23CSE311 Software Engineering

Project

A team project in three sprints

You and your team will build a complete product, and we will review your progress three times along the way.

Project calendar

PhaseWindowProject activity
Team formation, repository and OpenProject setupMon 16 Nov to Fri 27 Nov 2026Teams of four to five students formed by randomized allocation within each section, project allocation, repository and OpenProject setup.
Sprint 0, InceptionMon 16 Nov to Thu 24 Dec 2026Problem framing, personas, epics, user stories with acceptance criteria, prioritization, estimates, and release slices on a User Story Board in OpenProject. Ends with Review 0, the class presentation of the board.
Sprint 1, Core ImplementationMon 4 Jan to Sat 20 Feb 2027About 40% working build deployed on the cloud, tests, CI pipeline, and backlog visibility. Runs in two stretches with a pause for the winter break and the midterm week. A short re-plan on Mon 1 Feb follows the pause. Ends with Review 1.
Sprint 2, Completion and ValidationMon 1 Mar to Sat 20 Mar 2027Near complete functionality, test coverage, performance evaluation, documentation, live demonstration, retrospective, and closure. Three weeks, then Review 2. The Sprint 2 backlog is fixed at Review 1.

Sprint 1 active days

Sprint 1 runs in two stretches, with a pause for the winter break and the midterm week. It has 26 active days, within the limit of 30. Burndown and velocity are plotted against active days only, on an axis from 0 to 26. Days shown in gray are Sundays and holidays inside the two stretches.

Stretch 1: Mon 4 Jan to Sat 9 Jan 2027, active days 1 to 6

01Mon 4 Jan
02Tue 5 Jan
03Wed 6 Jan
04Thu 7 Jan
05Fri 8 Jan
06Sat 9 Jan

Pause: winter break and midterm week. A short re-plan follows on Mon 1 Feb 2027.

Stretch 2: Mon 1 Feb to Sat 20 Feb 2027, active days 7 to 26

07Mon 1 Feb
08Tue 2 Feb
09Wed 3 Feb
10Thu 4 Feb
11Fri 5 Feb
12Sat 6 Feb
13Sun 7 Feb
14Mon 8 Feb
15Tue 9 Feb
16Wed 10 Feb
17Thu 11 Feb
18Fri 12 Feb
19Sat 13 Feb
20Sun 14 Feb
21Mon 15 Feb
22Tue 16 Feb
23Wed 17 Feb
24Thu 18 Feb
25Fri 19 Feb
26Sat 20 Feb

Reviews

ReviewMarksProgressWindowFocus
Review 0: User Story Board1010 to 15%Thu 31 Dec to Thu 7 Jan 2027Team presentation to the class of the User Story Board in OpenProject: epics, user stories with acceptance criteria, priorities, estimates, and release slices for Sprint 1 and Sprint 2.
Review 1: Sprint 115about 40%Mon 22 Feb to Fri 26 Feb 2027Working build deployed on the cloud, SRS and design diagrams, AI usage plan and instruction file, test and CI evidence, backlog and burndown, AI usage log, and individual code walkthrough.
Review 2: Sprint 2, Retrospective, and Release15100%Tue 23 Mar to Tue 30 Mar 2027Complete tested system, deployment with CI/CD and observability, documentation, retrospective, closure report, and live demonstration.

At each review your team presents to a panel of faculty and teaching assistants who act as product owner and stakeholders. We score the individual lines of the rubric from your own answers and your repository record, and the group lines for the team. Your group marks may be adjusted when your individual record shows a substantially different contribution.

The User Story Board

The User Story Board is the product plan that the team builds together and presents to the whole class at Review 0. It is the baseline from which the Sprint 1 and Sprint 2 backlogs are drawn, and Review 1 and Review 2 measure progress against it. It is kept in the team's OpenProject workspace, and the repository is linked to it. The board contains the following.

Every team member presents part of the board and answers questions on any part of it. If the board changes after Review 0, record the change in OpenProject with a reason, and we will talk about it at Review 1 and Review 2.

