transit Simulation (MTS) system that is being used to help model the behavior of the system to support business operations and decision-making. Recently, some of your peers reviewed your designs and provided you with feedback on your proposals. In this phase, you will review the feedback from your classmates, and provide responses to them that address the accuracy, relevance, and quality of their observations and suggestions.
Disclaimer: This scenario has been developed solely for this course. Any similarities or differences between this scenario and any of the programs at Georgia Tech programs are purely coincidental.
This assignment requires you to provide responses to the feedback that you received via the Peer Feedback system.
Requirement
- You received feedback on your design from three of your fellow classmates in a previous assignment. Now you are required to respond to the feedback that you received.
- After reviewing each of the three sets of feedback, your responses should:
(1) Address the quality of the feedback: did it provide reasonably well-written and substantive viewpoints?
(2) Do you agree or disagree with the feedback provided? If yes, address how it will change your design approach. If not, address why you disagree with the feedback provided in this case.
- You must provide clear, concise and comprehensive responses to the distinct aspects for each set of feedback that you were provided. By comprehensive, we mean that you need to address at least two of the most significant and distinct observations and suggestions ("aspects") that were provided. By concise, however, we mean that you do not need to provide multiple paragraphs for each observation and suggestion - a sentence or two will suffice.
- You will have an area to respond to each set of feedback that you received. We are not mandating as specific of a format as we did for the original Design Peer Review assignment. You have the option to format your responses in a more flowing, continuous manner; or, you can use a short-response bulleted style, if you feel that you can provide better responses with that format.
Evaluation
- **Each response will be worth approximately 16-17 points [50 points total], but the actual points per response might be redistributed based on the quality of the feedback.
- When we evaluate your responses, we will primarily evaluate whether you really took the time to review the feedback received and provide substantive responses.
- If you receive feedback that is of extremely poor quality (e.g. missing, not constructive, not informative to any significant degree, etc.), then you are welcome to return a response similar to "The feedback did not provide any constructive observations or suggestions".
- **Possible points redistribution: If you receive one or more sets of feedback of very poor quality, however, we will likely redistribute your points across the remaining higher-quality feedback.
- As with the original reviews, we will also award points for appropriately and effectively using the design-related terminology that you have been learning during the course from the SWEBOK, the various readings, Udacity videos, etc. (remember: quality of usage and relevance, not quantity).
- As with providing the original peer feedback, the way you express your response is important. Be as clear and concise as possible, but also be professional - avoid personal attacks and/or condescension in your response.
- Though we will deduct points for factually incorrect comments, we will not go to extreme lengths to agree or disagree with the subjective and/or stylistic nature of your responses.
- If you would like to correspond further with your peers about the feedback received or provided afterwards, feel free to do so. Please remember to be as professional as possible: software architects and designers often work on teams, and the ability to communicate while being both direct and respectful is often essential to success.
Closing Comments & Suggestions: We will likely conduct an Office Hours where you will be permitted to ask us questions further questions about the feedback. We are often asked to provide an "official solution" for the design phase once the due date has passed, but we are generally reluctant for various reasons.
This assignment offers, in some sense, the next best (or possibly better) option; and, allows you to develop your ability to review other's designs, while also receiving alternate feedback on your own.
Attachment:- Peer Feedback.rar