For this activity, you will provide feedback on one or more other teams’ individual assignment specs. They will use this feedback to improve their specs.
Provide the following feedback. Some feedback covers multiple tasks (“global”), whereas other feedback covers an individual task.
For the following global feedback items, leave your feedback in one place at the beginning of the document. Comment on all items below (even if they are “good”).
Completeness. Are all teammates accounted for?
One file. Are all the team members’ specs in a single file?
Markdown PDF file. Is the specs file a PDF file that was generated from a Markdown file using VS Code’s Markdown PDF extension?
Followed template. Did the specs correctly use the Markdown template provided? In addition to providing global comments about this, you may also mark specific places where the template is not followed.
No shared tasks. Was each task assigned to exactly one team member?
For the following per-person feedback items, leave your feedback in one place at the beginning of each team member’s section. Comment on all items below (even if they are “good”).
Enough tasks. Does the team member appear to be taking on enough tasks? Do they have enough work for a respectable 3-week homework assignment? Each team member should have 4 days worth of work planned (24–32 person hours).
Substantial coding. Does the team member have at least two-thirds of their task time devoted to coding?
No A&B tasks. Were A&B tasks excluded from the team member’s tasks? Recall that A&B tasks, like creating the demo video, should not be included in the regular task specs.
For the following per-task feedback items, leave your feedback next to each task spec. Comment on all items below (even if they are “good”).
Clear task description. Is the task description clear about what the team member will be doing? For example, the reader must be able to understand what functionality is being implemented and what artifacts (classes, views, design documents, etc.) will need to be created or updated to implement that functionality. This also means that the reader will feel like they have a good handle on the scope of the task (how much effort it will require).
Sensible task description. Does it make sense to do the task in the way described?
Clear evaluation instructions. Are the how to evaluate instructions clear about the steps that the instructors will need to follow in order to evaluate the work?
Sensible evaluation instructions. Does it make sense to evaluate the task work that way?
Cross-references. Does the task spec cross-reference other planning and design documents to clarify what the task will involve.