ARCHIVED - Peer Review Process

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
•  

This page has been archived.

Appendix A – Bibliography

Bibliography

Quality Practices Manual. Quality Assurance Institute, Orlando, Florida, U.S.A. January 1995.

Capability Maturity Model for Software, Version 1.1. Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, U.S.A. February 1993.

Appendix B – Procedure, Checklists and Templates

Review Procedure

A step-by-step method to conduct a peer review. Used by the Participants throughout the review cycle.

STEP 1: Planning

To initiate, organize, and schedule the review, define the participant roles, and define how defects will be classified.

Participant		Task
Author	(1)	Initiates the review process. Contacts the facilitator, appointed by project management, to indicate the work product is ready for review. Provides basic information on project and work product to be reviewed.
	(2)	Verifies a Review Package Cover Sheet exists for the work product. If it does not exist: With the project leader and facilitator, creates a Review Package Cover Sheet for the work product. Forwards a copy of the materials listed in the Review Package Cover Sheet to the facilitator.
Facilitator	(3)	Begins activities listed in Facilitator Checklist.
	(4)	Determines if the product is ready for review based on the Review Package Cover Sheet.
	(5)	Selects reviewers in consultation with the author and/or the project leader and assigns the roles of reader and recorder.
	(6)	Estimates review preparation time. documents: 10-15 pages per hour code: 100-200 statements per hour
	(7)	Schedules the review meeting and sends Review Meeting Notice to participants.
	(8)	Determines with author and project leader if overview is required (e.g. if the product is lengthy or complex)
	(9)	Co-ordinates the distribution of the review material including the Review Meeting Notice.

STEP 2: Overview Meeting (Optional but suggested)

To acquaint all acquaint all reviewers with the work product to be reviewed and to minimize individual preparation time. An overview is optional and is performed if the work product is lengthy, complex or new, if the review process is new, or if the participants are new to the review process

Participant		Task
Facilitator	(1)	Requests the author to present an overview of the work product.
Author	(2)	Organizes, schedules and presents the overview.
Reviewers	(3)	Attends the overview to gain an understanding of the product, not to find defects.

STEP 3: Preparation

To provide time for each review participant to acquire a thorough understanding of the product to be reviewed and identify any defects found (as per exit criteria)

Participant		Task
Reviewers	(1)	Familiarize themselves with the review material.
	(2)	Using the Exit Criteria Checklist, record all defects found and time spent on the Review Preparation Report and Review Defect List.

STEP 4: Review Meeting

To find defects in the work product, but not correct those defects or suggest alternatives for correction.

Participant		Task
Facilitator	(1)	Introduces participants and identifies roles.
	(2)	Re-states objective of the review.
	(3)	Verifies reviewer's readiness by asking time spent in preparation and whether or not all material was reviewed prior to the meeting (as indicated on each reviewer's Review Preparation Report). If any of the participants are not prepared, the facilitator must decide whether to continue with the review, or reschedule it for further preparation.
Reader	(4)	Paraphrases or reads the material.
Reviewers	(5)	State potential defects found, discuss the defect stated and reach a consensus on whether or not the defect exists.
Recorder	(6)	Records defects found by origin, type, class, and severity on the Review Defect List.
	(7)	Classifies each defect found with concurrence from all reviewers.
	(8)	Prepares the Review Defect Summary.
Author	(9)	Provides clarification of the work product, when requested.
Facilitator	(10)	Calls the review to an end if a high number of defects are found early in the review meeting indicating the work product was not ready for review. (The author is responsible for re-initiating a review, through the facilitator, once the work product is ready)
	(11)	Determines the disposition of the review and any follow-up required.
	(12)	Approves the Review Defect List and the Review Defect Summary and forwards a copy to the author and Project Software Quality Assurance.
	(13)	Sign-off on the Defect Certification Report if no defects were found.

STEP 5: Rework/Follow-up

To complete rework required, obtain a sign-off or initiate a re-review and capture review results.

Participant		Task
Author	(1)	Completes all rework to correct defects found as a result of the review.
	(2)	Re-initiates the review process if the inspection ended with a disposition of major rework required.
	(3)	Contacts the facilitator to approve the rework, if the review ended with a disposition of minor rework required.
Facilitator	(4)	Reviews all rework completed and signs-off on Review Certification Report when all defects have been corrected.
Recorder	(5)	Summarizes defect data and ensures entry into an Inspection Defect Database.

Review Package Cover Sheet

Used by the Facilitator to determine if the work product is ready for review.

Unique for each type of artifact.

_____	Review Meeting Notice.
_____	Copy of work product.
_____	Exit Criteria Checklist Form.
_____	If re-review, defect List from prior review.
_____	Applicable Work Product Standards.
_____	Standards.
_____	Departmental Planning Documents.
_____	Others.

