Assessment Brief: Innovative Multimedia; refer/defer coursework

Module Leader: Level:

Charles Boisvert 6
Module Name: Module Code:
Innovative Multimedia 55-602067
Assignment Title:
Project Presentation
Individual / Group Weighting: Magnitude: presentation, 20-30
Group 60% minutes; reflection
Submission date/time: Blackboard submission Y Format: e.g. Word, Excel, PowerPoint,
30 June 2022 Turnitin submission N source code, digital media.
Planned feedback date: Mode of feedback: oral, at In-module retrieval available: Yes/No
21 July 2022 presentation time;

Module Learning Outcomes

 Describe in appropriate detail and critically evaluate processes by which products ---
especially multimedia products --- are conceived and created.
 Access and interpret information from a range of sources, including professional and
research-oriented publications.
 Give analytical descriptions of new technologies that are likely to play a part in multimedia
production or products in the near future, including how they relate to other existing
and/or new technologies

Re-Assessment: difference with the assessment brief

The purpose of the reassessment is to enable you to show the same skills as your colleagues who completed
coursework during the academic year. Therefore, it is essentially the same problem. This section explains the
differences that result from working later and on your own.

- You have no team to work with. The number of functionalities to develop is normally “6, 4 of which
make the application novel”, as described in the original brief for students working on their own.
- There are no progress points; as they were formative, this makes no difference to marking
- Presentation format. A live (face to face or digital) presentation could be organised, but an alternative is
a recording, in either video form or using presentation software, then uploaded to cloud storage to
share. Include a link to the presentation with your submission.
- Evidence. If some of the evidence is redundant with a presentation, you do not need to provide the
same information twice. For example, presentation slides might be available through a recording, and if
they are legible, there is no need to also include them as a separate file.
- A working server. The homepages.shu.ac.uk server remains available. As distance makes it difficult to
use, and particularly to receive support; so two alternatives are acceptable:
o Use a cloud server. Availability and quality of free servers varies, but during this academic year
(2021-22) the https://pantheon.io service has been effective (including its free plan).
o Demonstrate your site from a server running on a personal computer. In this case, you need to
make it clear that your server is working. For example, a video demonstration of your site must
include indications of the server you are using.
- Describing your contribution to the project. There is no teamwork – instead your reflection should be on
the difference between developing alone and developing in a team: how do you have to adapt to
working alone?
The brief below and marking criteria remain as per the coursework, except for the differences explained above.

It is repeated here:

Assessment Brief

Your Coursework assignment will be carried out in a team. Each team should be made up of 3-4 members (no more
than 4). You are free to form teams with colleagues of your choice.
During November your team should be fully formed and have an application idea to propose. It is recommended you
discuss with your colleagues what team(s) you wish to form as soon as possible. Please see the tutor as soon as
possible in case of difficulty finding a team to join.
This is a GROUP-WORK BASED assessment with provision for INDIVIDUAL MARKS. This means that all team members
are to contribute towards designing and development of the deliverable. Each member of the team is required to
take part in the designing and development of the application. Marks will be given individually according to your
respective contribution, based on the team’s work, peer-reviews, and your proven contribution.
The Application
Your task is to design and develop a novel multimedia application using various technologies. As a theme to invite
you to develop a novel idea, the module will give multiple examples of data visualisation.
The application (or product that encapsulates an application) does not have to be totally unique in the world, but
there must be clear evidence of original thinking as to how the application or the technology solutions to implement
it. To ensure that the application is of the standard expected at your level, there is a minimum number of
functionalities depending on the number of members in the team.
For a team of… A minimum of… Out of which…
1-2 members 6 functionalities 4 make the application novel
3 members 9 functionalities 6 make the application novel
4 members 12 functionalities 9 make the application novel

Agile software development methods (such as the SCRUM framework) are reputed to facilitate innovation in the
design and development of applications. It also provides well for dealing with uncertainty. As such you will be using
the SCRUM framework to implement your application.
The assessment’s final submission will be in March 2022, but to support your progress over the academic year, you
will be asked to show your plans and your work in progress in earlier, formative progress points.
 Progress points will address your ideas, the functionalities you are identifying, the key technologies needed
to implement them, the state of your progress and current problems you are facing. This will be shown to
your tutors, in class, and dates of this will be chosen with you.
 Summative, final presentation: a presentation of your prototype application, the steps (SCRUM ‘sprints’) that
led to its realisation, the technical solutions adopted and difficulties met.
Formative progress points
Though formative progress points are not formally marked, your engagement in formative work will be essential to
succeed; you will not succeed at the summative assessment without formative experience.
The dates of progress points will be chosen with your team and with tutors. The state of progress of your project will
change, and so do the expectations: at the start, you do not need to have started developing the application, and it is
normal to have no evidence of development to present; as time progresses, elements of the application prototype to
present; need to be presented at this stage (in the second part of the assessment you will present the application)

