> **DRAFT** — under teacher review. # Evaluation Criteria Must Come From Your SRS The Hamilton and Alexandra College · Year 12 · 2026 One of the most commonly skipped steps in C4-2 is linking evaluation criteria back to the SRS. Students often write criteria that sound plausible but weren't in the requirements they set at the start of the project. The rubric penalises this — criteria that float free of the SRS cannot provide genuine evidence that your solution met its goals. --- ## The rule > Every evaluation criterion must trace back to a numbered requirement in your SRS. If you can't point to a requirement ID (FR1, NFR2, etc.) for a criterion, the criterion should not be in your evaluation matrix. --- ## A concrete counter-example ### Floating criteria (wrong) | Criterion | SRS link | |---|---| | The interface looks modern | — none — | | The app is easy to use | — none — | | The colour scheme is attractive | — none — | These criteria were invented after the fact. They aren't measuring whether the solution met its stated requirements — they're measuring whatever the student decided to judge it on at evaluation time. The rubric at 7–10 specifically requires criteria derived from the SRS. ### SRS-anchored criteria (right) | Criterion | SRS Requirement | Factor type | |---|---|---| | A first-time user shall complete a booking in under 4 minutes without assistance | NFR2 — Usability | Effectiveness | | The event list shall load in under 2 seconds on school Wi-Fi | NFR1 — Performance | Efficiency | | All travel plans entered by the user shall be saved and retrievable across sessions | FR3 — Data persistence | Effectiveness | Each criterion is measurable, has a scoring scale, and traces to a specific SRS requirement ID. When you score it, you're producing genuine evidence. --- ## How to derive criteria from your SRS For each requirement in your SRS, ask: 1. **What does "met" look like?** — turn the requirement into a measurable criterion. 2. **What type is it?** — efficiency (resource use) or effectiveness (fitness for purpose)? 3. **How will you score it?** — define a 1–5 scale with thresholds. **Example:** SRS Requirement: *NFR2 — The interface shall be learnable by a first-time user within one session.* → Criterion: "80% of test users can complete the primary task on their first attempt without assistance." → Type: Effectiveness — Usability → Scoring: 1: <40% | 2: 40–59% | 3: 60–74% | 4: 75–89% | 5: ≥90% --- ## Why VCAA cares At **5–6**: criteria must exist and be applied — even floating criteria partially satisfy this. At **7–8**: criteria must be *used to explain* decisions. Floating criteria make this hollow — you can't explain a decision in terms of requirements you never set. At **9–10**: criteria must be *used to justify* decisions with explicit SRS links. Without requirement IDs in your matrix, this band is unreachable. --- ## Checklist before submitting your evaluation matrix - [ ] Every criterion has a SRS requirement ID next to it - [ ] No criterion appears that isn't in the SRS - [ ] Efficiency and effectiveness criteria are in separate tables - [ ] Each criterion has a defined scoring scale (not just pass/fail) --- ## See also - [Evaluation vs Testing](/sd/C04/Evaluation%20vs%20Testing) — a related conflation to avoid - [Efficiency vs Effectiveness](/sd/C04/Efficiency%20vs%20Effectiveness) — how to sort criteria into the right table - [C04 Resources](/sd/Resources/C04-Resources) — external reading and resources --- ← Back to [C04 Home](/sd/C04/C04-home) · [VCE Software Development Hub](/sd/VCE%20Software%20Development%20Hub)