COM5015 Object Orientated Programming Level 5 Assignment Brief 2026 | Arden University
Looking for Plagiarism free Answers for your US, UK, Singapore college/ university Assignments.
| University | Arden University |
| Subject | COM5015 Object Orientated Programming |
COM5015 Assignment Brief
As part of the formal assessment for the programme, you are required to submit aObject Orientated Programming assignment. Please refer to your Student Handbook for full details of the programme assessment scheme and general information on preparing and submitting assignments. The assignment brief will specifically give details and instructions for the assignment. No examination or details are included within this module.
Module description: Coursework 100%
Description
The assignment is given as three tasks. Task 1 has been designed to check your understanding of Logic and the construction of an appropriate UML diagram, based on the scenario given. Task 2 validates your knowledge and understanding of inheritance and multiple processes within an OOP framework. Finally, Task 3 is a mini project that is split into three parts, therefore allowing you to showcase your understanding of many OOP methodologies and their applications.
A clear, concise description and application for all Tasks is to be given within the submission, complemented with screenshot evidence of all processes and results. You are to submit a single Word document for all three tasks. Your fully developed and tested code for tasks 2 and 3 is to be included within an appropriately associated appendix, so that your code can be checked and verified.
Learning Outcomes
After completing the module, you should be able to:
- Demonstrate an understanding of Object Oriented Programming principles, i.e. Inheritance, Interface and Abstract classes.
- Demonstrate and understand key concepts and modelling techniques in Object-Oriented analysis and design.
- Analyse a set of system requirements and design, develop and test asolution which satisfies those requirements using an Object Orientated Programming language.
All learning outcomes must be met to pass the module.
Guidance
Your assignment should include:
- a title page containing your student number,
- the module name,
- the submission deadline and the exact word count of your submitted document;
- the appendices, if relevant; and
- a reference list in the AU Harvard system(s).
You should address all the elements of the assignment task listed below. Please note that tutors will use the assessment criteria set out below in assessing your work.
You must not include your name in your submission because Arden University operates anonymous marking, which means that markers should not be aware of the identity of the student. However, please do not forget to include your STU number.
Maximum word count: 4000 words
Please refer to the full word count policy, which can be found in the Student Policies section here: Arden University | Regulatory Framework
Please note the following:
Students are required to indicate the exact word count on the title page of the assessment.
The word count includes everything in the main body of the assessment (including in-text citations and references). The word count excludes numerical data in tables, figures, diagrams, footnotes, reference list and appendices. ALL other printed words ARE included in the word count.
Please note that exceeding the word count by over 10% will result in a 10-percentage-point deduction.
COM5015 Assignment Task
Case Study
The Head of“Maximus” has asked you to develop an application that will create the following departments within the store: Women’s Clothing, Men’s Clothing, Make Up, Food and Toys. In addition to full-time staff across all departments, each department also offers weekly departmental workshops to customers. Staff are also allocated four hours per week as personal shoppers to customers who require additional help when shopping. These hours are posted on the department store’s website, so customers can book an appointment during these hours. Each customer is limited to a thirty-minute session only, so as to enable multiple customers the personal service they require each week.
The Food department also offers boot camps in baking, for which there is a registration requirement. There are full-time and part-time staff across all departments and additional bakery boot camp staff for the Food department only. The boot camp is available for new and existing customers. New customers get an additional discount on the bakery boot camp if they enroll on a further full-time boot camp at the department store.
This application has a provision to insert, modify, delete, and display staff and customer records, including details such as name, age, email, phone number, sex, address, boot camp fees (customers only) and salaries (staff only).
Functionality
The overall assignment is broken down into three tasks. Task 1 requires a class diagram to be designed and drawn appropriately. Task 2 requires the initial applications to be written in Java, using appropriate OOP methodologies, and Task 3 requires the further development of the application, specifically relating to individual staff and customers of“Maximus”, culminating in a mini project.
