Programme description, pseudo code and actual code of application should show the working of the application.

 

 

Foundations in Programming - Assignment 2
Individual Coursework – 60% Hand out Date: Friday 06th March 2017
This is an individual piece of work due on 07th April 2017.
This assignment consist of a practical task, set to demonstrate key programming
concepts, data structures and pseudo code problems solving techniques gained from
the understanding of logical principles taught on this module; and also, a self- reflective commentary on the subject studied. This assignment will assess the
following module learning outcomes:
1. An appreciation of the use of pseudo code in the development of computer
software and to be able to develop relevant algorithms and to design relevant
data structures to solve a range of different practical problems.
2. An appreciation of the skills requirements for computing programming.
This assignment has two sections (A&B). Section A requires students to develop a
Zodic sign programmer and Section B is about a critical self-reflective commentary
on task A. Section A
Question
Make a program in VB.Net that asks for the user's birthday. The program should
return the day of the week the person was born, age and astrological star sign. Add
the Zodiac Sign images to the picturebox and a textbox to present their respective
characteristics (e.g. planet, time of birth, zodic sign). The images and text should
change according to the date of birth.
You are required to design a project called Zodic_Sign_2017 similar to: 1|Pa ge © 2016 Roehampton University Deliverables:
Your programme should demonstrate the followings: Pseudocode
Flow chart
Code of the application including:
o Algorithm
o Layout and Structure
o Screen Shots of Design
o Correctness and Completeness
Programme Description
(250 Words) (5 Marks)
(5 Marks)
(5 Marks)
(5 Marks)
(5 Marks)
(5 Marks)
(20 Marks) (Marks: 50) Instructions
Guidance note for section A
Section- A will be assessed against the above-mentioned deliverables. Programme
description, pseudo code and actual code of application should show the working of
the application stepwise, displaying all the forms operating on different buttons with
error checks, exception handling, arrays and controls. A good set of answers will be well researched and presented, argued logically and
effectively, using examples from credible sources to illustrate your points and
2|Pa ge © 2016 Roehampton University referenced in line with the University of Roehampton’s Harvard Referencing
guidelines.
• All submission of coursework will be online via Turnitin on the module's Moodle site. • The Roehampton Harvard Referencing system should be used for any resources
used as part of your research. • Final submission deadline is 07th April 2017 @ 2:00pm. • Your student number MUST be included in your document on each page. • Word count: 250 words - guidance has been provided regarding recommended
word count (Deliverables) for each question. Section B
Your second task is to write a self-reflective commentary about your
application.
Having created your application, you should write a self-reflective commentary (750
words) critically reflecting on your work. You commentary should critically explore the
work you have done to produce your application. You should reflect on:
1. Your research as you produced your application.
2. The decisions you made as you worked on your portfolio.
3. Where you think you succeeded and where you think you could have room for
improvement.
4. What you would do differently if you were to attempt to do your application
again and what you would do with your portfolio if you could develop it further.
Your commentary should show evidence of your reading and research and use
Harvard referencing. Your commentary is a chance for you to critically analyse your
own work, showing an awareness of strengths as well as identifying potential areas,
which could use improvement if they were to be done again. Requirements Commentary
Critical Reflection 3|Pa ge (20 Marks)
(20 Marks)
© 2016 Roehampton University References (10 Marks)

