analysis and reflection - mayonez89/MovieSuggestions GitHub Wiki
📑 Chapter summary
In this section we would like that you reflect about the work you have done during the course.- Reflect about own learning
- Feedback on course instruction
✔️ Chapter evaluation (max 4.5 points)
You can get a maximum of 4.5 points after completing the Analysis and Reflection section.📑 Content that must be included in the section
Explain how you would improve your RESTful API and your client application. Try to develop the ideas, and explain why each improvement is needed✔️ Evaluation criteria(max 1.5 points)
- Future work is provided and carefully thought out: 1.5
✏️ Our application can be improved in multiple ways, both on the client-side and on the server-side. For the client, we could improve the UI by making it responsive and by adding better visuals and exploiting hypermedia usage even more. For the server-side, we would like to add more functionality such as profile-based search, comments, ratings, likes, etc. Moreover, we could develop multiple clients, such as mobile apps.
📑 Content that must be included in the section
Discuss in this section the things that you would have done differently if you started the project after this course ends.✔️ Evaluation criteria(max 1.0 points)
- A short reflective description of what was learned while working on the project 1.0
✏️ Write here your text We would have planned it better and not made it hard for ourselves. However, during the project, we got a good idea about hypermedia and its uses and we realized the importance of documentation, team coordination, and compromises as well.
📑 Content that must be included in the section
Comment where you encountered the main difficulties while doing your project work. Discuss about the easiest/most difficult parts of the project. Provide convincing statements.✔️ Evaluation criteria(max 1.0 points)
- A short reflective description of the easiest/most difficults parts of the projects 1.0
✏️ Write here your text The main difficulty that we faced was the shortage of team members - as one of the members dropped out in the middle of our project, without contributing anything. We would like to say that documenting the project was a bit hard as it asked for so many details, while actual programming work did not contribute much to the grade; it was all about the documentation. Also setting projects separately for every team member was a little troublesome - it would have been easier if we could have at least a centralized database.
📑 Content that must be included in the section
Make sincere comments about the course. How this course could be improved? What should be changed? What should not be changed?✔️ Evaluation criteria(max 1.0 points)
- Useful course feedback - what we should change, what we should keep: 1.0
✏️ Write here your text There is a lot of room for improvement in this course. Before enrolling course, we had different expectations from the course, as we thought it would be more about coding. Regardless of that, we enjoyed the exercises and lectures; also we learned a lot of new stuff such as hypermedia, HATEOAS, etc. The recorded lectures were really helpful during the course, and the course staff responses were really quick responding to our issues each time. One devastating thing to find out was that related work cannot be accredited through this course - especially because both team members have enough experience in web development.
| Task | Student | Estimated time |
|---|---|---|
| Editing wiki | Hadi Mir | 10 hrs |
| Editing Wiki | Arnold | 10 hrs |