Research Paper

I respectfully request assistance writing a research paper. Attached is the instructions I was provided. Thank you very much.

Very Respectfully,

Tank

Rev.2 06/14/2017 1

System Development Life Cycle Research Paper

Purpose of this

Assignment

This assignment gives you the opportunity to apply your research skills, analysis,

and

critical thinking skills to compare and contrast two different system development life cycle

(SDLC) models. This will provide you an opportunity to gain an in-depth

understanding of

this important IT governance and management tool. This assignment specifically

addresses the following course outcome:

• Identify, define, and explain the concepts of information technology governance and

management.

Assignment

You will conduct some research to learn about the Waterfall Model of SDLC and another

model of your choosing. You will then describe both models and compare and contrast

them. Select one of the SDLC models listed below:

• Spiral

Model

• Agile (Extreme Programming) Model

• Evolutionary Prototyping Model

• Iterative and Incremental Model

Research and write a paper that describes the Waterfall Model and your chosen model. Your

descriptions should include each model’s purpose and structure (or characteristics) along

with its strengths and weaknesses. It should describe the types of system development

efforts for which it is most appropriate. Then, compare and contrast your selected model

with the Waterfall Model, covering the criteria shown in Section IV below. Finally, you will

document the conclusions you reached from your research, which may include such things

as which model is “better,” when each model should be used, whether one or the other

should not be used, or whether it makes any difference which one is used. The conclusions

are your own and will be assessed according to how well you defend them and how

convincing your arguments are.

Your paper should be structured as follows:

I.

Introduction

II. Waterfall Model (description, purpose, structure/characteristics,

strengths and

weaknesses)

III. Chosen Model (description, purpose, structure/characteristics, strengths and

weaknesses)

IV. Comparison of the Two Models. Using the table below, choose which model is

better for each of the criteria listed and explain why it is the better choice – enter

your answer in the table column under the appropriate model and leave the

corresponding cell for the other model blank.

Rev. 2 06/14/2017 2

Criterion Waterfall Model Other Model (insert name)

Ease of use

Applicability for complex

projects

Applicability to projects of

all sizes

Encourages/allows customer

involvement

Interfaces with other

systems or development

projects

V. Conclusion (conclusions you drew from your research and analysis, including the

table above on the two models).

Your paper will be graded on both the accuracy and completeness of your descriptions; it

needs to clearly and completely define each model and its strengths and weaknesses. The

comparisons will be graded based on the extent to which they are supported by facts and

are drawn from the descriptions. The conclusions should be well justified, and drawn from

the rest of the paper. Illustrations will enhance your paper if they contribute to an

understanding of the model.

Your paper should be 3-

5

pages in length (not counting any cover sheet

or reference

pages). The use of at least three external scholarly resources (other than class

materials) is required. You should use scholarly journals (rather than authorless website

postings). If you need assistance with determining what a scholarly journal is, the UMUC

library is a very good source of information, accessed via the following link:

http://www.umuc.edu/library/libhow/articles.cfm. Remember to correctly cite and reference

all sources using APA format.

Submit your paper in Word format via your Assignments Folder as an attached document

with your last name included in the filename.

Grading Rubric

Use the rubric below to be sure you have covered all aspects of this assignment.

Criteria

90-100%

Far

Above
Standards

80-89%

Above
Standards

70-79%
Meets Standards

60-69%

Below
Standards

< 60%

Well Below
Standards

Possible

Points

Introduction

5 Points

A

sophisticated

introduction sets

the stage for the

paper.

4 Points

A well-written
introduction sets

the stage for the
paper.

3.5 Points

The introduction
adequately sets

the stage for the
paper.

3 Points

The introduction
does not

adequately set
the stage for the

paper.

0-2 Points

No
introduction

included.

5

http://www.umuc.edu/library/libhow/articles.cfm

Rev. 2 06/14/2017 3

Criteria

90-100%

Far Above
Standards

80-89%
Above
Standards

70-79%
Meets Standards

60-69%
Below
Standards

< 60% Well Below Standards Possible Points

Description

of Waterfall

Model

18-20 Points

Description of

waterfall model

is accurate and
thorough;

includes

description,

purpose,

characteristics,

strengths and

weaknesses; and

demonstrates

sophisticated

understanding of

course

concepts.

16-1

7 Points

Description of
waterfall model

is correct and
complete;

includes
description,
purpose,
characteristics,
strengths and

weaknesses;
and

demonstrates

good
understanding

of course
concepts.

14-15 Points

Description of
waterfall model
includes
description,

purpose,
characteristics,

strengths and

weaknesses; and
demonstrates

adequate

understanding of

course concepts.