Task 1 – UML
Draw a UML class and object diagram that correctly represents the scenario detailed within the Case study described above. (800 Words)(20 Marks)(LO: 2)
Task 2: – Application and Testing
Write a Java program to code the UML class diagram from Task 1 to show only the base classes, as this will be further developed within Task 3. You should describe and justify the attributes and operations for each class you have written. Add appropriate methods to set and get the instance variables in the classes. Test your code for robustness. (800 Words)(20 arks)(LO: 1)
Task 3:
(Mini Project)
As the department store’s data administrator, the CEO has asked you to create a Java application, applying appropriate OOP methodologies, which will display multiple queries on individuals in the department store, such as full-time and part-time staff. There will be three parts to Task 3, constituting a mini project.
a. Using the class and object diagram created in response to Task 1, select an appropriate class as the base class. Write the Java code for this base class and decide how many derived classes are appropriate to make the code as efficient as possible, and implement the hierarchy in Java. (15 marks)
b. For this task consider the database to be comprised of multiple Array List(s). Include dummy data showing the details of full-time staff (a minimum of 4records including at least 4 staff), part-time staff (a minimum of 10 records) andstaff availability hours for personal shopping support (one record per full timestaff member). Demonstrate one example of the functionality of a customer selecting a thirty-minute slot for one personal shopper. Implement this interaction in Java. Test it by printing the customer name, customer phone number, full-time staff member’s name and appointment details. (15 marks)
c. Set the fees for the bakery boot camp for new customers to £350 with a discount of 32% if they enroll on an additional full-time boot camp. Select this functionality as an abstract method defined in an abstract class/interface. Demonstrate how the full functionality of this abstract method can be implemented in Java. (30 Marks)(2400 Words Total)(60 Marks Total)(LOs: 3 & 4)
NOTE: A clear, concise description and application for all Tasks is to be given within the submission, complemented with screenshot evidence of all processes and results. You are to submit a single Word document for all threetasks. Your FULLY developed and tested code for tasks 2 and 3 is to be included within an appropriately associated appendix, so that your code can be checked and verified.
As technology and platforms may change, your module tutor will provide you with up-to-date details.
Formative Feedback
You have the opportunity to submit a draft to receive formative feedback.
You are encouraged to submit your assignment for feedback once, and it is 30% ofyour entire submission. You, the student, are to choose 30%, not the tutor. The last day for guaranteed feedback hand-in is Monday of week 9 at 23:58. No formative feedback will be given after the time specified above, either blended or distance learning. The Feedback is designed to help you develop areas of your work, encouraging academic skills and independent learning.
If you are a Distance Learning student, then you are encouraged to send 30% of your assignment for feedback by email to your tutor, no later than two weeks before your final submission date. Dates will be given to you by your tutor on a module-by-module basis.
Formative feedback will not be given to work submitted after the above date or the date specified by your tutor, if a blended learning student.
Referencing Guidance
You MUST underpin your analysis and evaluation of the key issues with appropriateand wide ranging academic research and ensure this is referenced using the AUHarvard system(s).
Follow this link to find the referencing guides for your subject: Arden Library
Submission Guidance
Assignments submitted late will not be accepted and will be marked as a 0% fail.
Your assessment can be submitted as a single Word (MS Word) or PDF file, or as multiple files. If you chose to submit multiple files, you must name each document as the question/part you are answering, along with your student number, i.e. Q1 Section ASTUXXXX.
The FULL code for each separate task is to be included within an appropriately associated appendix, so that your code can be checked and verified.
If you wish to overwrite your submission or one of your submissions, you must ensure that your new submission is named the same as the previous one for the system to overwrite it.
You must ensure that the submitted assignment is all your own work and that all sources used are correctly attributed. Penalties apply to assignments which show evidence of academic unfair practice. (See the Student Handbook, which is available on the A-Z key information on iLearn.)
