It will be advantageous to have completed COMP2303 - Network & Operating System Principles or its equivalent.
It is desirable to have completed COMP3301 - Operating Systems or its equivalent OR completion of COMS3200 Computer Networks I or its equivalent
Programming experience is essential, while experience in the C language, Java or C++ is an advantage but not essential. Note that all programming in this course involves programming in C++.
This course introduces students to application programming of a typical embedded system: cellular phone. The laboratory work and projects are based on Greenphone, a cell phone made by Norwegian company Trolltech as a hardware platform on which developers can test their code. Greenphone is a Linux computer with all cell phone interface devices. All code development is performed in C++ in a well integrated environment Qtopia enabling full access to phone resources.
A number of laboratory experiments provide well guided introduction to programming the cell phone. The final project gives opportunity to integrate previously developed modules and develop a more advanced application.
The 1C for this course will take the form of a class discussion at the start of each experiment/project over the semester. That is, in the week that you have assessment, you also have a class discussion where the next experiment/project will be discussed.
Additional timetable information will be available on this course WEB site.
The aim of the course is to introduce students to the practical use of a commercial environment for application development in a particular embedded system.
Students need to be able to develop the software and communicate their work and results
| GRADUATE ATTRIBUTE | LEARNING OBJECTIVES |
| A. IN-DEPTH KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIELD OF STUDY | |
| A2. A broad understanding of the field of study, including how other disciplines relate to the field of study. | 1 |
| A3. A comprehensive and in-depth knowledge in the field of study. | 1, 3, 4, 5 |
| A5. An international perspective on the field of study. | |
| A7. An appreciation of the link between theory and practice. | |
| B. EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION | |
| B1. The ability to collect, analyse and organise information and ideas and to convey those ideas clearly and fluently, in both written and spoken forms. | 1, 2, 4, 6 |
| B2. The ability to interact effectively with others in order to work towards a common outcome. | 2, 6 |
| B3. The ability to select and use the appropriate level, style and means of communication. | 6 |
| B4. The ability to engage effectively and appropriately with information and communication technologies. | 1, 2, 6 |
| B5. The ability to practise as part of an interdisciplinary team. | |
| C. INDEPENDENCE AND CREATIVITY | |
| C2. The ability to work and learn independently and effectively. | 1 |
| C3. The ability to generate ideas and adapt innovatively to changing environments. | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 |
| C5. The ability to formulate and investigate problems, create solutions, innovate and improve current practices. | 1, 5 |
| C6. The abilities and skills that provide a foundation for future leadership roles. | |
| D. CRITICAL JUDGEMENT | |
| D2. The ability to apply critical reasoning to issues through independent thought and informed judgement. | 3, 4, 5, 6 |
| D4. The ability to process material and to critically analyse and integrate information from a wide range of sources. | |
| D5. The ability to evaluate opinions, make decisions and to reflect critically on the justifications for decisions using an evidence-based approach. | |
| E. ETHICAL AND SOCIAL UNDERSTANDING | |
| E1. An understanding of social and civic responsibility. | |
| E3. An appreciation of the philosophical and social contexts of a discipline. | |
| E4. A knowledge and respect of ethics and ethical standards in relation to a major area of study. | |
| E5. A knowledge of other cultures and times and an appreciation of cultural diversity. | |
| E7. The ability to work effectively and sensitively across all areas of society. | |
| E8. An understanding of and respect for the roles and expertise of associated disciplines. | |
All of the necessary material is available on the course web pages.
Students are not required to purchase any textbooks. |
|
| David E. Simon, An Embedded Software Primer, Addison-Wesley Pub Co; 1st edition | |
| Christopher Hallinan, Embedded Linux Primer, Prentice Hall 2006 | |
Greenphone pages at www.trolltech.com |
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Your final grade will be the highest grade for which your overall percentage and component results satisfy the criteria in the following table. For example, if you achieve Conference paper, Assignments, and Project results of 45, 80, and 85 respectively, your overall percentage will be 72% (45%*0.3 + 80%*.3 + 85%*.4). Thus for each component the grades were 4, 6, 7, 5; with your final grade a 4@64% due to the 45% in the final examination. Thus, the final grade is the minimum of the four components, and this is set at the upper bounday of the lowest grade if rounding down has taken place on the final grade.
