Project Plan Document [15 pts]

Your Team "Pitch"

The purpose of this project plan is to get you thinking about what you will do for the year-long project. Although you have a project option, the details of the project can vary widely, so it is important you decide on an appropriate scope for your team. This document serves as your "pitch" to the client so you can "sell" your ideas and features. Be creative and unique! Use this opportunity to impress your client.

What to Submit:

Expected Deliverable

You will create an .md file in your repo. All the content of your project plan will be there. When you are done, submit a PDF of the document on Canvas (for easier grading reasons - thank you!). Note: All text must be readable when printed.

As you flesh out the details of your project, you will need to scope the features and plan out who does what (at least at a high level). The goal is for you to go through the exercise of developing detailed functional requirements, talking with your teammates to identify what everyone wants to work on, and figuring out how each requirement should be tested. You will inevitably come across questions -- please ask when you are stuck!

After you submit the report -- I will gather the requirements from each team and cross-reference with what I have to develop a common set of core requirements for Milestones 1 and 2. You can update your system design (both the architecture diagram and the DFD) and your WBS based on the consolidated requirements.

Use this document template as your starting point for writing the project proposal. Be sure to adhere to the same section headings and expected length requirements. Read the instructions carefully and follow them closely. Don't include the instructions and examples in your report (I just want to read your project, not my instructions and examples again).

Evaluation Rubric

Total marks possible: 18 points.

Criteria Exceeds Expectations Meets Expectations Below Expectations No Submission
Scope, Usage Scenario, Proposed Solution, Technology Stack
 [3 pts] The scope is clear and covers the intended usage scenario completely for the intended user groups. The proposed solution has interesting and unique features. The solution has a strong value proposition. The use cases are detailed and offer good coverage. The technology proposed make sense and the solution is entirely feasible using the proposed technology stack. [2 pts] The scope is clear and covers the usage scenario minimally for the intended user groups. The proposed solution identifies the required features to build an adequate technical solution. The use cases are adequate and offer decent coverage. The technology proposed make sense and the solution is mostly feasible using the proposed technology stack. [0 pt] The scope is not clear and/or the description does not fully cover a usage scenario from start to end. Usage scenario for certain user groups are missing. The proposed solution seems incomplete. The use cases are inadequate. The technology proposed may not be the best choice for the problem at hand. The solution is mostly feasible using the proposed technology stack. [0 pt] Not provided, significant information is missing, or information provided does not fit what was asked.
Functional Requirements
[3 pts] The necessary functional requirements to cover the proposed technical solution are completely identified. [2 pts] The necessary functional requirements to cover the proposed technical solution are mostly identified. [1 pt] Many functional requirements are missing. [0 pt] Not provided, or significantly missing/erroneous.
Requirements Verification
 [3 pts] A test framework has been identified and makes sense to use. All the requirements have associated test cases that are well defined, testable, and automatable. Each requirement has good test case coverage. [2 pts] A test framework has been identified and makes sense to use. Most of the requirements have associated test cases that are well defined, testable, and automatable. Each requirement has good/decent test case coverage. [1 pt] The information about a test framework is missing or does not seem to make sense. Only some of the requirements have associated test cases that are well defined, testable, and automatable. Requirements do not have good test case coverage. [0 pt] Not provided or largely missing/erroneou.s
Proposed Workload Distribution
[3 pts] Everyone is assigned to a similar number of requirements for each level of difficulty. [1 pt] Not everyone is assigned to requirements, or not all requirements have people assigned to them. Alternatively, some people have all the "hard" requirements and some have all the "easy" requirements. [0 pt] Not provided or largely missing/erroneous.
Writing Quality
 [3 pts] Very professionally and concisely written. [2 pts] The report generally reads well and is coherent. [1 pt] The report has many mistakes (technical and grammatical), or is overly lengthy. [0 pt] Not clear at all.