Object Relational Database Implementation
|Learning outcomes||1||To research and critically appraise issues involved in designing and implementing a database.|
|2||To synthesise the tools, techniques and procedures involved in the design and implementation of advanced databases|
|3||To critically examine relational and object relational data systems with reference to their appropriateness for differing application requirements|
|4||To investigate and critically evaluate emerging database and information technologies with a view to their deployment as business solutions|
|Title||Object Relational Database Implementation|
|Task details||This element consists of an OO Database development to showcase the use of Oracle’s object relational features. At the start of the module you will be introduced to the various OO features supported by Oracle which should be incorporated into your development. For the case study provided you are required to:|
You must submit the following through the link on Blackboard:
a) A notepad file containing your table creation SQL scripts, suitably annotated.
b) A Word file containing: Your Class Diagram; evidence of the successful implementation of your database (screenshots with annotations); your report.
Following submission, your tutor may ask you explain one or more of the elements you have submitted, to demonstrate your understanding and authorship of the work.
|Understanding and application of OO DB concepts|
|Does the design demonstrate understanding of Object Relational Databases? Are there examples of OO features?|
Is there evidence of successful implementation (correct compilation and execution)?
|35||OO model – 5|
Range of features correctly specified – 10
Successful demonstration of implementation of features (create type/table/insert statements, method testing etc) – 10 Appropriate outputs & rationale; Complexity and originality of outputs -10
Demonstration of independent research
Does your report provide a clear rationale/critique of the design, discussion of alternatives considered.
Does it display evidence of appropriate research, extending concepts covered in class
|Presentation||Are the outputs presented neatly, in an easy to read manner? Is writing free of errors? Is work referenced correctly?||5|
In addition to the assessment criteria above the following table may assist you in understanding how we arrive at your final mark. Indeed your final mark should agree with the following grade descriptors, but note that the assessment criteria are the main means of assessment.
|0-39%||In E1 practical is only partially attempted or has many technical errors.|
In E2 -Limited understanding of the topic. Report poorly structured. Few literature sources and inadequate referencing. Inappropriate argument leading to unreliable and invalid conclusions/recommendations.
|40-49%||In E1 database design and implementation has been attempted but weak incorporation of OO features, or evidence is poorly presented. Rationale may be weak.|
The grammar and punctuation in the report is reasonable. Clear and understandable PowerPoint presentation. Some attempt to relate the research paper to the topic area.
Sufficient attempt at analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the research paper’s recommendations or findings. Reference section contains evidence of wider research, but sources may be poor.
|50-59%||In E1 database design and implementation shows correct implementation of a range of OO features, with sensible justification of rationale. Evidence has been provided of correct implementation of design. The work shows clear evidence of application of research, extending material covered in class. Evidence has been clearly presented.|
For E2- Clear evidence of research into the topic, with some sound references used. The report is near error free. The report is logical and demonstrates sound understanding of main principles. Harvard has been correctly used for all references.
|60-69%||In E1 – Database design, implementation and evaluation all demonstrates a high level of understanding of OO principles and their application to the case study. Rationale provides insightful discussion of viable options. E2- Demonstrates accurate knowledge and understanding of the subject presented in a coherent manner. The answer contains evidence of application and interpretation. At the upper end there is evidence of thoughtful and measured critical evaluation. Well designed PowerPoint presentation. Good analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the research paper’s recommendations or findings based on sound knowledge of the topic selected. Sound sources are used and are well referenced.|
|70+||Meets all the requirements for a mark of 60-60% and in addition:|
E1 practicals demonstrate exceptional understanding of complex features and their application.
E2 report and presentation demonstrate depth of insight and understanding of relevant material. Language and presentation is exceptional.
MARKING GRID – ELEMENT 1 – OORDBMS Development
|Quality of modelling||0-1|
No, or very poor Class diagram provided.
Class diagram models some significant classes and associations but has errors
Class diagram provides a comprehensive model for development, with few errors
Class diagram is exemplary, of a professional standard showing attention to detail
|Quality and breadth of solution; (translation of model to SQL specification)||0-3|
Coded OO features contain errors throughout; or only one feature demonstrated.
At least three OO features have been attempted, but with errors, or inappropriate application.
Full range of OO features have been appropriately applied, including methods; At the higher end, there is evidence of originality and independent research
Solution is exemplary, of a professional standard, showing originality of thought and significant independent research
|Successful implementation of features (create type/table/insert statements, method testing etc)||0-3|
Very little documentation provided to evidence implementation
Documentation provides only partial evidence of implemenation
Good set of documentation, providing evidence for full implementation, at the higher end, full set of features, including adequate testing of methods/function
Exemplary documentation for full range of features, to a professional standard
|Output design and implementation||0-3|
No queries provided, or fewer than required outputs provided, unrelated to requirements of case study;
6 outputs provided, mostly correct, but some are simplistic or address requirements poorly.
6 outputs provided, addressing clear requirements and demonstrating originality and scope of OO features.
Outputs are exemplary in showcasing potential of OORDBM. .
Inadequate report, little valid content.
Attempt made to provide rationale for some choices; at least one reference has been used.
A good evaluation provided; sound explanation for choices and alternatives suggested; Shows appropriate research
Exemplary report, showing originality of thought extending concepts covered in class;
Poorly presented; Problems with English/referencing
Adequate, but room for improvement – eg in English or Referencing
Good presentation and level of English
Exemplary presentation and referencing
MARKING GRID – ELEMENT 2 – PRESENTATION AND RESEARCH PAPER
|Presentation: Has your group provided a clear and accurate summary of the main content in the research paper you have chosen? Does the presentation show a clear understanding of the topic area and the content of paper? (10)||0-3|
The summary is weak or confused showing poor understanding of the topic and content of the paper.