Any work submitted which has no academic merit attributable to the student submitting the work will receive a mark of 0% for the assessed item. Also note the references to plagiarism elsewhere in this document.
| To be awarded this | requires that you achieve this... | |||
| Final Grade | Overall Percentage | Conference paper | Assignments | Project |
| 7 (High Distinction) | 85% or higher | 75% or higher | 85% or higher | 80% or higher |
| 6 (Distinction) | 75% or higher | 65% or higher | 75% or higher | 70% or higher |
| 5 (Credit) | 65% or higher | 55% or higher | 65% or higher | 60% or higher |
| 4 (Pass) | 50% or higher | 45% or higher | 50% or higher | No requirement |
| 3 (Fail) | 45% or higher | No requirement. | ||
| 2 (Fail) | 20% or higher | No requirement. | ||
| 1 (Fail) | At least one item of work submitted or exam/test/labs attempted. | |||
| X | No work submitted or tests/exams/labs attempted. | |||
Each assignment is designed to build on material provided or developed in previous assignments. Because of this approach, no late assessment of the assignments can be conducted, i.e., a mark of 0% is recorded for each of the components for the late assignment.
Up to one assignment can be waived with suitable evidence that there was a medical condition that made attendance at the demonstration impossible or that the required written material could not be prepared for submission. Any subsequently missed assignments will be awarded 0% even with medical evidence within 24 hours of the demonstration.
Late submission of the project will be penalised by 1/5th of the contribution of the project (not of the mark you were awarded) per working day or part thereof. Requests for extensions should be made to the course coordinator (before the due date) and be accompanied by documentary evidence of extenuating circumstances (e.g. medical certificate).
Late submission should be made to the school office.
| Demonstration | 2% |
| Workbook | 2% |
| Technical Brief | 2% |
| Achievement | Result |
|---|---|
| Software is poorly coded. Software does not compile or link. Software does not work, nor exhibits any possibility of working. Software has been plagiarised. |
|
| Some attempt to maintain the coding style (with relevant comments). Software compiles and links with some warnings. Software works in most areas required, or has indication of substantial proportion working. |
|
| Software adheres to the coding style and has excellent comments. Software compiles and links without any warnings or errors. Software works completely. |
| Demonstration | 2% |
| Workbook | 2% |
| Technical Brief | 2% |
| Achievement | Result |
|---|---|
| Software is poorly coded. Software does not compile or link. Software does not work, nor exhibits any possibility of working. Software has been plagiarised. |
|
| Some attempt to maintain the coding style (with relevant comments). Software compiles and links with some warnings. Software works in most areas required, or has indication of substantial proportion working. |
|
| Software adheres to the coding style and has excellent comments. Software compiles and links without any warnings or errors. Software works completely. |
Each student's workbook is marked individually. If work is included which is not original, then the source of that material needs to be accurately referenced.
The workbook will be marked out of 2 and no part-marks will be given. The following table defines the criteria by which the workbook will be assessed.
| Achievement | Result |
|---|---|
| Little or no material to show development of the software. Material has been plagiarised. |
|
| Some material to show the development of the software. | |
| Detailed material that shows the development of the software which includes: pseudo-code, flowcharts and diagrams. |
| Demonstration | 2% |
| Workbook | 2% |
| Technical Brief | 2% |
| Achievement | Result |
|---|---|
| Software is poorly coded. Software does not compile or link. Software does not work, nor exhibits any possibility of working. Software has been plagiarised. |
|
| Some attempt to maintain the coding style (with relevant comments). Software compiles and links with some warnings. Software works in most areas required, or has indication of substantial proportion working. |
|
| Software adheres to the coding style and has excellent comments. Software compiles and links without any warnings or errors. Software works completely. |
Each student's workbook is marked individually. If work is included which is not original, then the source of that material needs to be accurately referenced.
