orlando-mercado
commented
11 months ago In order to apply the professor's feedback the following changes were made:
Introduction Clarification: • The introduction was refined to emphasize the current situation and needs without assuming the development of a software-based system. Language was adjusted to use terms like "individuals" instead of "users" to maintain a more general focus. Assumptions Refinement: • The assumptions were rephrased to shift the focus from operating the system-to-be to broader project success factors. Emphasis was placed on external adoption readiness, adaptability to institutional changes, user engagement, and effective stakeholder collaboration. Current Situation Section: • The "Current Situation" section was revised to provide more concrete examples and anecdotes, addressing the need for specificity in describing challenges faced by new students. The language was adjusted to maintain a focus on the current state and avoid assumptions about the system-to-be.
When you are introducing your project in the informative part and you talk about the situation as it is now, what the needs are and what your ideas are for satisfying these needs: there are no users yet to talk about. We're looking at that situation, we're identifying needs and we're he developing ideas, but we don't even know whether developing a software-based system is really what we should do. At least for the current situation and the needs this is true, for the ideas we might start talking about the system-to-be. In your project, there are new students (instead of users) who need to identify buildings on campus, need to know building locations. Maybe new professors have the same needs. But it's only when you assume that a software-based system is the solution that you can talk about users.Some of the comments on the previous feedback have not yet been addressed. For example, the three assumptions that you list are all concerned with operating the system-to-be. But what we are more interested in here are the assumptions that you make for your project to succeed. This is not the same. Your project might be a success, but running the product might not be. For example, you could get the users requirements right, implement them correctly, etc. but then the university decides to do everything online (just for example). Your product will then not have much use, but the project was successful insofar as it has developed the right product for the original needs, on time, etc.No need to restate the primary goal once more. The website in your domain rough sketch refers to the system-to-be. When we're talking about the domain, then there is no system-to-be. We're thinking in terms independent of the system-to-be."Navigating" is already an abstraction. Something that you would have developed in the analysis and concept formation section. What's the thought before "navigation"? "I was so lost when I tried finding the chemistry lecture hall for the first time". Or "I entered the Stefani Building coming from the Celis Building and took a left. That was a mistake, I ended up walking once around in the entire building only to find that the room I was looking for was almost where I had entered." Or "when I had my first lecture in the business and administration building I was so late because I had no idea how far it was."