You should attach your commentary to your submission. Submit one document to
Turnitin. Instructions
Guidance note for section B
It is expected that your answers will go beyond just stating points. To score high
marks, it is important that answers are explained and where possible, use relevant
examples.
A good set of answers will be well researched and presented, argued logically and
effectively, using examples from credible sources to illustrate your points and
referenced in line with the University of Roehampton’s Harvard Referencing
guidelines.
• All submission of coursework will be online via Turnitin on the module's Moodle site. • The Roehampton Harvard Referencing system should be used for any resources
used as part of your research. • Final submission deadline is 07th April 2017 @ 2pm. • Your student number MUST be included in your document on each page. • Word count: 750 words - guidance has been provided regarding recommended
word count for each question. Marking Schema
Section A & B will be marked according to the following marking schema: Use of a diverse range of number programming techniques where appropriate
Demonstration of an understanding of pseudo code, programming
environment, logical & arithmetic operators, controls and routines. 4|Pa ge © 2016 Roehampton University Evidence for research
Evidence for knowledge and application of relevant theory
Clearly presented and logically structured work
Use appropriate academic sources, referenced in accordance with the University of Roehampton’s Harvard Referencing guidelines:
http://www.roehampton.ac.uk/Referencing.aspx Formatting
You are required to provide a word document file of your assignment (for both
sections A & B), submitted via TunritIn on Moodle. Arial. Size 12
Word document (not a pdf)
1.5 line spacing Plagiarism
Plagiarism is presenting another person’s work as your own. When you include the
arguments, ideas, or theories of someone else, or use the words they have used and
present them as your own argument, then this is plagiarism. This can be written
words or may be an idea, an artefact, musical composition, choreography, image or
string of computer code etc..., dependent on your programme of study. The term
plagiarism is derived from the Latin Plagiarius, which means kidnapper. Plagiarism in
written work can occur intentionally (e.g. you copy a section from a book without
referencing it) or unintentionally (e.g. you paraphrase another person’s work or ideas
but fail to acknowledge them as the source).
A lack of awareness of the rules of referencing is not an acceptable excuse for
plagiarism so please double check all of your quotations and paraphrases and make
sure every source is listed correctly in your bibliography. Please note: just changing
one or two words somewhere in the quote does not mean it becomes your own work
and you do not need to reference it. This is still a form of plagiarism. Roehampton
University takes plagiarism very seriously. The following is taken from Section 5 of
the Student Disciplinary Regulations: a) No student shall represent the work of
another person as his or her own in any academic material submitted for
5|Pa ge © 2016 Roehampton University assessment. b) No student shall contribute any work to another student with the
knowledge that the latter may submit the work in part or whole as his or her own.
More about what is considered plagiarism can be found at Roehampton plagiarism
page http://core.roehampton.ac.uk/repository/content/subs /a.pietsch/a.pietsch656/HO Roehampton%20Referencing%20Guide%20 05 09 HTML/page 04.htm Generic Assessment Criteria
The University of Roehampton has developed a set of generic assessment criteria
which are show below. Marking guides for individual pieces of assessment will be
informed by these criteria.
Work of outstanding quality that is fluent and extremely well structured. The
80% + relevant issues are identified, completely understood and analysed with
originality with articulate synthesis where appropriate. Work will show a
familiarity with and critical use of a substantial range of sources that in
coursework would be fully and properly referenced as part of a high standard 70-79% of presentation.
[70% and over is equivalent to a first in degree classification.]
Work of excellent quality with a very clear structure and fluently written. The
relevant issues are identified and understood. There is a high degree of ability
in evaluating, criticising and producing well-reasoned argument in defence of
a point of view. Material will show evidence of a very good knowledge and
critical use of a substantial range of sources that in coursework are properly
referenced. There will be signs of creative originality and evidence of critical 60-69% independent thinking.
[Equivalent to an upper second in degree classification.]
There is evidence in the work of a very good ability to evaluate, criticise and
produce well-reasoned arguments in defence of a point of view. There is an
analytical approach to relevant material that includes use of secondary
material properly referenced in coursework. Work will show the ability to
identify and engage in the relevant issues within a clear and very well
organised structure. Presentation standards are high and the assessed task is 50-59%
6|Pa ge completed with a high degree of competence.
[Equivalent to a lower second in degree classification.]
Work is mainly descriptive but demonstrates a good coverage of relevant
© 2016 Roehampton University issues with occasional references to secondary material. Evidence exists of
an ability to produce arguments relative to the issues under focus but with
only limited, if adequate, evidence of an analytical, critical or evaluative
response. Material is presented with reasonable care and has a discernible
structure. The assessed task is completed competently but the work is largely
0-49% descriptive and lacks originality.
[Far below the standard required for a pass mark.]
It demonstrates that the work is extremely weak and seriously inadequate.
This will be because either the work is badly jumbled and incoherent in
content, or fails to draw on any research carried out to complete the tasks. It
will show very little evidence of learning or of an ability to analyse the work. 7|Pa ge © 2016 Roehampton University

• 1493350508-FoP - Assignment-2-PA-EE.docx

ComputerScienceExpert

(11)

Status NEW Posted 28 Apr 2017 03:04 AM My Price 9.00

-----------

Attachments

file 1493350508-Solutions file 2.docx preview (51 words )

H-----------ell-----------o S-----------ir/-----------Mad-----------am ----------- Th-----------ank----------- yo-----------u f-----------or -----------you-----------r i-----------nte-----------res-----------t a-----------nd -----------buy-----------ing----------- my----------- po-----------ste-----------d s-----------olu-----------tio-----------n. -----------Ple-----------ase----------- pi-----------ng -----------me -----------on -----------cha-----------t I----------- am----------- on-----------lin-----------e o-----------r i-----------nbo-----------x m-----------e a----------- me-----------ssa-----------ge -----------I w-----------ill----------- be----------- qu-----------ick-----------ly -----------onl-----------ine----------- an-----------d g-----------ive----------- yo-----------u e-----------xac-----------t f-----------ile----------- an-----------d t-----------he -----------sam-----------e f-----------ile----------- is----------- al-----------so -----------sen-----------t t-----------o y-----------our----------- em-----------ail----------- th-----------at -----------is -----------reg-----------ist-----------ere-----------d o-----------n -----------THI-----------S W-----------EBS-----------ITE-----------. ----------- Th-----------ank----------- yo-----------u -----------

Not Rated(0)

• Buy Answer