### Data Structure and Algorithms

Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd.
Assessment Brief
ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458
Version 2: 21st March, 2022 Page 1 of 4 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051
ASSESSMENT BRIEF

Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd.
Assessment Brief
ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458
Version 2: 21st March, 2022 Page 2 of 4 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051
ASSESSMENT DESCRIPTION:
This assessment is an individual report about the design of an OOP system using Data Structures and
Algorithms. The report should follow the following structure using the actual case study that will be available
on Moodle (in assessment section) by week 8.
1. Title Page
2. Executive Summary
3. Introduction
4. Background
5. Case Study and the Design
5.1 Variables, Ranges and Keys
5.2 Operations and the Justification
5.3 Algorithms and the Justification
5.4 Modifications
6. Conclusion
7. References
CASE STUDY:
This assessment is an individual report.
You are required to design a library system for Kent Institute.
Assume that there are:

 i. ii. iii. iv. two campuses – Sydney and Melbourne 200 VET level students 300 Higher Education students 30 professional staff and 40 academic staff

You need to decide how many books, journals, DVDs or other media the library holds.
Then specify the range of operations which will be needed for the library system. For each of these
operations, discuss the most suitable sorting or searching method and why your chosen algorithm for each
operation is the most appropriate.
A nearby University wants to use your system.
They have:
One campus
5000 research students
2000 professional staff
What changes, if any, would you make to your system for the University to be able to use it
effectively and efficiently?
TASKS TO BE COMPLETED
Given the above information:
a) Decide the appropriate variables, keys and ranges to be used in the system. Justify.
b) The operations that library system should support.
c) Algorithms for the operations that your system should support. Also, justify the choice of
algorithms.
d) Changes for the larger university, if any, to be made in the original system. Justify.
ASSESSMENT SUBMISSION:
The assignment must be submitted online in Moodle. All materials MUST be submitted electronically in
Microsoft Word format. Other formats (e.g., pdf or MAC file) may not be readable by markers. Please be aware
that any assessments submitted in other formats will be considered LATE and will lose marks until it is presented
in MS Word. No paper based or hardcopy submission will be accepted.

Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd.
Assessment Brief
ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458
Version 2: 21st March, 2022 Page 3 of 4 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051
MARKING GUIDE (RUBRIC):

 Marking Criteria Fail (0- 9.8) Pass (10 – 12.8) Credit (13 -14.8) Distinction (15- 16.8) High Distinction (17- 20) Specification of K/V/R with justification /20 Little or no specification of keys, values and ranges with no justification is given. Only one out of three (K/V/R) are specified with no or little justification provided. Only two out of three (K/V/R) are specified with no or little justification provided. Only two out of three (K/V/R) are specified with right justifications. All keys, values and ranges are clearly specified and supported by right arguments. Fail (0- 9.8) Pass (10 – 12.8) Credit (13 -14.8) Distinction (15- 16.8) High Distinction (17- 20) Operations /20 No operations are specified that are required for proper functioning of the system. Some rudimentary/un necessary operations are specified which are not crucial for the functioning of the system. Minimal operations are specified that are essential for the working of the system. 50% of operations that are crucial for working of the system are provided. 75% of operations that are crucial for working of the system are provided. Some of the reasons that justify the need of these operations are also specified. A complete list of operations is provided that makes system functional and operational. Reasons for the need of those operations are also provided. Fail (0- 14.2) Pass (15- 19.2) Credit (19.5- 22.2) Distinction (22.5- 25.2) High Distinction (25.5-30) Choice of algorithms with Justification /30 No algorithm is specified for listed operations. If there is some algorithm mentioned, it is not supported by the right arguments as to why the said algorithm is best suited to the operation. Algorithms for majority of the operations are specified. However, there is no justification provided for the choice of algorithms. Algorithms for majority of the operations are specified. Justifications are given but the arguments show a lack of understanding for different properties of algorithms. Algorithms for majority of the operations are specified. Student has an understanding of some of the properties of algorithms. However, he fails to choose the right algorithm for some of the operations. Algorithms for all of the operations are specified. The justification shows a sound understanding of the different properties of algorithms. The capability for choosing the right algorithm for any operation is shown. Fail (0- 5.4) Pass (5- 6.4) Credit (6.5- 7.4) Distinction (7.5- 8.4) High Distinction (8.5- 10) Modifications /10 No comments or superficial comments are provided on the modified system. The change in requirements has been understood but a decision about modifications has not been made. The change in requirements is understood but the modifications suggested are not related to key data structures or algorithms. The change in requirements is understood and modifications are suggested. The arguments given in support of modifications, or no modifications are little or have minor issues. The change in requirements is understood and modifications are suggested. The arguments given in support of modifications, or no modifications are comprehensive and accurate. Fail (0- 5.4) Pass (5- 6.4) Credit (6.5- 7.4) Distinction (7.5- 8.4) High Distinction (8.5- 10) Language and presentation /10 Poor standard of writing. Word limit may not be adhered to. Basic and sound standard of writing; some errors in punctuation, grammar and spelling Good standard of writing; few errors in punctuation, grammar and spelling. Very good standard of writing; very few or minor errors in punctuation, grammar and spelling. Professional standard of writing; no errors in punctuation, grammar and spelling. . Fail (0- 5.4) Pass (5- 6.4) Credit (6.5- 7.4) Distinction (7.5- 8.4) High Distinction (8.5- 10) Structure and referencing /10 No referencing is evident or, if done, is inconsistent and technically incorrect. No or minimal reference list, mixed styles. No in text citations Basic and sound attempt to reference sources; may be some inconsistencies and technical errors in style. Reference list is generally complete with 1 or 2 references missing. Good attempt to reference sources, inconsistencies and technical errors in style. Few inaccuracies in reference list and all references listed. Very good attempt to reference sources, very minor inconsistencies and technical errors in style. Thorough and consistent reference list and all references listed. Professional level of referencing and acknowledgment; no errors of style evident. Thorough and consistent reference list and all references listed.

Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd.
Assessment Brief
ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458
Version 2: 21st March, 2022 Page 4 of 4 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051
GENERAL NOTES FOR ASSESSMENT TASKS
Content for Assessment Task papers should incorporate a formal introduction, main points and conclusion.
Appropriate academic writing and referencing are inevitable academic skills that you must develop and
demonstrate in work being presented for assessment. The content of high-quality work presented by a student
must be fully referenced within-text citations and a Reference List at the end. Kent strongly recommends you
refer to the Academic Learning Support Workshop materials available on the Kent Learning Management System
(Moodle). For details please click the link
http://moodle.kent.edu.au/kentmoodle/mod/folder/view.php?id=3606
and download the file titled “Harvard Referencing Workbook”. This Moodle Site is the location for Workbooks
and information that are presented to Kent Students in the ALS Workshops conducted at the beginning of each
Trimester.
Kent recommends a minimum of
FIVE (5) references in work being presented for assessment. Unless otherwise
specifically instructed by your Lecturer or as detailed in the Unit Outline for the specific Assessment Task, any
paper with less than five (5) references may be deemed not meeting a satisfactory standard and possibly be failed.
Content in Assessment tasks that includes sources that are not properly referenced according to the “
Harvard
Referencing Workbook
” will be penalised.
Marks will be deducted for failure to adhere to the word count if this is specifically stated for the Assessment Task
in the Unit Outline. As a general rule there is an allowable discretionary variance to the word count in that it is
generally accepted that a student may go over or under by 10% than the stated length.
GENERAL NOTES FOR REFERENCING
References are assessed for their quality. Students should draw on quality academic sources, such as books,
chapters from edited books, journals etc. The textbook for the Unit of study can be used as a reference, but not
the Lecturer Notes. The Assessor will want to see evidence that a student is capable of conducting their own
research. Also, in order to help Assessors determine a student’s understanding of the work they cite, all in-text
references (not just direct quotes) must include the specific page number(s) if shown in the original. Before
preparing your Assessment Task or own contribution, please review this ‘YouTube’ video (Avoiding Plagiarism
through Referencing) by clicking on the following link: link:
http://moodle.kent.edu.au/kentmoodle/mod/folder/view.php?id=3606
A search for peer-reviewed journal articles may also assist students. These type of journal articles can be located
in the online journal databases and can be accessed from the Kent Library homepage. Wikipedia, online
dictionaries and online encyclopaedias are acceptable as a starting point to gain knowledge about a topic, but
should not be over-used – these should constitute no more than 10% of your total list of references/sources.
Additional information and literature can be used where these are produced by legitimate sources, such as
government departments, research institutes such as the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC),
or international organisations such as the World Health Organisation (WHO). Legitimate organisations and
government departments produce peer reviewed reports and articles and are therefore very useful and mostly
very current. The content of the following link explains why it is not acceptable to use non-peer reviewed websites
(Why can’t I just Google?):