Project Activities (10% in final grade)

Project submissions
- Sprint retrospective action plan
- Sprint 3 release
- Sprint 3 demo
- Application implementation
  - Functionality
  - Unit tests and code coverage
  - Adherence to prescribed architecture and design principles
  - Code reviews
  - Code communication
Other dimensions
- Planning activities in Trello board
- GitHub use for version control
- Slack workspace use for team communication
- Individual team member visibility in Trello board, Slack workspace, and GitHub activities

Submission Instructions

* As a team, carefully review the Rubric below to make sure your submission addresses everything that is required.
You have already submitted your Sprint 3 retrospective action plan as part of that exercise.
Create a Sprint 3 release using the instructions for creating a GitHub code release provided here.
Your instructor will review your project code submission in the Sprint 3 release to evaluate the adherence to architectural separation and design principles, quality of the unit tests, and code communication. Your instructor will execute your unit test suite and obtain the latest code coverage data.
Your instructor will observe your demo to gauge the functionality of the product, and may also do independent testing of it for the Functionality dimension. The Demo and Acceptance Test Plan dimension is based on the quality of the demonstration, not the actual functionality that was shown, and on and the quality of the acceptance test plan used for the testing.
As before, make sure your Design Document has been updated and create a PDF of the design documentation from your latest version of the markdown documentation file in the /docs directory and submit as part of your sprint 3 release. Your instructor will evaluate Design Quality and Design Documentation from this documentation and direct review of your project code.
Your instructor will review your history of pull requests for evaluating Feature Branching and Code Reviews.
Your instructor will evaluate your Planning Activities and Version Control Activities directly in your Trello planning board and GitHub repository, respectively.
Create the Sprint 4 Done list in Trello. Put it to the left of the Sprint 3 Done list.
Your instructor will determine individual contributions to the project directly from the evidence provided in your team's Trello board, GitHub repository, and Slack workspace.

Grading Rubric

10% in final grade	Exceptional Performance 100 points	Competent Performance 88 points	Acceptable Performance 75 points	Developing Performance 50 points	Unacceptable Performance 0 points

Application (90% of total) :
Functionality 40%	Minimum viable product (MVP) feature set is bugfree. 10% feature enhancement is bugfree and matches customer expectations and effort of team and size.	MVP feature set is bugfree. 10% feature enhancement has minor issues or does not match customer expectations and effort of team and size.	MVP feature set is bugfree.	MVP feature set has notable bugs.	Little functionality seen in the product.
Adherence to Architecture and Design Principles 10%	Team properly documents and accurately describes at least three design principles exemplified in their design and explains how and where they will/have materialized in their solution across all tiers in great detail. Diagram(s) are clear and work to support the claims. Team includes prior recommendations and clearly describes improvements from previous submission.	Team documents and describes at least three design principles exemplified in their design and explains how and where they will/have materialized in their solution across most tiers. Diagram(s) are clear and work to support the claims. Only a few issues found. Team includes some prior recommendations and identifies some improvements from previous submission.	Team documents and describes design principles in their design and explains how and where they will/have materialized in their solution across some tiers, with minimal detail. Diagram(s) work to support the claims but consistency is lacking. Team did not head prior recommendations or fails to identify improvements.	Team documents and describes minimally the principles in their design and fails to explains how or where they will/have materialized in their solution. Diagram(s) lack evidence to support the claims. There are multiple major issues with adherence to architectural separation and OO design principles.	There is little effort in either the descriptions or evidence diagram(s) to support the design principles.
Unit Tests and Code Coverage 10%	Full set of high quality unit tests providing over 90% coverage.	Full set of high quality unit tests providing over 75% coverage.	Unit tests are of high quality with at least 50% coverage, or have some issues with mechanics and provide at least 65% coverage.	Significant unit tests are missing or are of notable poor quality in terms of mechanics.	Unit tests are very low quality either in terms of coverage or mechanics.
Code Communication 5%	Code adheres to style guideline; uses good variable, method, and class names; provides Javadocs for methods and classes; appropriate user of helper methods.	Code shows adherence to good code communications practices with only a few issues found.	Adherence to good code communications practices is apparent but consistency is lacking.	There are multiple major issues with adherence to good code communication practices.	Code does not meet most elements of good code communication.
Acceptance Test Plan 5%	Complete Acceptance Test Plan showing full suite of acceptance criteria and test results.	Complete Acceptance Test Plan shows full suite of acceptance criteria with only a few issues with test results.	Acceptance Test Plan has been updated with most user stories and acceptance criteria, and shows most test results.	Acceptance Test Plan lacking many user stories, acceptance criteria, or test results.	No evidence of updating of Acceptance Test Plan with user stories, acceptance criteria, and test results.
Demo 20%	Team gave a polished demo which was easy to follow and ran without any problems.	Team gave a polished demo which was easy to follow but there were a few minor issues noted with the demo.	Team appeared prepared for the demo but there were major issues with delivery.	Team did not appear prepared but was able to carry off something of a demo.	Team did a minimal demo.

Planning Activities 5%	Team correctly entered user stories into the sprint backlog and tracked them through to completion.	All team members were involved in planning activities but there were a few minor issues noted.	Only a portion of the team was involved in planning activities, or it was not done consistently.	Only a portion of the team was involved in planning activities, and it was not done consistently.	Minimal evidence of team performing planning activities.
Version Control and Code Reviews 5%	Full use of version control, feature branches, pull requests, and substantive reviews.	Version control, feature branches, pull requests and reviews used with some breaks in consistency, use across the team, or quality of review comments.	Version control, feature branches, pull requests, and reviews are regularly used but not always in a coordinated manner or review comments are of low quality.	Inconsistent use of version control, feature branching, pull requests, and reviews.	Minimal use of version control, feature branches, pull requests, and reviews.

document.write(page_topic);

Project Activities (10% in final grade)

Team Exercises (part of 13% for team exercises)

Submission Instructions

Grading Rubric