Flexible Rates Compatible With Everyone’s Budget
Hire a Professional Essay & Assignment Writer for completing your Academic Assessments
COM5015 Assessment Criteria
Level 5 reflects the continuing development in knowledge, understanding and skills from Level 4. At Level 5, students are not expected to be fully autonomous but are able to take responsibility for their own learning with appropriate guidance and direction. Students are expected to further develop their theoretical knowledge within a more intellectual context and to demonstrate this through more complex forms of expression, which move beyond the descriptive or imitative domain. Students are expected to demonstrate skills of analysis in both problem-solving and resolution.
| Grade | Mark Bands | Generic Assessment Criteria |
|---|---|---|
| First (1) | 80%+ | An outstanding information base exploring and analysing the discipline, its theory and any associated ethical considerations. Utterly sophisticated use of methodology, excellent referencing throughout and a high degree of autonomy are demonstrated. Writing is outstandingly well-structured and accurately referenced throughout. Where appropriate, outstanding professional skills are demonstrated. The work is original and, with some additional effort, could be considered for internal publication. |
| First (1) | 70%–79% | An excellent knowledge base within which the discipline is explored and analysed. There is a degree of originality in the approach. The work demonstrates confidence and autonomy and extends to consider ethical issues. Learning resources have been managed confidently. Writing is exceptionally well structured and accurately referenced throughout. Where appropriate, an excellent level of professional skills is demonstrated, and the work demonstrates a high level of intellectual and academic skills. |
| Upper second (2:1) | 60%–69% | A very good knowledge base which explores and analyses the discipline, its theory and any associated ethical issues. There is evidence of some originality and independence of thought. A very good range of learning resources underpins the work, and there is evidence of growing confidence and self-direction. The work demonstrates the ability to analyse the subject and apply theory with good academic and intellectual skills. Academic writing skills are very good, expression is accurate overall, and the work is consistently referenced throughout. |
| Lower second (2:2) | 50%–59% | A good understanding of the discipline that begins to analyse the subject and apply some underpinning theory. There may be a reference to some of the ethical considerations. The work shows a sound level of competence in managing basic sources and materials. Academic writing skills are good and accurate overall, and the work is planned and structured with some thought. Professional skills are good (where appropriate). The work lacks original thought, but academic and intellectual skills are moving into the critical domain. The work is referenced throughout. |
| Third (3) | 40%–49% | Satisfactory level of performance in which there are some omissions in understanding the subject, its underpinning theory and ethical considerations. There is little evidence of independent thought, and the work shows a basic use of sources and materials. Academic and intellectual skills are limited. The work may lack structure overall. There are some difficulties in developing professional skills (where appropriate). There is an attempt to reference the work. |
| Marginal Fail | 30%–39% | A limited piece of work in which there are clear gaps in understanding the subject, its underpinning theory and ethical considerations. The work shows a limited use of sources and materials. Academic and intellectual skills are weak, and there are errors in expression, and the work may lack structure overall. There are difficulties in developing professional skills (where appropriate). The work lacks original thought and is largely imitative. |
| Clear Fail | 29% and below | A poor performance in which there are substantial gaps in knowledge and understanding, underpinning theory and ethical considerations. The work shows little evidence in the use of appropriate sources and materials. Academic writing skills are very weak, and there are numerous errors in expression. The work lacks structure overall. Professional skills (where appropriate) are not developed. The work is imitative. |
Rubric Task 1: UML (20 Marks)
| Criteria | Outstanding 80%–100% | Excellent 70%–79% | Very Good 60%–69% | Good 50%–59% | Pass 40%–49% | Limited 0–39% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Task 1: UML Diagram (20 Marks) (20% of Overall award) | An outstanding understanding of the processes involved in creating an appropriate UML diagram, based upon the given case study. Logic has been correctly defined where appropriate. | An excellent understanding of the processes involved when creating an appropriate UML diagram, based upon the given case study. Logic has been defined. | A very good understanding of the processes involved when creating an appropriate UML diagram, based upon the given case study. Logic has been mostly defined, and UML is mostly correct. | A good understanding of some of the processes involved when creating an appropriate UML diagram, based on the given case study. Logic has been attempted, and some elements are unjustified. | A basic understanding of the processes involved when creating an appropriate UML diagram, based on the given case study. Logic has been attempted, but it is incorrect and unjustified. | A limited understanding of the processes involved when creating an appropriate UML diagram, based on the given case study. Logic has not been attempted because incorrect. |
