Checklist for Publisher Project
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Section
Title page
Identify (5 marks)
Analyse (9 marks)
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Design (9 marks)
21
22
23
24
25
Implement (12 marks)
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
Evaluate (5 marks)
Documentation
Student name, title of project and type of software
Section title
Background detail
User identified
Statement of the problem
Manual solution considered
Two alternative software solutions considered
Proposed solution justified
At least 3 quantitative objectives identified
Section title
Appropriate hardware identified
Appropriate software identified
Types and source of data explained (e.g. information from
user, Internet research, clip art, scanned photographs)
Data manipulation explained (e.g. image manipulation in a
Paint package or spreadsheet/chart imported)
Alternative methods of output considered (e.g. screen, printer)
Choice of output method justified
Backup strategy identified
Security strategy explained
Section title
Initial designs showing layout of pages, columns, graphics
User feedback on initial designs (comments, letter or
questionnaire results)
Subtasks identified
Each page sketched out showing content and placement of
graphics. Fonts etc specified
Test plan containing tests and expected results linked to user
requirements in Identify section.
Section title
Brief description of how the design was implemented,
explaining any changes that had to be made to the design
Hard copy of publication(s), annotated to explain special
features, e.g. linked text boxes, text wrapped round graphics,
images manipulated
Evidence that each test in the test plan was carried out,
comparing actual with expected results
When errors occurred, explanation of how they were corrected
Section title
Each original objective fully evaluated. Comment on how well
the objectives are fulfilled
Comment on any major problems that caused a change in
design
A critical comment on anything that you think could be
improved
User feedback in the form of a letter or questionnaire. User
comment should be critical and relevant.
Evidence that you understand the user’s comments by making
suggestions for future improvements
Done