The workbook will be marked out of 2 and no part-marks will be given. The following table defines the criteria by which the workbook will be assessed.
| Achievement | Result |
|---|---|
| Little or no material to show development of the software. Material has been plagiarised. |
|
| Some material to show the development of the software. | |
| Detailed material that shows the development of the software which includes: pseudo-code, flowcharts and diagrams. |
| Demonstration | 2% |
| Workbook | 2% |
| Technical Brief | 2% |
| Achievement | Result |
|---|---|
| Software is poorly coded. Software does not compile or link. Software does not work, nor exhibits any possibility of working. Software has been plagiarised. |
|
| Some attempt to maintain the coding style (with relevant comments). Software compiles and links with some warnings. Software works in most areas required, or has indication of substantial proportion working. |
|
| Software adheres to the coding style and has excellent comments. Software compiles and links without any warnings or errors. Software works completely. |
Each student's workbook is marked individually. If work is included which is not original, then the source of that material needs to be accurately referenced.
The workbook will be marked out of 2 and no part-marks will be given. The following table defines the criteria by which the workbook will be assessed.
| Achievement | Result |
|---|---|
| Little or no material to show development of the software. Material has been plagiarised. |
|
| Some material to show the development of the software. | |
| Detailed material that shows the development of the software which includes: pseudo-code, flowcharts and diagrams. |
Assesssment of Assignment 5
1. Demonstration of software - 13%
2. Workbook - 2%
| Achievement | Result |
|---|---|
| Software is poorly coded. Software does not compile or link. Software does not work, nor exhibits any possibility of working. Software has been plagiarised. |
|
| Some attempt to maintain the coding style (with relevant comments). Software compiles and links with some warnings. Software works in most areas required, or has indication of substantial proportion working. |
|
| Software adheres to the coding style and has excellent comments. Software compiles and links without any warnings or errors. Software works completely. |
Each student's workbook is marked individually. If work is included which is not original, then the source of that material needs to be accurately referenced.
The workbook will be marked out of 2 and no part-marks will be given. The following table defines the criteria by which the workbook will be assessed.
| Achievement | Result |
|---|---|
| Little or no material to show development of the software. Material has been plagiarised. |
|
| Some material to show the development of the software. | |
| Detailed material that shows the development of the software which includes: pseudo-code, flowcharts and diagrams. |
Students will need to submit their report and project source code by the due date/time. The workbook will not be submitted for assessment. Demonstration of the students' projects will be carried out by the student in the lab session after the submission date.
Each student will submit a report for the project along with a virus-free floppy disk (not a flash disk) containing a zipped archive of the source code. The report will be submitted with a cover sheet showing the name and student number of the student. The appendix of the report will contain a User's Manual and the printed listing of their source code.
The detailed marking criteria for the project demonstration and report will be posted on the course web pages when the details of the project are released.
| Achievement | Result |
|---|---|
| Software is poorly coded. Software does not compile or link. Software does not work, nor exhibits any possibility of working. Software has been plagiarised. |
|
| Some attempt to maintain the coding style (with relevant comments). Software compiles and links with some warnings. Software works in most areas required, or has indication of substantial proportion working. |
|
| Software adheres to the coding style and has excellent comments. Software compiles and links without any warnings or errors. Software works completely. |
Detailed criteria available on the course WEB site
Conference paper according to the detailed requirements published on the course WEB page.
Detailed marking criteria published on the course WEB page.
An overview of the University’s assessment-related policies can be found on myAdvisor (http://www.uq.edu.au/myadvisor/index.html?page=2910).
Academic Integrity
It is the University's task to encourage ethical scholarship and to inform students and staff about the institutional standards of academic behaviour expected of them in learning, teaching and research. Students have a responsibility to maintain the highest standards of academic integrity in their work. Students must not cheat in examinations or other forms of assessment and must ensure they do not plagiarise.