12-13 Points

Description of
waterfall model

may be
incomplete,

and/or may not

demonstrate

adequate

understanding
of course

concepts.

0-11 Points

Description of
waterfall

model is not
included or

little is
presented.

20

Description

of Chosen
Model

18-20 Points

Description of

chosen model is
accurate and

thorough;
includes

description,
purpose,
characteristics,

strengths and
weaknesses; and

demonstrates

sophisticated
understanding of

course concepts.

16-17 Points

Description of

chosen model is
correct and

complete;
includes

description,
purpose,
characteristics,

strengths and
weaknesses;

and

demonstrates
good

understanding
of course
concepts.

14-15 Points

Description of

chosen model
includes

description,
purpose,

characteristics,
strengths and
weaknesses; and

demonstrates
adequate

understanding of
course concepts.

12-13 Points

Description of

chosen model
may be

incomplete,
and/or may not

demonstrate

adequate
understanding

of course
concepts.

0-11 Points

Description of

chosen model
is not included

or little is
presented.

20

Comparison

of the Two

Models

23-

25

Points

The comparison
of the two

models is clear,
compelling, and

directly related

to the

models,
demonstrating a

sophisticated
understanding of

course concepts,
analysis, critical

20-22 Points

The comparison
of the two

models is clear,
and is directly

related to the

models,
demonstrating a
good
understanding

of course
concepts,

17-19 Points

The comparison of
the two models is

related to the
models;

demonstrates

adequate
understanding of

course concepts,
analysis, and

critical thinking.

15-1

6 Points

The comparison
of the two

models may not
be clear, may

not be directly

related to the
models; and/or

may not
demonstrate

adequate
understanding

0-14 Points

Few or no
comparisons

are provided.

25

Rev. 2 06/14/2017 4

Criteria

90-100%
Far Above
Standards

80-89%
Above
Standards

70-79%
Meets Standards

60-69%
Below
Standards

< 60% Well Below Standards Possible Points

thinking, and

synthesis.

analysis, critical
thinking, and

synthesis.
of course
concepts,

analysis, and
critical thinking.

Conclusion

9-

10

Points

Conclusion is

convincing,
effective and

drawn from the
paper.

Demonstrates

sophisticated

analysis and
critical thinking.

8 Points

Conclusion is

effective and
relevant.

Demonstrates
analysis and
critical thinking.
7 Points

Conclusion is
provided and is

relevant.

6 Points
Conclusion is

somewhat
effective and/or
relevant.

0-5 Points

No conclusion

provided, or
minimal effort
demonstrated.

10

External
Research

9-10 Points

Three scholarly

sources other
than the class

resources are

incorporated and
used effectively,

contextualized,
appropriately

researched and

supported, and
synthesized with

original
arguments.

Sources used
are credible,

relevant, and

timely. Proper

APA style is used

for

citations and
references.

8 Points

Three scholarly
sources other
than the class
resources are

incorporated
and used

effectively,
appropriately

researched and

supported, and
support original

arguments.
Sources used

are credible,
relevant, and

timely. Proper

APA style is
used for

citations and
references.
7 Points

Three scholarly

sources other than
the class resources

are properly

incorporated and
used. Uses APA

format for
references and

citations.

6 Points

Three or fewer

sources other
than the class

resources may

be used; may
not be scholarly

sources; may
not be properly

incorporated or

used to support
arguments; may

rely too heavily
on the reporting

of external
sources, and/or

are not

effective

or appropriate;
and/or are not

credible,
relevant, or

timely. May not

use APA format.

0-5 Points

No external

research is
incorporated

or reference

listed is not
cited within

text.

10

Format

9-10 Points

Paper reflects

effective
organization and

sophisticated
writing; follows

instructions
provided; is

8 Points
Paper reflects
effective

organization;
follows
instructions
provided; is
written in third
person; has few

7 Points

Paper has some

organization; may

have some errors
in sentence
structure,
grammar and
spelling. Is double
spaced and

6 Points

Paper is not well

organized,

and/or contains
several
grammar
and/or spelling
errors; and/or is
not double-

0-5 Points

Paper is
extremely

poorly
written, has
many
grammar

and/or
spelling

10

Rev. 2 06/14/2017 5

Criteria

90-100%
Far Above
Standards

80-89%
Above
Standards

70-79%
Meets Standards

60-69%
Below
Standards

< 60% Well Below Standards Possible Points

written in third
person; uses

correct
structure,

grammar, and

spelling; double-
spaced and

presented in a
professional

format using
Word.

errors in
sentence
structure,
grammar, and

spelling;
double-spaced,
and presented
in a
professional
format.

written in third
person.

spaced and
written in third
person.

errors, or
does not
convey the
information.

TOTAL

Points
Possible

100