Skip navigation.


CSI422 - Systems Development Project

  • What is the Systems Development Project?

    The Systems Development Project or "Final Year Project" as it is often called, forms part of the degree requirements for research oriented activities or independent projects carried out under the supervision of at least one faculty member with an optional number of secondary (external) supervisors.

  • What is the significance of the Systems Development Project?

    It is part of the Computer Science programme to foster research and independent project participation by undergraduates in order to impart in them the exposure needed for graduate studies as well as the skill to be on the forefront of their field of study.

  • Project Types

    The project may cover an area in Computer Science or an application to another field and fall along the following spectrum:

    The main project types are highlighted starting from the right end (Project type: A), then in the middle (Project type: B), and towards the left end (Project type: C). However, there may be variations in project types that can fall between these main points of the spectrum.

      1. (Project type: A)
      2. Theory- biased research projects are usually extensive investigations which may involve surveys. They aim to pioneer relatively new concepts or improve on old ones.

      3. (Project type: B)
      4. Experimental research projects attempt to establish cause and effect relationships via experimentation. The researcher manipulates and maintains control of all factors that may affect the outcome of the experiment.

      5. (Project type: C)
      6. Implementation-biased projects focus mainly on the development of applications with little research implications.

View the CSI422 Course Flow for a quick overview of how the course is run.

Credits - 4

The Standard of a CSI 422 Project

The Allocation of Students to Supervisors

The General Timeline of CSI 422

This section describes a tentative schedule for CSI 422.

Semester I
  13 CSI 422 Meeting with students
Semester II
2012-02-03 1 Submission of Preliminary Proposal
2012-02-10 2  
2012-03-02 3 Approval of project and suggested supervisor
2012-03-09 4  
2012-03-16 5  
2012-03-23 6  
2012-03-30 7 Presentation of Proposal Concept
2012-04-06 8  
2012-04-13 9  
2012-04-20 10 Submission of Progress Report 1
2012-04-27 11  
2012-05-04 12  
2012-05-11 13 Submission of Formal Proposal
2012-05-18 14  
2012-05-25 15  
2012-06-01 16 Submission of Progress Report 3
2012-06-08 17  
2012-06-15 18  
2012-06-22 19  
2012-06-29 20  
2012-07-06 21 Project Presentation Week
2012-07-13 22  
2011-07-20 23 Submission of Thesis/Project

CSI 422 Protocols

Defined below is a set of rules or guidelines pertaining to both student and supervisor. The consistency of CSI 422 is maintained by such stated protocols.

1 - CSI422 Assessment Checklist

2 - Formatting & Submission of Documents

2.1 Document Formats & Descriptions

  • Preliminary Proposal

    The preliminary proposal is a draft document that briefly outlines the nature of the project or its associated field of study, the proposed title, the statement of the problem, the proposed solution and significance.
    The main objective of the preliminary proposal is to provide a means for faculty members to assess and approve the proposed field of study as well as the standard of work implied in the project.
    [view format of preliminary proposal]

  • Formal Proposal

    The formal proposal builds on the Preliminary Proposal and further elaborates on the proposed project, providing a detailed background, problem statement, proposed solution, significance, methodology, deliverables, a general development plan associated with the project and a list of resource requirements.
    The main focus of this report is to lay the foundation of the project itself with respect to the particular area of interest.
    [view format of formal proposal]

  • Progress Reports

    The progress report is a brief document that aims to inform the respective supervisor(s) of the state of development of the project. Enough detail should be provided in the progress report so as to foster proper guidance from your supervisor(s).
    [view format of progress reports]

  • Thesis

    The thesis is the final document that elaborates, in detail, the findings and developed state of the initially proposed project.
    [view format of thesis]

2.2 Document Packaging

2.3 Late Submissions

3 - Collaboration with Respective Supervisor(s)

4 - The Role of a Supervisor

Investigating Online Multimedia Focus Group Applications: The case of IFGO

, Mr. Lenandlar Singh
Focus groups embrace an interesting methodology in conducting Qualitative research. This research tool is useful in soliciting participants’ deep understanding in an area of interest. The methodology is heavily reliant on an environment that embraces users’ interactions and collaborative questioning in order to fulfill the intent of this research process. Traditionally Focus Groups have been carried out in a face-to-face setting with strengths and limitations well documented. The development of the internet has provided another medium for conducting focus groups discussions with the promise of addressing issues with traditional face-to-face sessions. However, this medium has not yet been fully exploited. In this paper, we describe the development and evaluation of a Multimedia Focus Group Application, Interactive Focus Group Online (IFGO). IFGO refines the online methodology to include multimedia components in an environment that enhances the current Online Focus Group methodology. IFGO potentially provides an environment where group dynamics can be intensified by inherently engaging users in a more proactive discussion process. IFGO is implemented as a web application with synchronous multimedia chat area, synchronous multimedia whiteboard, multimedia file repository and asynchronous discussion forum. Four(4) groups discussion sessions of four(4), five(5), five(5), four(4) participants respectively were conducted using IFGO, and evaluated against two Face-to-Face discussion sessions of six(6) and four(4) participants respectively. The evaluation suggested minimal differences in the results for IFGO when compared with traditional face-to-face groups. However, IFGO has demonstrated potential to address issues with current online methodologies: lack of social cues, limitation of group dynamic, limitation in exposing participants to external stimuli and capture of synchronously generated data. Limitations and directions for future research are discussed.
Online Focus Groups, Online Multimedia Focus Groups, Computer Mediated Communication, Focus Group methodology, Online Research Tools.

Syndicate content