The Advisor: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
==== Please note that ==== | ==== Please note that ==== | ||
{{Box1|The '''feedback''' of the advisor can be | {{Box1|The '''feedback''' of the advisor can be positive or negative!}} | ||
The report of the advisor depends on the '''current state''' of the phase. e.g. if asked | The report of the advisor depends on the '''current state''' of the phase. e.g. if asked that specifications have to be over-worked, it depends on the completeness of the specification-document which report the trainee gets from the advisor. If the specifications already satisfy, it is communicated to the trainee. If not, the trainee gets the advice to over-work the document. | ||
The advisor '''can’t''' give statements to phases, which have not been started! In this case, the trainee gets a message, which says that there are not enough data available to evaluate. | The advisor '''can’t''' give statements to phases, which have not been started! In this case, the trainee gets a message, which says that there are not enough data available to evaluate. | ||
Revision as of 11:45, 14 April 2013
Advisor
The advisor can be asked by the trainee if he is in trouble.
Purpose of the advisor
The task of the advisor is giving the trainee a couple of questions from a predefined catalog. If the trainee chooses one of these questions, the advisor will answer it. The advisor has an own surface in the simulation environment. The advisor gives just current advice. That means he does not have the possibility to give statements about long time aspects in the simulation run.
Questioning
The following list includes advice, which is delivered by the advisor if wished:
- Previous phases should not be forgotten.
Phases always needs a previous document as base, on which they are build on. If this document is missing the phase is doomed to failure. - The previous phase should be finished before starting a new phase.
It is important to the following phase, that the previous phase and thus emerged previous document has been finished more than 50% to enable an overlapping of the phases. If this is not the case, the initiated phase fails. The limit of 50% depends on the model. (QS-model). - The previous phase should be reviewed before starting a new phase.
To build on results of phases, it’s important to review these phases. After the review, the trainee knows that the result of this phase still has errors. These errors need to be corrected, in order to not adopt them in the next phase. - The previous phase should be corrected based on the review, before starting a new phase.
After the review it is important to correct the located errors to avoid their adoption in following phases. - After testing a correction should be performed
Besides the review, a trainee also can make a test to find errors in documents. Those errors also have to be corrected in order to obtain a correct document. - incomplete documents should be subjected to a further working-over.
During the simulation run it happens that single phases satisfy too less requirements or include too much errors. If the advisor recognizes a situation like this, he can react to it and deliver the trainee an advice to improve the phase.
Please note that
| The feedback of the advisor can be positive or negative! |
The report of the advisor depends on the current state of the phase. e.g. if asked that specifications have to be over-worked, it depends on the completeness of the specification-document which report the trainee gets from the advisor. If the specifications already satisfy, it is communicated to the trainee. If not, the trainee gets the advice to over-work the document. The advisor can’t give statements to phases, which have not been started! In this case, the trainee gets a message, which says that there are not enough data available to evaluate.