Plagiarism
The University has adopted the following definition of plagiarism:
Plagiarism is the act of misrepresenting as one's own original work the ideas, interpretations, words or creative works of another. These include published and unpublished documents, designs, music, sounds, images, photographs, computer codes and ideas gained through working in a group. These ideas, interpretations, words or works may be found in print and/or electronic media.
Students are encouraged to read the UQ Academic Integrity and Plagiarism policy (http://www.uq.edu.au/hupp/index.html?page=25128) which makes a comprehensive statement about the University's approach to plagiarism, including the approved use of plagiarism detection software, the consequences of plagiarism and the principles associated with preventing plagiarism.
As a student you have a responsibility to incorporate feedback into your learning; make use of the assessment criteria that you are given; be aware of the rules, policies and other documents related to assessment; and provide teachers with feedback on their assessment practices.
There are certain steps you can take if you feel your result does not reflect your performance. Please refer to the myAdvisor web site. (http://www.uq.edu.au/myadvisor/index.html?page=2953&pid=2910)Further to the statement on academic integrity and plagiarism above, students are required to read and understand the ITEE policy on Student Misconduct (http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/about_ITEE/policies/student-misconduct.html).
Late Arrival or Non-attendance at Examinations
The policy and procedure for late arrival or non-attendance at centrally controlled examinations is set out in the University's Examinations policy (HUPP 3.30.5), sections 8 and 10.2.
The way in which late arrival at a School-controlled examination is dealt with will be at the discretion of the course coordinator, who may be guided by the policy for centrally controlled exams.
In the case that a student requests a special exam for a School-controlled exam, the request will be considered and, if allowed, the timing shall be determined by the course coordinator, in consultation with the School's Chief Examiner where necessary, and in accordance with HUPP 3.30.5. Unless otherwise indicated in the Course Profile, applications must be made in writing to the Head of School no later than one week after the exam. Late applications will not be accepted.
Where an adjustment is made to an accredited program, it is the responsibility of the relevant Faculty to liaise with professional and registration bodies regarding the acceptability of the change/s.
Below is a table showing the relationship between the learning objectives for this course and the broader graduate attributes developed, the learning activities used to develop each objective and the assessment task used to assess each objective.
| Learning Objectives | ||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| Learning Activities | ||||||
| Assignment 1 (Discussion) |
 |
|||||
| Assignment 1 (Laboratory ) |
|
|
|
|
||
| Assignment 2: (Discussion) |
|
|||||
| Assignment 2: (Laboratory ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Assignment 3 (Discussion) |
|
|||||
| Assignment 3 (Laboratory ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Assignment 4 (Discussion) |
|
|||||
| Assignment 4 (Laboratory ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Assignment 5 (Discussion) |
|
|||||
| Assignment 5 (Laboratory ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| PROJECT (Discussion) |
|
|||||
| PROJECT (Laboratory ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Assessment Tasks | ||||||
| Assignment 1 |
|
|
|
|
||
| Assignment 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Assignment 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Assignment 4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Assignment 5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Project |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Conference paper |
|
|||||
| Learning Objectives | ||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| Graduate Attributes | ||||||
| A IN-DEPTH KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIELD OF STUDY | ||||||
| A2. A broad understanding of the field of study, including how other disciplines relate to the field of study. |
|
|||||
| A3. A comprehensive and in-depth knowledge in the field of study. |
|
|
|
|
||
| A5. An international perspective on the field of study. | ||||||
| A7. An appreciation of the link between theory and practice. | ||||||
| B EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION | ||||||
| B1. The ability to collect, analyse and organise information and ideas and to convey those ideas clearly and fluently, in both written and spoken forms. |
|
|
|
|
||
| B2. The ability to interact effectively with others in order to work towards a common outcome. |
|
|
||||
| B3. The ability to select and use the appropriate level, style and means of communication. | ||||||