All the team members are expected to take part in the progress points. Information does not need to be submitted
online, but feedback will be given immediately after. Part of the feedback will include agreeing on the list of
functionalities (in the form of user stories) and updating them where needed. These will form the requirements to
base the final presentation.
Final (summative) assessment

Your assessment will be to present the application prototype supported by written documentation, aimed at
convincing of the feasibility of your idea. You are required to design and develop a prototype to demonstrate.

and the ones the Tutor will refer to when marking the application. You will be free to replace the requirements but it
will have to be like for like. Any changes to the requirements will have to be discussed with the Tutor first.

Presentation

You will present your application idea and demonstrate the prototype. The focus of the presentation should be on
explaining

a) The idea for your application.

b) How the user stories are supported by functionalities you developed (note that only those user stories agreed
with all team members will be considered).
c) The functionalities and how they make the application novel. Each member of the team will present the
functionalities they implemented, the technologies they used to implement them, and the steps you have taken
and problems you have resolved through their development.
d) You must make it is clear precisely what functions are successfully implemented, partially implemented (and to
what extent), or not implemented by you at all but are demonstrated through simulation images or shown to
work elsewhere.

You do not have to implement every feature of your application. Where you can implement features, do so (any say
so in your presentation). Where you cannot implement features, you may show in image mockup or as a simulation.
Where you cannot even simulate features, or visually it is clearer to use footage from another source, you can
“prove” that your technology combinations can work together by showing and explaining examples from other
sources. Your presentation effectively is to make a pitch to technical evaluators, to convince them of the feasibility of
your ideas. Clearly, if the ideas are working/implemented then they are more convincing. But you can also
demonstrate the feasibility of an idea by relating it to existing products, as evidenced by you making a careful
evaluation of third-party examples.

The presentation is to run from between 20 and 30 minutes. Tutors present will ask you about your proposed
application

Every member of the team must take part in the presentation unless one has accepted extenuating circumstances. A
team member is awarded 0(zero)% for presentation if they do not participate in the presentation . A mark of 0(zero)
% is also awarded to a team member for Technologies Implemented and Functionalities Implemented if no evidence
is provided for implementation of functionality.

Because the presentations may well be used by you to get employment etc, it is advised that all members of the
group appear on screen at some point, and are named. End credits with photos can be used. You are all students
likely to work in the creative media environments. Ensure your presentations are appropriately intelligent,
intelligible and informative. Use this assignment to showcase yourself well.

Supporting Evidence

Each group is required to

 Upload their application onto a server and include the URL together with the rest of the evidence. (All you
need to do is to copy and paste the URL into a document in the folder which contains the rest of the
evidence).
 Provide one folder of evidence (this is not an individual task). The folder is to include the prototype files, the
supporting evidence, the URL of the application, and the presentation.
You need to include documentary evidence for each and every claim stated within the presentation about the
technical achievements or information investigation made by the project group members. For example, if you state
that your application reads data from source x and displays it via method y, you must evidence this as fact. To link to
the evidence from your presentation you can do one of

 Provide a full transcript script of the presentation, with end-notes or footnotes providing references to the folder
of evidence
 Provide on-screen (or on-page) buttons that reference electronically items in your folder of evidence
 Provide pop-up panels that provide the discussion evidence directly on screen at relevant times.

Evidence will mostly be one of

 URL and screenshot of a section of a web source, highlighting the fact claimed.
 Screenshot of a data source, key steps in source code, screenshot of output of an algorithm you have written
 Test plan and test results of your application, possibly with photos of actual use

Each member of the group should produce a short (1 page) reflection including:

 A critical evaluation of the potential for success of the novel application proposed Would it actually work? Would
be viable? Why? What would you do differently?
 A critical evaluation of the application of the SCRUM framework or the development model you used - Was it a
success? Why? - Would you use the SCRUM framework or development model again? Why?
 A discussion on the technical platform and technologies used in the project -Were the platform and technologies
used for the project appropriate? Why? What would you do differently?
 A critical evaluation of your individual contribution to the project and the learning achieved throughout -What
did you contribute? What did you learned? What skills did you developed? How this contribute (or not) to your
development? What would you do differently next time?

