Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
series of review meetings to discuss the test team's static testing review results for
the requirements. Depending on which area of the system is reviewed fi rst, second,
and so forth, you may need to extend an invitation to specialists in the topic covered
by the requirements. For example, when data entry is the review meeting topic, it
would be very helpful to have one of the more experienced DSA data entry opera-
tors/certifi cate writers included in the meeting discussion. Similarly, when database
searching is the review meeting topic, it would be very helpful to have one of the
more experienced CPI database designers included in the meeting discussion.
Here is an example of what might happen during one of the static test review meet-
ings. On the surface, it looks like the instructor certifi cation code listed on the class ros-
ters is incidental to entering and printing each student's completion certifi cate. When
the situation is discussed with Lisa Lemoine, the DSA Operations Manager, she indi-
cates that DSA has several legal obligations to the State regarding DSA instructors.
First, each DSA course instructor must be certifi ed by the State of Colorado
before the instructor can deliver driver training and vouch for successful student
completion. The State of Colorado assigns each instructor a unique code after the
instructor passes the State examination. DSA must track the certifi cation code for
each instructor and ensure that the instructor successfully completes initial certifi ca-
tion and recertifi cation every 2 years. The penalty for out-of-certifi cation instructors
vouching for successful student completion is a fi ne of $25,000 for each instance. So
far, DSA has not been fi ned for out-of-certifi cation instructors. A penalty that DSA
has incurred is a fi ne of $1,000 for each instructor name on a completion certifi cate
that does not match exactly the instructor name on the State instructor certifi cation
document. DSA has paid an average of $5,000 per year in non-matching instructor
names on completion certifi cates for a total of $10,000 in fi nes. This problem will
most likely reoccur as long as DSA workstation employees must retype the full in-
structor name onto each completion certifi cate.
CPI suggests a modest extension to the current system design to provide an in-
structor code lookup feature. Once the absolutely correct instructor names and codes
have been entered into a system fi le, the workstation operator need only enter a valid
instructor code and a guaranteed correct instructor name can be provided to the input
process via automated lookup. Furthermore, if the instructor code is stored on the stu-
dent completion master record in lieu of the instructor name, there is a possible disk
storage savings because the instructor code is much shorter than any instructor name.
Although the lookup action will require a small amount of additional processing per
student completion master record, the value of the increased accuracy of instructor
name spelling is expected to more than offset the additional processing cost. As a re-
sult of this static test discussion, the following additional use cases are documented:
Use case-09: DSA Instructor Certifi cation Input
Use case-10: DSA Instructor Certifi cation Update
You know when to stop your requirements review meetings by the completion of
your static test review item list. When all review items have review resolutions, you
are fi nished with the review meetings. There can be at least three different kinds of
review resolutions:
Search WWH ::
Custom Search