1. Introduction Final Year Projects. Mr.R.M. Kinmond

2. Aim  An introduction to the final year Project (fyp) process as conducted at Staffordshire University in regard to Stafford Computing

3. Project …. BCIT BIT CDS Intelligent systems Identity E- commerce Software Engineering Forensic Mobile Computing science Internet Technology Computer science Computer systems Games Web media technology Information systems Graphics Business Computing Multimedia And more Communications technology

4. What do they have in common?…  Engineering approach  Application of IT  Research  Planning  Analysis  Design  Testing  Conclusion

5. Understanding and Defining The problem  Award requirements  Your career ambitions  Your skills  The skills you want to aquire.  Resources  Time  Supervisor/route advisor approval  Ethical basis

6. Historically …….. Culturally  Changes this year  EOS viva  Gradex entry  Degree means you can problem solve  FYP chance to prove this  Hardest thing yet  What is level three thinking/behaviour  Your project is essentialist and individualistic

7. Today's Perspective:  Project idea and title  Supervisor: what is required who is suitable what if…..  Practicalities: Logging on Proposal selection

8. The importance of the title  One starting point: The project list Combine ideas Apply new technologies New domains Job adverts Skills for career 105 staff suggested projects  Interesting  Informative  Technology used  Domain applied

9. Aims and Objectives  Aims Broad over view General purpose Problem being solved Ambitions and golas  Objectives: Measurable may constrain your ambitions May be too ambitious Think!

10. Methodological reflections…..  methodology Structured approach Suitability? SDLC, spiral, evolve, extreme, agile, object, web Guide lines Standards SSADM, RAD, uml, wsdm, psdm, dsdm, multiview, softsystems etc.. Etc… Hybrid / combined…why?

11. Importance of Technique?  Analysis and design techniques Erms Dfd’s Normalisation Pseudocode Use Case diagrams Rich pictures Story boards Personas Etc etc.

12. Tools! Is size important  Self is a concept that is fundamental to our being  If I believe self is…….then self is.

13. References:  Not for these slides just to show you the approach:  Burkitt, I (1991) Social Selves. London, Sage  Burr, V. (2002) The case for the person in social psychology. BPS Social Psychology Conference  Bruner, J. (1990) Acts of meaning Cambridge, Mass. Havard Uni press  Dennett, D.C. (2003). The self as a responding – and responsible – artifact. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1001, 39-50.  Gazzaniga, M.S. (2000). Cognitive Neuroscience: a reader. Oxford: Blackwell.  Geertz, C. (1984) ‘From the native’s point of view’: on the nature of anthropological understanding. In R. Shweder Culture theory: essays on mind, self and emotion. Cambridge uni Press.  Kihlsrom, J.F. (1993). What does the self look like? In Srull, T.K. and Wyer, R.S. (Eds). The Mental representation of trait and autobiographical knowledge about the self: Advances in social cognition Vol. 5. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.  McCann, D. and Sato, T. (2000). Personality, cognition and self. European Journal of Personality, 14, 449-461.  Markus, H. (1977). Self-schemata and processing information about the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 63-78.  Markus, H. and Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41, 954-969.  Neisser, U. and Jopling, D.A. (1997). The conceptual self in context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  Ramachandran, V.S. and Hirstein, W. (1997). Three Laws of Qualia: What Neurology Tells Us about the Biological Functions of Consciousness, Qualia and the Self. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 4, 429-458.  Ramachandran, V.S. (2003). Neuroscience – the New Philosophy. www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/reith2003/lecture5.shtml www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/reith2003/lecture5.shtml  Turk, D.J., Heatherton, T.F., Macrea, C.N., Kelley, W.M. and Gazzaniga, M.S. (2003). Out of Contact, out of Mind: The distributed nature of self. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1001, 65-78.