Rubric Task 2: Coding Requirements (20 Marks)
| Criteria | Outstanding 80% – 100% | Excellent 70% – 79% | Very Good 60% – 69% | Good 50% – 59% | Pass 40% – 49% | Limited 0 – 39% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Task 2: Coding requirements (20 Marks) (20% of the overall award) | An outstanding understanding of the processes involved in coding OOP methodologies and their applications. Code requirements have been defined, where appropriate and correctly implemented. | An excellent understanding of the processes involved when coding OOP methodologies and their applications. Code requirements have been defined and implemented. | A very good understanding of the processes involved when conducting OOP methodologies and their applications. Additional code requirements have been mostly defined and mostly correctly implemented. | A good understanding of most of the processes involved when conducting OOP methodologies and their applications. Coded requirements have been attempted; the code processor is incorrect. | A basic understanding of the processes involved when conducting OOP methodologies and their applications. Coded requirements have been attempted; the code processor is incorrect and unjustified. | A limited understanding of the processes involved when conducting OOP methodologies and their applications. Coded requirements have not been attempted or justified. |
Rubric Task 3: Mini Project (60 Marks)
| Criteria | Outstanding 80%–100% | Excellent 70%–79% | Very Good 60%–69% | Good 50%–59% | Pass 40%–49% | Limited 0–39% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Task 3 – Part A (15 Marks) (15% of overall award) | An outstanding understanding of the processes involved when conducting OOP methodologies and its applications. Additional code has been correctly included, interfaces are appropriate, and all fully justified. | An excellent understanding of the processes involved when conducting OOP methodologies and its applications. Additional code has been included plus interfaces where appropriate and justified. | A very good understanding of the processes involved when conducting OOP methodologies and its applications. Additional code has been inserted including interfaces where appropriate and mostly correct. | A good understanding of some of the processes involved when conducting OOP methodologies and its applications. Some additional code has interfaces have been inserted yet mostly incorrect. | A basic understanding of some of the processes involved when conducting OOP methodologies and its applications. Limited additional code and interfaces have been inserted yet incorrect. | A limited understanding of some of the processes involved when conducting OOP methodologies and its applications. No additional code and interfaces have been inserted. Major gaps in the student’s knowledge. |
| Task 3 – Part B (15 Marks) (15% of overall award) | An outstanding understanding of the processes involved when conducting OOP methodologies and its applications. Method additional has been correctly inserted and fully justified. | An excellent understanding of the processes involved when conducting OOP methodologies and its applications. Method addition has been correctly inserted and justified. | A very good understanding of the processes involved when conducting OOP methodologies and its applications. Method addition has been inserted and justified. | A good understanding of the processes involved when conducting OOP methodologies and its applications. Method addition has been inserted yet may be incorrect. | A basic understanding of the processes involved when conducting OOP methodologies and its applications. Limited method addition has been inserted. | A limited understanding of the processes involved when conducting OOP methodologies and its applications. No method addition has been inserted. No reasoning or justification has been given. |
| Task 3 – Part C (30 Marks) (30% of overall award) | An outstanding understanding of the processes involved when conducting OOP methodologies and their applications. Additional code has been correctly included; instances and constructors are appropriate and fully justified. | An excellent understanding of the processes involved when conducting OOP methodologies and their applications. Additional code and constructors are appropriate and justified. | A very good understanding of the processes involved when conducting OOP methodologies and their applications. Additional code, instances and constructors have been inserted yet mostly correct. | A good understanding of some of the processes involved when conducting OOP methodologies and their applications. Limited additional code has been inserted, mostly incorrectly. | A basic understanding of some of the processes involved when conducting OOP methodologies and its applications. Limited additional code has been inserted yet incorrect. | A limited understanding of some of the processes involved when conducting OOP methodologies and their applications. No additional code has been inserted. Major gaps in the student’s knowledge. |
Note: All sub-tasks are considered to be equally weighted. Where grades are awarded across multiple sub-tasks, the marker will allocate grades appropriately.
e.g. If the task contains parts a) and b), they are considered together (as each relates to different aspects of the learning outcomes), and a poor response to the second part would reduce the overall grade awarded, even if the response to the first part is of a high standard.
Flexible Rates Compatible With Everyone’s Budget
Hire a writer to get plagiarism free assignment answers of this question
Looking for Plagiarism free Answers for your US, UK, Singapore college/ university Assignments.