Facilitator Checklist

Used by the Facilitator throughout the review cycle.

_____	Check that entry criteria (Review Package Cover Sheet) have been met.
_____	Meet with author and team leader to select qualified review participants and assign roles.
_____	Determine need for an overview session.
_____	Schedule Review Meeting.
_____	Complete Review Meeting Notice.
_____	Gather materials from author and distribute to review participants.
_____	Talk with reviewers to assure preparation time.
_____	Complete self-preparation of material for review.
_____	Conduct Review Meeting.
_____	Ensure completion and distribution of Review Defect List and Review Defect Summary.
_____	Verify conditional completion (Facilitator review or re-inspection).
_____	Complete Review Certification Report.

Exit Criteria

Used by review Participants to determine if the work product passes the review.

Defect Type	Criteria
DC		DOCUMENTATION
	______	Documentation complete
EN		ENGLISH READABILITY
	______	Format and content correct
MN		MAINTAINABILITY
	______	Artifact maintainable and extendible
ST		STANDARDS
	______	Adherence to Quality/Project Standards and Practices

Meeting Notice

Distributed to Reviewers by the Facilitator.

Project Name:			Current Date:
Name of item being reviewed:
Item version identification:
Material Size (Lines/Pages):			Expected preparation time:
Facilitator:
Review Type:	Review
	Re-review
THIS REVIEW HAS BEEN SCHEDULED FOR:
DATE:
TIME:
LOCATION:
DURATION:
THE FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS ARE SCHEDULED TO PARTICIPATE
NAME		PHONE		ROLE
COMMENTS:

Preparation Report

Used by Reviewers during preparation to record defects.

Project Name:			Current Date:
Name of item being reviewed:
Item version identification:
Material Size (Lines/Pages)
Expect Preparation Time:
Preparation Log:
DATE		TIME SPENT
DEFECT LIST:
LOCATION	DEFECT DESCRIPTION			EXIT CRITERIA VIOLATED

Note: For additional defects use reverse side of form.

Defect List

Used by Recorder during the review to record defects.

Project Name:					Current Date:
Name of item being reviewed:
Item version identification:
Facilitator:
Phone:
Review Type:			Review			Release #
			Re-review			Product Type:
DEFECT TYPES: These are examples of defect types. Standard defect types do not currently exist. Until standard defect types are defined, senior project personnel should establish defect types for each type of work product to be inspected.
CM	Comments	LO		Logic			PF	Performance
DA	Data	LR		Linkage Req.			RQ	Requirements
DC	Documentation	MN		Maintainability			SC	Specs. Clarification
EN	English Readability	MS		Messages/Return			ST	Standards
IF	Interface	OT		Other			TP	Test Plan
LD	Logical Design	PD		Physical Design

DEFECT CLASS:

E Extra M Missing W Wrong A Ambiguous U Unknown

 

LOCATION	DEFECT DESCRIPTION	ORIGIN	TYPE	CLASS	SEVERITY

Defect Summary

Prepared by Recorder at the end of the review meeting.

Project Name:		Current Date:
Name of item being reviewed:
Item version identification:
Facilitator:
Phone:
Review Type:	Review		Re-review:

	MINOR DEFECT CLASS
DEFECT TYPES		M	W	E	A	U	Total
CM Comments
DA Data
DC Documentation
EN English Readability
IF Interfaces
LD Logical Design
LO Logic
LR Linkage Reqs.
MN Maintainability
MS Message/Return
OT Other
PD Physical Design
PF Performance
RQ Requirements
SC Spec Clarification
St Standards
TP Test Plan
TOTALS

M Missing
W Wrong
E Extra
A Ambiguous
U Unclear

Project Name:		Current Date:
Name of item being reviewed:
Item version identification:
Facilitator:
Phone:
Review Type:	Review		Re-review:

	MAJOR DEFECT CLASS
DEFECT TYPES		M	W	E	A	U	Total
CM Comments
DA Data
DC Documentation
EN English Readability
IF Interfaces
LD Logical Design
LO Logic
LR Linkage Reqs.
MN Maintainability
MS Message/Return
OT Other
PD Physical Design
PF Performance
RQ Requirements
SC Spec Clarification
St Standards
TP Test Plan
TOTALS

M Missing
W Wrong
E Extra
A Ambiguous
U Unclear

Review Certification Report

Prepared by Facilitator when work product has passed review. Copy forwarded to project Software Quality Assurance (SQA) group.

Project Name:	Review Date:
Name of item being reviewed:
Item version identification:
The following people have reviewed the named Item and agreed that all technical, contractual, quality, etc. requirements and review criteria have been satisfied.
Facilitator:
Recorder:
Reader:
Author:
Software Quality Representative:
Inspectors
Facilitator signature/date

 

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
•