Tool chain and UML by review

ReviewTool chainUML diagrams
Review 0Git, OpenProject, and one tool of the team’s choice for the story map (the OpenProject board is sufficient).None. UML diagrams are first assessed at Review 1.
Review 1Git, OpenProject, StarUML, development stack, CI tool, and one tool chosen to make the team stand out.Mandatory: Use case and activity diagrams; Class diagram; Sequence diagram. Optional: Communication, state machine, and package diagrams.
Review 2Git, OpenProject, StarUML, Jenkins or another CI/CD tool, and one tool for testing, performance, or security.Mandatory: Use case, activity, class, and sequence diagrams (final). Optional: Component, deployment, and state machine diagrams (refined).

Rubric for Review 0: User Story Board

10 marks. The 5 criteria carry 2 marks each. The panel awards the full mark, one mark, or no mark, using the descriptors that follow, and may award a half mark between levels.

Criterion and evidenceLevelMarks
Coverage: problem statement, personas, epics, and user stories that together cover the project statementGroup2
Story quality: role, goal, reason form, invest properties, testable acceptance criteria, and a definition of doneGroup2
Prioritization and estimation: ordered backlog with reasons and story point estimatesGroup2
Release planning: story map, sprint 1 and sprint 2 slices, dependencies, and risksGroup2
Presentation and defense: each member presents and answers questions on the boardIndividual2
Total10

Level descriptors

CriterionFull mark (2)One mark (1)No mark (0)
CoveragePersonas are specific. Epics cover every part of the project statement, and each epic is broken into stories with no gaps or overlaps.Epics cover most of the statement. Some stories are missing, duplicated, or too large to be built in one sprint.Stories are a loose feature list with no personas or epics, or do not match the project statement.
Story qualityEvery story is written for a named role with a clear reason. Stories are independent, small, and testable. Acceptance criteria are concrete conditions, and the Definition of Done includes unit testing.Most stories follow the form. Acceptance criteria exist but are vague, repeat the story, or cannot be tested.Stories are tasks or technical items. Acceptance criteria and Definition of Done are absent.
Prioritization and estimationThe order of the backlog follows stated value and risk reasons. Estimates are relative, consistent across stories, and the team can explain them.A priority order is present but the reasons are weak. Estimates are present but inconsistent or all alike.No order or estimates, or the order is arbitrary and cannot be justified.
Release planningThe story map follows the user journey. Sprint 1 holds a coherent first slice of about 40% that can be deployed. Sprint 2 completes the product. Dependencies and risks are named.Stories are allocated to sprints, but the first slice is not a working whole, or dependencies and risks are missing.No allocation to sprints, or the allocation is infeasible for the time available.
Presentation and defenseEvery member presents. Answers show that the member understands the whole board and the reasons behind it. The board in OpenProject matches the presentation.Some members present or answer only on their own part. The board and presentation differ in places.A member cannot explain the board, or the board is not shown in OpenProject.

Rubric for Review 1: Sprint 1

15 marks.

Component and evidenceLevelMarks
Working build of about 40% of the planned functionality, deployed on the cloudGroup3
SRS derived from the User Story Board, and UML diagrams as listed for Review 1Group2
Architecture diagram, ERD, API specification, and design justificationGroup2
Testing evidence: unit and integration tests, with the CI pipeline runningGroup2
OpenProject progress: board, work packages, and actual against planned burndown on active days (role based)Individual2
Version control contribution (branching, commits, pull requests) and individual code walkthroughIndividual2
AI usage plan, instruction file, and usage log, with verification evidence for accepted AI outputGroup2
Total15

Rubric for Review 2: Sprint 2, Retrospective, and Release

15 marks.

Component and evidenceLevelMarks
Complete implementation and live demonstrationGroup3
Test automation, coverage, regression, and performance evaluationGroup3
Deployment through CI/CD, with logging and monitoringGroup2
Documentation: installation guide, release notes, user manual, and final UML diagramsGroup2
Retrospective record, lessons learned, and project closure reportGroup2
OpenProject closure (role based), individual contribution, and individual code walkthroughIndividual2
Innovation or use of a new tool, with AI usage log reviewed against verification evidenceGroup1
Total15