The summary shows an understanding of the topic but only covers part of the paper.
A good attempt has been made to provide an accurate and comprehensive summary of the content, suitable for the target audience.
The summary is exemplary, showing an excellent understanding of the content
|Presentation: Have you clearly outlined the context of the paper and explained what the article’s contribution is to the topic area, using relevant references (5)||0-1|
No context or statement on contribution provided.
Slidesand sources relating to context and contribution have been provided, but are vague or incomplete
Correctly identifies context and justifies statement on contribution to the DB area using sound sources
Fully identifies context and provides insightful assessment of contribution using sound sources
|Presentation: Is there appropriate use of fonts and PowerPoint features, did the team produce a seamless, organised presentation demonstrating good team working? (5)||0-1|
Poor, badly organised presentation suggesting a lack of adequate preparation or poor team working.
Some attempt to incorporate PowerPoint features to provide professional finish, but room for improvement. Delivery is mostly adequate and there is evidence of group collaboration, though this may be patchy.
Good use of PowerPoint features to create professional slides. Presentation is well organised and delivery is timely and professional. Evidence of good group collaboration.
Exemplary use of PP features and notes; the presentation is professional, timely and shows excellent levels of group collaboration in its creation and delivery.
|Summarising report and placing in context: Have you identified the paper’s its context, scope and rationale? Is content summarised in an organised and understandable manner? Have you explored the issues involved in the selected topic with respect to relevant literature, integrating appropriate theories/ concepts to show a clear progression of ideas and understanding? (12)||0-3|
Paper may be inappropriate – eg not peer reviewed journal or too simplistic.
Poor attempt made to summarise the materials, and place it in context. Or summary does not match the content.
Poor use of literature.
Appropriate paper chosen and fair attempt made to summarise content, though may not cover the whole paper. Some pertinent issues have been identified, though may need clearer organisation, and some attempt made to link these to relevant literature. Demonstrates a fair understanding of the main principles;
Appropriate paper chosen and clear summary provided; theories and concepts have been clearly identified and linked to appropriate literature. The paper is well organised with clear progression of ideas Shows accurate knowledge of the subject matter presented in a coherent manner.
Appropriate paper chosen, exemplary summary, scope and links to theory; demonstrates depth of insight and understanding of broad range of relevant material.
|Critical Analysis of report: Do you demonstrate the ability to understand and critically evaluate aspects of the topic in the light of other sources? Are your conclusions justified? (12)|
Inappropriate argument leading to unreliable and invalid conclusions/ recommendations. Few or no references to other sources.
Sufficient attempt at analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the research paper and its recommendations or findings. Reference section contains evidence of wider research, but sources may be poor.
At the upper end there is evidence of thoughtful and measured critical evaluation. Good analysis of the strengths and weaknesses or findings based on sound knowledge of the topic selected. Sound sources are used.
Critical analysis demonstrates depth of insight and understanding of relevant material using a range of excellent sources.
Visual style – impact, legibility & font etc
Quality of citation and referencing (8)
The report is poorly structured, with many spelling/ grammatical errors.
Harvard referencing has been used incorrectly.
The grammar and punctuation in the report is reasonable though may contain some errors. Referencing is mostly correct.
The report is near error free. Harvard has been correctly used for all references.
Exemplary style, language and visual impact. Harvard correctly used for all references.
ADVANCED DATABASE SYSTEMS – ASSIGNMENT 1 OO DEVELOPMENT CASE STUDY
New Faces Ltd
New Faces Ltd (NFL) is a private chain of cosmetic surgeries, set up by a husband and wife team. Originally based in Harley Street, London, the company has over the past 5 years expanded rapidly into other major cities throughout the UK and it now owns almost 25 separate practices employing over 100 surgeons. About 75% of the surgeons are full time, the remainder part time.
This rapid expansion has also presented some problems. The computing systems have always been rather rudimentary, set up by a friend of the two owners who has now decided to retire. This has prompted the owners to undertake a wide scale analysis of their current databases and to look at upgrading their information systems to bring them up to date. They feel they would like to invest in an object relational database to store details of their treatments and customers.
They currently have approximately 30 treatments (for example, botox, various types of face lifts, cellulite reduction, etc). Each treatment has a code, a full description, set price and length (in hours). Each treatment requires a number of materials and processes (eg 30 x ml of silicone; 1 x syringe; 1 hr surgery + 2 hrs one-to-one observation, and so on) and these need to be clearly identified for each treatment.
In order to maintain standards, surgeons working at the surgeries are restricted to specialising in 3 different types of treatments and these need to be recorded for each surgeon. In addition, part time surgeons are required to provide enhanced professional indemnity insurance – the certificate number and date of expiry needs to be held on the database.
Customers book for one treatment at a time and if satisfied can return for many more treatments. On booking, they will be asked to supply a list of any illnesses they have suffered over the last 5 years, the duration of these illnesses and the name of any medicines taken. This record will be stored with the customer and updated whenever they return for more treatments.
Customers are required to rate their satisfaction on completion of their treatment (on a scale of 1-5) and these scores will then processed to produce the average satisfaction score for each surgeon. This will be stored in the surgeon’s record, with a new satisfaction figure being produced every year. If the satisfaction level falls for two consecutive years, that surgeon will be replaced.
NB: This is a fictitious outline case study. You may make any reasonable assumptions to cover any ambiguities. Any assumptions should be stated in your report.