These assessments will be used as guides by the assessors in the allocation of marks to individuals.

A content area Assessment has been created to access all the information you need for the Coursework Assessment.
In this area you will also find the link to submit your assignment documents.

Reminder

You do not have to create and present a fully working final product. The presentation should aim to show that your
idea is thought-through, and that its pieces will work together. It is better to prove that a piece works if you can
demonstrate a working prototype of that piece, but there are other ways of evidencing workability, such as referring
to literature examples.

Group Member Contribution

The default assumption for this assessment is that all the members of the group will have contributed equally and
should therefore receive the same mark. Alternatively, you may choose to allocate the individual contribution pro-
rata amongst yourselves. In either case, you will need to download the "Group Member Contribution" form available
from the Assessment folder on Blackboard and submit it through the link Group Member Contribution in the section
Assessment.

Notes:

One member of the group submits the report. Please help the tutors by making sure you do not submit more than
once. Also, make sure that the names and student numbers of all members in the group are clearly indicated.

Each member of the group submits the reflection and the Group Member Contribution form.
Assessment Criteria
FAIL THIRD LOWER UPPER FIRST
(insufficient) (sufficient) SECOND SECOND (excellent)
(good) (very good)
Z L M Ma Low Mid H L M H Lo M H Lo Mi H Exce Perf
e o id rgi 3rd i o i ig w i i w d ig ption ect
r w F nal 3rd g w d h 2.1 d g 1st 1s h al 1st
o ai Fail h 2 2 h t 1 1st
F l 3 2 . . 2 2 st
a r . 2 2 . .
il d 2 1 1
Criteri
a and
<19 20-39 40-49 50-59 60–69 70-84 85+
weighti
ng
Feasi There Evidence for Evidence of all The All / most As per
bility was little some of the the technical prototype key requirements for
and evidence technical claims were has been technical 70-79% with a
Novel to claims had to provided and developed claims are reasonable
ty of support be sought. are from to sufficient correctly prospect that the
Applic the The idea of different extent to evidenced University
ation technical the existing show that though a Innovation team
(20%)
claims application applications the ideas mix of would be
made. was adopted have been practical interested in
The from more researched proof and taking this idea
whole than one and are references forward
idea was application workable. to the
adopted Idea has literature.
from a been Evidence
single adopted provided
applicati from does not
on existing point to
applications any
but has existing
been applicatio
customised n
for own
prototype


Functi Up to At least half At least three At least At least All the

onaliti half of of the quarters of the three three functionalities are
es the functionalitie functionalities quarters of quarters fully implemented
Imple function s of the are fully the of the including the
 FAIL THIRD LOWER UPPER FIRST
(insufficient) (sufficient) SECOND SECOND (excellent)
(good) (very good)
Z L M Ma Low Mid H L M H Lo M H Lo Mi H Exce Perf
e o id rgi 3rd i o i ig w i i w d ig ption ect
r w F nal 3rd g w d h 2.1 d g 1st 1s h al 1st
o ai Fail h 2 2 h t 1 1st
F l 3 2 . . 2 2 st
a r . 2 2 . .
il d 2 1 1
Criteri
a and
<19 20-39 40-49 50-59 60–69 70-84 85+
weighti
ng
mente alities prototype implemented. functionaliti functionali linking to two or
d are fully are fully The rest of the es are fully ties are more data sources
(30%) impleme implemented functionalities implemente fully one of which is
nted. Up . At least half are simulated. d and the implement open data. The
to half of of the At least two prototype ed and majority of
the remaining technologies links to at prototypes functionalities
remainin functionalitie used least one links to which make
g s are implement data source. two data application novel
function simulated. At functionality/ie The sources have been
alities least one s which remaining one of implemented
are technology make/s functionaliti which is
simulate used application es are open data.
d implement novel simulated. The
functionality At least remaining
/ies which three functionali
makes technologie ties are
application s used simulated.
novel implement At least
functionality four
/ies which technologi
make/s es used
application implement
novel functionali
ty/ies
which
make/s
applicatio
n novel


