Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
118 lines (68 loc) · 3.52 KB

File metadata and controls

118 lines (68 loc) · 3.52 KB

Final eval of report

[X] Add references to all figures that is not our own.

[s] Discuss title

Abstract

[X] Revise the whole shebang

Introduction

[s] Introduce reflection technology short

Context & Domain

[X] Add sentence describing what is an agile method

[X] Add something about the date/quality of date.

Core Concepts

[X] The purpose of the chapter is unclear

[X] Change figure of Figure 1.1 "tagging", figure is unclear

Research Method

[X] Add sources

[X] Relate more clearly to the steps in figure 1.2, clarify connection between 1.3.1 and 1.3.2

[X] Clarify daily delivery cycle and what we build it on

[X] Add table 2 from 1.3.4 to report

[X] Go through 1.3.4 and rewrite. It is not clear what we have actually done and why.

[X] 1.3.5 what has this to do with problem relevance?

[X] 1.3.6 Is our tool + evaluation is increased understanding of... something. Not only the tool

[X] Describe how the findings and tool will be made available (github repos).

PeacefulBanana

[s] Improve description , so the purpose of the chapter is more clear.

[X] Add figures of chapter/screenshots

[X] Clarify what we share in the tool. Experience vs reflection outcome vs reflection session

[X] Integrate main goal / 2.3 into 2.1

Background

[X] Monica thought most of our work fitted in the conduct reflection phase?

Problem Elaboration

[X] Seems more like an overview than a problem elaboration - Revise

[X] Don't jump ahead, don't refer to stuff that comes later in the report.

[X] Add reference to "most agile process models adopt reflection sessions"

[X] Scaffolding vs trigger. Define scaffolding earlier

[X] Last part of 4.1 page 28. In what way is this important. We don't demonstrate it. Maybe remove?

[X] Maybe add figure of overall process of the tool.

[X] 4.2.1 authentication is part of implementation, should not be here. Either move it to implementation or revise it to mention authorization without details.

[X] 4.2.4 Consider adding some annotated screenshot. Of github I guess?

[X] 4.3 Clarify structure

[X] Clarify how 4.3.1 influences our work, and relates to our work

[X] 4.4 Scenarios need to be read and rewritten. Discard the course of IT2901 and instead call it a development team?

[s] Consider expanding scenario 2

[X] Add analysis of scenarios with requirements

[X] Add screenshot of tagcloud and screenshot of preparation/workshop

State of the art

[X] Move this chapter earlier? Discuss

[X] Related work - conclude what it has to do with our work

Requirements

[s] Set in perspective to the stuff at end of chapter 4(scenarios)

[x] We assume a client/server architecture but do not state it anywhere.. revise

Design

[x] Missing a lot about the overall design of our system. What do we do to meet requirements, f.ex what visualizations you have chosen, what form of cooperation are we supporting.

[x] Could be useful with a presentation of your system with the help of the CSRL mirror model (8.2.2).

[x] 7.2.2 missing figure reference.

[x] 7.3 revise

Evaluation

Usability

[X] How have we chosen participants, at which stage of development were they recruited and which version of the system did they use,

[X] Reposition Scenario 1 completion rate figure

[X] Say more about task on time complexity

[X] Increase column of Post task questionnaire figure

[X] Recommendations: What have we done with the recommendations results?

Focus group

[X] Write more about the focus group evaluation

[x] Add explicit quotes from the workshop

Conclusion

Future work

[X] Stay at a higher level