1. Description of the plan
1. Product introduction
The task of this project is to test and evaluate two online learning platforms. The test product is BearingPoint platform, and the competing product is Xuetangxing. Both applications are mainly online learning websites. They are user-oriented and have very similar functions. They belong to competitive products and are very suitable for this comparative test work.
2. PSP table
PSP2.1 | PSP stage | Estimated time (minutes) | Actual time (minutes) |
---|---|---|---|
Planning | plan | 20 | 10 |
Estimate | Estimate how long the task will take | 20 | 30 |
Development | develop | 100 | 130 |
Analysis | demand analysis | 30 | 10 |
Design Spec | Generate design documentation | 10 | 10 |
Design Review | Design Review | 30 | 30 |
Coding Standard | code specification | 20 | 20 |
Design | specific design | 20 | 20 |
Coding | specific code | 30 | 10 |
Code Review | code review | 50 | 10 |
Test | test | 100 | 10 |
Reporting | Report | 20 | 80 |
Test Report | testing report | 30 | 40 |
Size Measurement | Computational workload | 40 | 30 |
Postmortem | Summarize | 10 | 10 |
2. Description of requirements
1. Functional module division diagram
BearingPoint platform:
School Online:
2. The functional modules that I am responsible for
As shown in the picture above, I am responsible for the module that tests the writing and submission of online assignments
3. Test description
1. Design ideas
The submission type of assignments can be divided into selection options, writing text, uploading files, and some assignments have a time limit for question and answer. The following methods can be used:
(1) Equivalence class division method: It mainly tests functions such as normal choice questions, writing homework answer texts, uploading homework files, deleting the last submission, and resubmitting homework.
(2) Boundary value analysis method: The main test is to submit directly without selecting an answer, write simple JS code to observe whether escaping is done, and whether there will be problems when uploading an overly large homework file.
(3) Scenario test: Test the function of the system according to the user's usage scenario.
2. Test execution process
Test requirements:
List of test cases:
Test execution interface:
1. BearingPoint:
2. School Online:
List of bugs found:
Export requirements:
Export the list of test cases:
Export the defect list:
test tools:
ZenTao test management tool of our group's choice
Download address: http://www.zentao.net
Fourth, the conclusion statement
In this test, the homework submission systems of the two websites were tested, and it was found that the homework submission systems of the two platforms did not have any problems in terms of functionality, but they had different defects in usability. The homework submission system is more intuitive, but each topic needs to be submitted separately, and unified submission is not supported. The homework submission system on the BearingPoint platform is not conspicuous when displaying homework, and it also requires one more click of the button when viewing grades. Overall, both platforms have their own strengths.
5. Job description
Through our group work, the divided modules have been determined. I am responsible for submitting the homework module and contributing 0.24 points in the group.
6. Special test: front-end performance test