Quality Little or Some Evidence is Of all the Of all the A variety of

of no evidence presented with evidence evidence sources presented
Resea evidence presented most of it provided at provided as evidence. The
 FAIL THIRD LOWER UPPER FIRST
(insufficient) (sufficient) SECOND SECOND (excellent)
(good) (very good)
Z L M Ma Low Mid H L M H Lo M H Lo Mi H Exce Perf
e o id rgi 3rd i o i ig w i i w d ig ption ect
r w F nal 3rd g w d h 2.1 d g 1st 1s h al 1st
o ai Fail h 2 2 h t 1 1st
F l 3 2 . . 2 2 st
a r . 2 2 . .
il d 2 1 1
Criteri
a and
<19 20-39 40-49 50-59 60–69 70-84 85+
weighti
ng
rch provided only after being in the least two at least evidence
and . Little or being probed form of URLs are journal two are comprises of
Suppo no for it of websites articles journal journal article and
rting evidence articles. books which are
Eviden that You less than 5 years
ce research critically old and URLs of
(10%) carried evaluated websites
out the
implement
ation of
technologi
es by
other
people


Techn Two or At least At least four At least five All All technologies
ologie less three technologies technologie technologi taught on the
s technolo technologies taught on the s taught on es taught modules used to
Imple gies taught on module (or the module on the implement plus
mente taught the similar) used (or similar) modules other technologies
d on the module(or to implement used to are the student was
(20%) module( similar) used prototype. implement implement not aware of or
or to Prototype prototype. ed never used before
similar) implement integrates including
used to prototype gamification gamificati
impleme proposal on
nt
prototyp
e

 FAIL THIRD LOWER UPPER FIRST
(insufficient) (sufficient) SECOND SECOND (excellent)
(good) (very good)
Z L M Ma Low Mid H L M H Lo M H Lo Mi H Exce Perf
e o id rgi 3rd i o i ig w i i w d ig ption ect
r w F nal 3rd g w d h 2.1 d g 1st 1s h al 1st
o ai Fail h 2 2 h t 1 1st
F l 3 2 . . 2 2 st
a r . 2 2 . .
il d 2 1 1
Criteri
a and
<19 20-39 40-49 50-59 60–69 70-84 85+
weighti
ng
Prese Presenta Presentation Presentation Presentatio Accomplis Clear and insightful
ntation tion of idea does was well n was well hed business plan and
(10%) uncoordi not have a coordinated structured, presentati prototype.
nated, proper and idea coordinated on. Presented a
verbose, structure but clearly and clear. Structure convincing case for
difficult is presented but No further is funding a full
to understanda further details had coherent business plan.
understa ble. Some information to be and
nd. A lot Details about had to be sought. content is
of detail functionality sought. failed Answered relevant.
about and to answer all questions Language
function supporting questions used is
ality and evidence appropriat
supporti missing e, clear
ng and
evidence concise
missing


Individ Poor Reflection Clear Very Insightful Excellent critical

ual reflectio addresses reflection; objective reflection evaluation. Actions
Assign n. some conveys reflection that clearly explained
ment Contribu relevant important critically discusses and backed up by
(10%) tions aspects of knowledge evaluating knowledge examples and
made the project developed the of the justified Depth of
towards carried out pertaining to successes domain learning fully
develop but weak or e-business and and that has demonstrated.
ment of no related challenges been CPD requirements
prototyp justification technologies. encountere developed clearly identified
e not for the Clear reflection d. Where , and and evaluated
clear. business on individual challenges reflects on
Learning proposal or contribution were the
achieved its technical and learning encountere lessons
 FAIL THIRD LOWER UPPER FIRST
(insufficient) (sufficient) SECOND SECOND (excellent)
(good) (very good)
Z L M Ma Low Mid H L M H Lo M H Lo Mi H Exce Perf
e o id rgi 3rd i o i ig w i i w d ig ption ect
r w F nal 3rd g w d h 2.1 d g 1st 1s h al 1st
o ai Fail h 2 2 h t 1 1st
F l 3 2 . . 2 2 st
a r . 2 2 . .
il d 2 1 1
Criteri
a and
<19 20-39 40-49 50-59 60–69 70-84 85+
weighti
ng
not implementa achieved. d explained learned in
identifie tion. how these the
d Individual were process of
contribution overcome designing
is unclear, as and
is reflection developing
on individual the
learning. applicatio
n.

Overal
l
mark: