support@essaywritingexpert.orgPage 1 of 15
[4122]
Arden University © reserves all rights of copyright and all other intellectual property rights in the learning materials and this publication. No part of any of the learning
materials or this publication may be reproduced, shared (including in private social media groups), stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or means,
including without limitation electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Arden University. To find out more about
the use and distribution of programme materials please see the Arden Student Terms and Conditions.
Version 5
COM5026
Object Oriented Programming
Level 5
Assignment
Date for Submission: Please refer to the timetable on ilearn
(The submission portal on ilearn will close at 14:00 UK time
on the date of submission)Page 2 of 15
[4122]
Arden University © reserves all rights of copyright and all other intellectual property rights in the learning materials and this publication. No part of any of the learning
materials or this publication may be reproduced, shared (including in private social media groups), stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or means,
including without limitation electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Arden University. To find out more about
the use and distribution of programme materials please see the Arden Student Terms and Conditions.
Assignment Brief
As part of the formal assessment for the programme you are required to submit an
Object 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
of, 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 on many OOP methodologies and their applications.
A clear, concise description and application for all Tasks is to be given within
the submission, complimented with screenshot evidence of all processes and
results. You are to submit a single word document for all three tasks. Do not
submit the file in a compressed format, they will not be marked. 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.Page 3 of 15
[4122]
Arden University © reserves all rights of copyright and all other intellectual property rights in the learning materials and this publication. No part of any of the learning
materials or this publication may be reproduced, shared (including in private social media groups), stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or means,
including without limitation electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Arden University. To find out more about
the use and distribution of programme materials please see the Arden Student Terms and Conditions.
Learning Outcomes:
After completing the module, you should be able to:
- Demonstrate an understanding of Object Orientated Programming
principles, i.e. Encapsulation, Inheritance, Interface and Abstract classes.
- Demonstrate and understand key concepts and modelling techniques in Object
Orientated analysis and design.
- Analyse a set of system requirements and design, develop and test a
solution which satisfies those requirements using an Object Orientated
Programming language.
- Graduate Attribute:
Reflective Practitioner: Undertake critical analysis and reach reasoned and
evidenced decisions, contribute problem-solving skills to find and innovate in
solutions.
All learning outcomes must be met to pass the modulePage 4 of 15
[4122]
Arden University © reserves all rights of copyright and all other intellectual property rights in the learning materials and this publication. No part of any of the learning
materials or this publication may be reproduced, shared (including in private social media groups), stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or means,
including without limitation electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Arden University. To find out more about
the use and distribution of programme materials please see the Arden Student Terms and Conditions.
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 AU Havard 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
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.
Students who exceed the wordcount up to a 10% margin will not be penalised.
Students should note that no marks will be assigned to work exceeding the specified
limit once the maximum assessment size limit has been reached.Page 5 of 15
[4122]
Arden University © reserves all rights of copyright and all other intellectual property rights in the learning materials and this publication. No part of any of the learning
materials or this publication may be reproduced, shared (including in private social media groups), stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or means,
including without limitation electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Arden University. To find out more about
the use and distribution of programme materials please see the Arden Student Terms and Conditions.
Case Study
Virtual Pet Game:
Develop a virtual simulator for pets where the user can play and interact with virtual
pets. Each pet will have several attributes including health, happiness, hunger, and
energy, which evolve based on user actions. User can perform activities such as
feeding, playing with, and nurturing their pets to maintain their well-being and
happiness. The virtual game will support managing multiple pet types,
including dogs, cats, fish, and more, each with unique behaviours and needs. Users
can select and customize their pets, fostering a sense of personalization and
connection. The aim of this virtual simulator is to apply OOP principles including
encapsulation, inheritance, polymorphism, and Abstraction.
In this virtual game, users can manage virtual pets and engage in various tasks, such
as feeding, playing, and resting. The pets’ attributes will evolve in response to user
interactions, with their behaviour varying based on their current state. For example,
playing with a pet will increase its happiness proportionally, that is a 10% increase in
playing will increase its happiness by 10%. However, a hungry pet (level of hunger 20 or
less) may refuse to play until it is fed, and a tired pet (tiredness level of 10) will need rest
to regain energy (energy value of 10) before engaging in other activities.
The virtual pet game should have a provision to insert, modify, delete, and display pets’
state including details such as energy, hunger, health, and happiness using a menu with
attribute values as shown in task 3.
Functionality
The overall assignment is broken down into three tasks. Task 1 requires a class
diagram and an object diagram to be designed and drawn appropriately. Task 2
requires the initial virtual game to be written in Java, using appropriate OOP
methodologies and task 3 requires the further development of the virtual game,
specifically relating to pets’ behaviours and user’s actions, culminating in a mini project.Page 6 of 15
[4122]
Arden University © reserves all rights of copyright and all other intellectual property rights in the learning materials and this publication. No part of any of the learning
materials or this publication may be reproduced, shared (including in private social media groups), stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or means,
including without limitation electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Arden University. To find out more about
the use and distribution of programme materials please see the Arden Student Terms and Conditions.
Assignment Task
Task 1
Draw a UML Class diagram and object diagram that correctly represent the scenario
detailed within the case study described above.
(800 Words)
(20 marks)
(LO2)
Task 2
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 marks)
(LO1)
Task 3
(Mini project)
Create a virtual pet game where users can manage virtual pets and engage in various
tasks by applying appropriate object-oriented programming methodologies to ensure a
clean and efficient structure. The game should handle multiple queries on the user’s
interactions and pets’ state including pet’s health, energy, happiness, etc.
Key Functions of the mini project:
- Pet’s attributes should be modified based on user interaction:
– level of hunger range between (0 – 100)
– level of happiness range between (0 – 70)Page 7 of 15
[4122]
Arden University © reserves all rights of copyright and all other intellectual property rights in the learning materials and this publication. No part of any of the learning
materials or this publication may be reproduced, shared (including in private social media groups), stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or means,
including without limitation electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Arden University. To find out more about
the use and distribution of programme materials please see the Arden Student Terms and Conditions.
– level of health range between (0 – 100)
– level of energy range between (0 – 70)
- User interaction can affect their pets’ behaviours:
– Feed the pet can reduce the hunger
– Play with pet can increase happiness and reduce the energy
– Rest the pet can improve health and recover the energy
- Users can add pets to their personal’s list, with each user able to care for
up to three pets at a time.
- The list of available pets in the virtual game should be displayed whenever
a new user starts playing the virtual pet game
This task will be divided into three parts, constituting a mini project.
- Using the class and object diagrams created in response to Task 1, select
the appropriate base classes and decide how many derived classes are
appropriate to make the code as efficient as possible and implement the
hierarchy in Java. Write the Java code for the base classes and derived
classes.
(20 marks)
- Assume the database for this task is composed of multiple ArrayLists. Include
dummy data representing the available pets in the virtual simulator game (at
least 20 pets) and the users (at least five users) along with their selected
pets. Demonstrate the functionality of various user interactions with their pets
by displaying the pets’ behaviour state (hunger, happiness, health, and
energy). Implement these interactions in Java and validate them by printing
relevant details such as the user’s name, number of pets, pets’ names, and
each pet’s energy level, hunger level, happiness level, and health level.
(20 marks)Page 8 of 15
[4122]
Arden University © reserves all rights of copyright and all other intellectual property rights in the learning materials and this publication. No part of any of the learning
materials or this publication may be reproduced, shared (including in private social media groups), stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or means,
including without limitation electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Arden University. To find out more about
the use and distribution of programme materials please see the Arden Student Terms and Conditions.
- Implement a “sick” state when the pet’s health is low (below 20) using appropriate
techniques such as interface/abstract class. When a pet dies (pet’s health is 0), it
will be automatically removed from the user’s list and added back to the available
list in the virtual simulator. Demonstrate how the full functionality of this abstract
method can be implemented in Java.
(20 Marks)
Task 3 (Total 60 marks)
(LO3, LO4)
NOTE: A clear, concise description and application for all Tasks is to be given within
the submission, complimented 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 task’s 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.Page 9 of 15
[4122]
Arden University © reserves all rights of copyright and all other intellectual property rights in the learning materials and this publication. No part of any of the learning
materials or this publication may be reproduced, shared (including in private social media groups), stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or means,
including without limitation electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Arden University. To find out more about
the use and distribution of programme materials please see the Arden Student Terms and Conditions.
Formative Feedback
You have the opportunity to submit a draft report to receive formative feedback.
The feedback is designed to help you develop areas of your work and it helps you
develop your skills as an independent learner.
If you are a distance learning student, you should submit your work, by email, to your
tutor, no later than 2 weeks before the actual submission deadline. If you are a
blended learning student, your tutor will give you a deadline for formative feedback
and further details.
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 appropriate
and wide ranging academic research and ensure this is referenced using the AU
Harvard 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.
You are to submit a single word document for all three tasks. 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 chose to submit multiple files, you must name each document as the
question/part you are answering along with your student number ie Q1 Section A
STUXXXX. If you wish to overwrite your submission or one of your submissions,
you must ensure that your new submission is named exactly the same as the
previous in order 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.) Page 10 of 15
[4122]
Arden University © reserves all rights of copyright and all other intellectual property rights in the learning materials and this publication. No part of any of the learning materials or this publication may be reproduced, shared (including in private social media groups), stored
in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or means, including without limitation electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Arden University. To find out more about the use and distribution of programme materials
please see the Arden Student Terms and Conditions.Page 11 of 15
[4122]
Arden University © reserves all rights of copyright and all other intellectual property rights in the learning materials and this publication. No part of any of the learning materials or this publication may be reproduced, shared (including in private social media groups), stored
in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or means, including without limitation electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Arden University. To find out more about the use and distribution of programme materials
please see the Arden Student Terms and Conditions.
Assessment Marking Rubric
Criteria and
weighting
Outstanding
Excellent
Very Good
Good
Pass
Poor
Fail
80% – 100%
70% – 79%
60% – 69%
50% – 59%
40% – 49%
30 – 39%
0 – 29%
Task 1
(20%)
An exemplary
presentation and
implementation using
requested UML Class
and object diagrams
for complex
systems e.g. given
case-study etc and
justified using a highly
relevant literature
base.
Develop a diagram
that demonstrates all
the advanced
relationships such as
hierarchy, abstraction,
composition that are
evident in the case
study. The cardinality
is mentioned correctly.
The diagram should
demonstrate , a high
level of complexity,
criticality, synthesis
and original thought.
An exemplary
explanation that is free
from errors is
expected
An Excellent
presentation and
implementation using
requested UML Class
and object diagrams
for complex systems
e.g. given case-study
etc and justified using
a excellent relevant
literature base. An
excellent presentation
that is free from
errors. Advanced
concepts such as
relationships and
cardinality between
the classes are
mentioned with minor
mistakes.
A good presentation
and implementation
using requested UML
Class and object
diagrams for complex
systems e.g. given
case-study etc and
justified using
relevant literature
base. Some of the
advanced
relationships might be
missing or the
cardinality might be
missing. A wide
ranging use of
relevant literature,
though there are
some minor issues. A
very good
presentation, which is
clear and mostly free
from errors.
A satisfactory
presentation and
implementation
using requested
Class and object
UML diagrams for
complex systems
e.g. given case
study etc and
justified using
some relevant
literature base.
Advanced
relationships and
cardinality might be
slightly wrong. A
satisfactory
presentation of
academic as well
as professional
skills. Good use of
relevant and valid
literature
appropriately
referenced, with
some scope for
more depth and a
good presentation
though there are
some issues that
need to be
addressed
Some relevant
concepts are
presented in terms
of Unified Modelling
Language (UML)
for class and object
diagrams.
Advanced
relationships such
as hierarchy etc
might not be
demonstrated.
Cardinality might be
missing. Develop
some diagrams,
demonstrating
some level of
critical analysis.
There is a lack of
depth and
relevance. Some
inclusion of
relevant sources
with scope for more
and a basic
presentation which
needs further
development.
There is limited/no
discussion relevant to
Unified Modelling
Language (UML). The
student developed
some/no diagrams
which do not depict
all the classes or
there might be 2 -3
classes which might
not be clearly
described. No object
or incorrect diagram.
There are significant
omissions or a
significant lack of
depth of content and
discussion. There are
significant issues with
the presentation of
the document and
limited use of valid
references
A very limited or
wholly absent level
of design.Page 12 of 15
[4122]
Arden University © reserves all rights of copyright and all other intellectual property rights in the learning materials and this publication. No part of any of the learning materials or this publication may be reproduced, shared (including in private social media groups), stored
in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or means, including without limitation electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Arden University. To find out more about the use and distribution of programme materials
please see the Arden Student Terms and Conditions.
Criteria and
weighting
Outstanding
Excellent
Very Good
Good
Pass
Poor
Fail
80% – 100%
70% – 79%
60% – 69%
50% – 59%
40% – 49%
30 – 39%
0 – 29%
Task 2
(20%)
An outstanding level of
documentation, which
addresses all aspects
of the problem
specification.
Demonstrates a
practitioner level of
understanding of
coding in Java. The
execution of the
program is evidenced
via screenshots and
the output as required
by the task is
obtained, proof of
which is included in
the document. A
complete copy of the
program in text is
appended at the end
of the document.
An excellent level of
documentation, which
addresses all aspects
of the problem
specification.
Demonstrates an
excellent level of
understanding of
coding in Java.
Evidence of testing
the code is included.
Copy of the code in
plain text included in
the appendix.
A very good level of
documentation, which
addresses most
aspects of the
problem specification.
Demonstrates an very
good level of
understanding of
coding in Java. The
code developed
should not have any
errors. Evidence of
testing the code is
included. Copy of
code included in the
appendix.
A good level of
documentation and
design, which
addresses some
aspects of the
problem
specification but
there is scope for
more depth and/or
there are some
errors or omissions
but the code
compiles.
Demonstrates a
good level of
understanding of
coding in Java.
Evidence of testing
the code is
included.
A basic level of
documentation,
which addresses
some aspects of
the problem
specification but
there is scope for
much more depth
and/or there are a
number of errors or
omissions.
Demonstrates a
basic level of
understanding of
coding in Java but
code executes
without errors and
evidence of testing
is included.
An insufficient level of
documentation and
design, which
addresses limited
aspects of the
problem specification.
Demonstrates a
insufficient level of
understanding of
coding, the code does
not execute and there
is no proof of testing
included.
A very limited or
wholly absent level
of documentation
and code with lots
of errors or code
which does not
answer the task
appropriately.
There is no testing
demonstrated.Page 13 of 15
[4122]
Arden University © reserves all rights of copyright and all other intellectual property rights in the learning materials and this publication. No part of any of the learning materials or this publication may be reproduced, shared (including in private social media groups), stored
in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or means, including without limitation electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Arden University. To find out more about the use and distribution of programme materials
please see the Arden Student Terms and Conditions.
Criteria and
weighting
Outstanding
Excellent
Very Good
Good
Pass
Poor
Fail
80% – 100%
70% – 79%
60% – 69%
50% – 59%
40% – 49%
30 – 39%
0 – 29%
Task 3a
(20%)
An outstanding level of
documentation, which
addresses all aspects
of the problem
specification.
Demonstrates a
practitioner level of
understanding of
coding in Java. The
execution of the
program is evidenced
via screenshots and
the output as required
by the task is
obtained, proof of
which is included in
the document. A
complete copy of the
program in text is
appended at the end
of the document.
An excellent level of
documentation, which
addresses all aspects
of the problem
specification.
Demonstrates an
excellent level of
understanding of
coding in Java.
Evidence of testing
the code is included.
Copy of the code in
plain text included in
the appendix.
A very good level of
documentation, which
addresses most
aspects of the
problem specification.
Demonstrates an very
good level of
understanding of
coding in Java. The
code developed
should not have any
errors. Evidence of
testing the code is
included. Copy of
code included in the
appendix.
A good level of
documentation and
design, which
addresses some
aspects of the
problem
specification but
there is scope for
more depth and/or
there are some
errors or omissions
but the code
compiles.
Demonstrates a
good level of
understanding of
coding in Java.
Evidence of testing
the code is
included.
A basic level of
documentation,
which addresses
some aspects of
the problem
specification but
there is scope for
much more depth
and/or there are a
number of errors or
omissions.
Demonstrates a
basic level of
understanding of
coding in Java but
code executes
without errors and
evidence of testing
is included.
An insufficient level of
documentation and
design, which
addresses limited
aspects of the
problem specification.
Demonstrates a
insufficient level of
understanding of
coding, the code does
not execute and there
is no proof of testing
included.
A very limited or
wholly absent level
of documentation
and code with lots
of errors or code
which does not
answer the task
appropriately.
There is no testing
demonstrated.Page 14 of 15
[4122]
Arden University © reserves all rights of copyright and all other intellectual property rights in the learning materials and this publication. No part of any of the learning materials or this publication may be reproduced, shared (including in private social media groups), stored
in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or means, including without limitation electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Arden University. To find out more about the use and distribution of programme materials
please see the Arden Student Terms and Conditions.
Criteria and
weighting
Outstanding
Excellent
Very Good
Good
Pass
Poor
Fail
80% – 100%
70% – 79%
60% – 69%
50% – 59%
40% – 49%
30 – 39%
0 – 29%
Task 3b
(20%)
An outstanding level of
documentation, which
addresses all aspects
of the problem
specification.
Demonstrates a
practitioner level of
understanding of
coding in Java. The
execution of the
program is evidenced
via screenshots and
the output as required
by the task is
obtained, proof of
which is included in
the document. A
complete copy of the
program in text is
appended at the end
of the document.
An excellent level of
documentation, which
addresses all aspects
of the problem
specification.
Demonstrates an
excellent level of
understanding of
coding in Java.
Evidence of testing
the code is included.
Copy of the code in
plain text included in
the appendix.
A very good level of
documentation, which
addresses most
aspects of the
problem specification.
Demonstrates an very
good level of
understanding of
coding in Java. The
code developed
should not have any
errors. Evidence of
testing the code is
included. Copy of
code included in the
appendix.
A good level of
documentation and
design, which
addresses some
aspects of the
problem
specification but
there is scope for
more depth and/or
there are some
errors or omissions
but the code
compiles.
Demonstrates a
good level of
understanding of
coding in Java.
Evidence of testing
the code is
included.
A basic level of
documentation,
which addresses
some aspects of
the problem
specification but
there is scope for
much more depth
and/or there are a
number of errors or
omissions.
Demonstrates a
basic level of
understanding of
coding in Java but
code executes
without errors and
evidence of testing
is included.
An insufficient level of
documentation and
design, which
addresses limited
aspects of the
problem specification.
Demonstrates a
insufficient level of
understanding of
coding, the code does
not execute and there
is no proof of testing
included.
A very limited or
wholly absent level
of documentation
and code with lots
of errors or code
which does not
answer the task
appropriately.
There is no testing
demonstrated.Page 15 of 15
[4122]
Arden University © reserves all rights of copyright and all other intellectual property rights in the learning materials and this publication. No part of any of the learning materials or this publication may be reproduced, shared (including in private social media groups), stored
in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or means, including without limitation electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Arden University. To find out more about the use and distribution of programme materials
please see the Arden Student Terms and Conditions.
Criteria and
weighting
Outstanding
Excellent
Very Good
Good
Pass
Poor
Fail
80% – 100%
70% – 79%
60% – 69%
50% – 59%
40% – 49%
30 – 39%
0 – 29%
Task 3c
(20%)
An outstanding level of
documentation, which
addresses all aspects
of the problem
specification.
Demonstrates a
practitioner level of
understanding of
coding in Java. The
execution of the
program is evidenced
via screenshots and
the output as required
by the task is
obtained, proof of
which is included in
the document. A
complete copy of the
program in text is
appended at the end
of the document.
An excellent level of
documentation, which
addresses all aspects
of the problem
specification.
Demonstrates an
excellent level of
understanding of
coding in Java.
Evidence of testing
the code is included.
Copy of the code in
plain text included in
the appendix.
A very good level of
documentation, which
addresses most
aspects of the
problem specification.
Demonstrates an very
good level of
understanding of
coding in Java. The
code developed
should not have any
errors. Evidence of
testing the code is
included. Copy of
code included in the
appendix.
A good level of
documentation and
design, which
addresses some
aspects of the
problem
specification but
there is scope for
more depth and/or
there are some
errors or omissions
but the code
compiles.
Demonstrates a
good level of
understanding of
coding in Java.
Evidence of testing
the code is
included.
A basic level of
documentation,
which addresses
some aspects of
the problem
specification but
there is scope for
much more depth
and/or there are a
number of errors or
omissions.
Demonstrates a
basic level of
understanding of
coding in Java but
code executes
without errors and
evidence of testing
is included.
An insufficient level of
documentation and
design, which
addresses limited
aspects of the
problem specification.
Demonstrates a
insufficient level of
understanding of
coding, the code does
not execute and there
is no proof of testing
included.
A very limited or
wholly absent level
of documentation
and code with lots
of errors or code
which does not
answer the task
appropriately.
There is no testing
demonstrated.