Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to www.scribd.com

Scribd
Upload
25 views1 page

Software Evaluation Metrics

This document provides an evaluation instrument for a mobile application called PICTODESIGN that allows users to capture pictures and design interiors. It contains rating scales from 1 to 5 on various criteria such as functionality, reliability, usability, efficiency, maintainability, and portability. Evaluators are instructed to check the appropriate numerical rating for each indicator based on their assessment of the application.

Uploaded by

Cleo Audrey Dela Peña
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
25 views1 page

Software Evaluation Metrics

This document provides an evaluation instrument for a mobile application called PICTODESIGN that allows users to capture pictures and design interiors. It contains rating scales from 1 to 5 on various criteria such as functionality, reliability, usability, efficiency, maintainability, and portability. Evaluators are instructed to check the appropriate numerical rating for each indicator based on their assessment of the application.

Uploaded by

Cleo Audrey Dela Peña
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

EVALUATION INSTRUMENT

Research Project Title: PICTODESIGN: A Picture Capturing and Interior Designing


Mobile Application

Name: Date:
Profession: Contact No.
[ ] - IT Group [ ] - Non-IT Group
Instruction: Please evaluate the application by using the given scale. For each criteria,
please place a check mark ( ) under corresponding numerical rating. Thank you!
NUMERICAL RATING
5 Excellent No errors found on the modules and objectives are achieved.
4 Very Good Minimal errors found that has low impact on the application.
3 Good Some of the objectives are not achieved.
2 Fair Minimal errors found that has high impact to the application
1 Poor Most of the objectives are not achieved that has high impact on the application.
INDICATORS 5 4 3 2 1
A. FUNCTIONALITY
1. Appropriateness of application functions and performance of tasks required
2. Provision for comfort, convenience and accurate results
3. User friendliness of the application interface
B. RELIABILITY
1. Minimal frequency and resistance to application failures
2. Re-establishment of application performance from failure
3. Speed performance from the web server
C. USABILITY
1. Ease of function learning
2. Interface Attractive
3. Completeness of Description
D. EFFICIENCY
1. Application performance according to specifications
2. Response behavior in time and resources of the application
3. Interaction with specified applications
E. MAINTAINABILITY
1. Ease of maintenance and identification of application failure causes
2. Provision for enhancements, diagnostics and modifications
3. Minor sensitivity to application component modification
F. PORTABILITY
1. Ease of specification changes
2. Compliance to transferability conventions
3. Compatible to different android version
COMMENTS: SIGNATURE

You might also like