Throughout the group project, a main concern and obstacle that was often encountered was the lack of communication between the supplier and customer groups. This led to having conflicts and vague concepts of requirements and specifications between both supplier and customer groups. Perhaps allowing the customer and supplier groups to meet and discuss personally, over the requirements and specifications corresponding to the documents posted onto the web home pages will give a greater feedback and less speculations towards the project.

In conjunction with the meetings between both customer and supplier groups, internal supplier group meetings should be frequently held which would allow group members to be up to date regarding the project. This also eases the personal group assessments/evaluations since group members would know who worked on several parts of the project.

There should exist project related materials within the scope of the course. i.e. course lecture notes. This would allow groups to have a better understanding of what is required and background knowledge of what is to be expected. Lectures should tie into the progress of the design documents.

The expectations/grading and requirements of sections regarding the projects should be more explicit. Detailed descriptions would greatly be beneficial instead of having brief one or two-liners posted to the Web. Telling us to seek out the TAs isn't a remedy to this problem - often they are difficult to track down. If the question is posed by e-mail, it sometimes takes a few days to get a reply, simply due to the volume of e-mail they must respond to. This is unacceptable as the time-frame for each assignment is small, and answers are needed quickly.

There are a few methods that will make the course project less work and a better convenience. Simplifying and restricting redundant information in documents would save a lot of time. For example, removing the psuedocode from the Detailed Design Document. Creating psuedocode is very useful when preparing for implementation of the project but is it really required for such a document? This raises another question about the usefulness of the Overall Design Document and Detail Design Document. Is it really a necessity for a scope of such a small class project? It would be more useful in a larger project. The timing would be of great convenience and less stressful to groups, but due to the lack of time, supplier groups were not able to fully test all functionality and features nonetheless to complete a fully working prototype/product. Also, it is a great inconvience to groups who are last to present (both customer and supplier), because of the fact that deadlines extends well over the last day of lectures which conflicts with the purpose of doing more work earlier in the semester.