COURSE SPECIFICATION · ETEC T-104 STRUCTURE · FALL 2026
Course Specification
CPIT-455 · IT 456 Dependable Systems in the revised plan
The course as delivered in Fall 2026, presented in the sections of the course specification template of the Education and Training Evaluation Commission (ETEC, T-104), with the iSCARB teaching and assessment framework mapped to each section.
Document control بيانات الوثيقة
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Course (current code) | Software Engineering (II) · CPIT-455 |
| Course in the revised IT program plan | IT 456 Dependable Systems (elective) |
| Program | Bachelor of Science in Information Technology |
| Department and faculty | Department of Information Technology, Faculty of Computing and Information Technology, King Abdulaziz University |
| Course coordinator and instructor | Prof. Adeeb Noor |
| Version and date | Version 2.1 · 26 October 2026 |
| Scope | The course as delivered in Fall 2026. The approved course specification is held in the department course file. |
نبذة
تعرض هذه الصفحة مقرر هندسة البرمجيات (2)، ورمزه الحالي CPIT-455، ويقابله في الخطة الدراسية المحدثة لبرنامج تقنية المعلومات المقرر الاختياري IT 456 Dependable Systems. ويُعرض المقرر كما يُدرَّس في الفصل الدراسي الأول 1448هـ وفق أقسام نموذج توصيف المقرر الصادر عن هيئة تقويم التعليم والتدريب (T-104)، مع بيان إسهام إطار iSCARB في طرق التدريس والتقييم ومجالات الإطار الوطني للمؤهلات. أما توصيف المقرر المعتمد فمحفوظ في ملف المقرر بالقسم.
1 · iSCARB and the course specification إطار iSCARB وتوصيف المقرر
iSCARB (Interactive System for Case-based Analysis, Reasoning & Boundaries in the AI Era) is the teaching and assessment framework of this course. Class time teaches the engineering mechanism; a separate, bounded assignment asks each student to own, bound and defend a decision with inspectable evidence, and the final sign-off remains human. The table shows which section of the specification each element serves. See also the iSCARB methodology and the Saudi alignment page.
| iSCARB element | What students do | Specification section | Outcomes and NQF domain |
|---|---|---|---|
| Split delivery | The lecture teaches the engineering mechanism; the consequential decision is made in a separate, bounded assignment. | B · teaching strategies; C · course content | All CLOs |
| Case-based lecture with source figures and three practice stations | Students work through a real case, the original source figures and three short practice stations in every chapter. | B · teaching strategies | CLOs 1–10 · knowledge and skills |
| FIT | Select the mechanism or option that is justified for the case. | B · assessment methods; D | Skills |
| BOUND | Name the observable condition beyond which that choice stops being fit. | B · assessment methods; D | Skills; values, autonomy and responsibility |
| ACT and EVIDENCE | Turn the judgment into a concrete action with a named accountable owner, and provide evidence another professional can inspect. | B · assessment methods; D | Skills; values, autonomy and responsibility |
| Python build in the weekly practical session | Write and run at least three tests, pass a mutation test against known faulty versions and complete a code-coverage step. | B; C · practical hours; D | CLO 11 · skills |
| Commit, then STRESS, then REFIT | Commit the initial reasoning before a changed condition is revealed, then retain, revise or replace the decision with justification. | D · assessment design; F · effectiveness of student assessment | Values, autonomy and responsibility |
| AI-use rules and declaration; human sign-off | Follow the AI rules for each step and declare any assistance; the final decision and wording remain the student's. | D.1 · use of Generative AI (FCIT policy, Option C); F; NELC alignment | Values, autonomy and responsibility |
| Micro-viva and in-class check | Explain and change one's own work in a short oral or written check. | D; F · effectiveness of student assessment | Skills; values, autonomy and responsibility |
| Four-level rubrics with calibration examples | Every criterion is assessed at 1, 0.75, 0.5 or 0, with strong and weak examples shown in advance. | D; F · effectiveness of student assessment | All CLOs |
2 · Course specification, ETEC T-104 structure توصيف المقرر وفق نموذج الهيئة
The wording of the course learning outcomes is that of the course specification on file.
A · General information about the course
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Course title and code | Software Engineering (II) · CPIT-455. In the revised IT program plan: IT 456 Dependable Systems |
| Program, department and faculty | Bachelor of Science in Information Technology · Department of Information Technology · Faculty of Computing and Information Technology, King Abdulaziz University |
| Credit hours | 3 (theory 3, laboratory 0, practical 1) |
| Course type | Department course · elective |
| Pre-requisite and co-requisite | CPIT-251 · none |
| Course topics | Dependable systems; reliability, safety, security and resilience engineering; software reuse; component-based software engineering; distributed software engineering; systems of systems; code coverage. |
| Teaching mode | Traditional classroom instruction on campus: 100% of contact hours. The course website supports study and practice and does not replace classroom instruction. |
| Contact hours per semester | Lectures 45 (3 hours × 15 weeks) · practical 22.5 (90 minutes × 15 weeks) · total 67.5 |
B · Course learning outcomes, teaching strategies and assessment methods
| Code | Course learning outcome | Student outcome | Teaching strategies | Assessment methods |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.0 · Knowledge and understanding · المعرفة والفهم | ||||
| 1.1 | Identify the elements involved in the re-use of code and describe an approach to software reuse based on the composition of standardized, reusable components (CLO 7) | 6 | Case-based lecture; reuse-strategy station; primary source (Garlan, Allen and Ockerbloom 1995) | Assignment 6 (FIT, COMPARE, BOUND); final examination |
| 1.2 | Describe an approach to software reuse based on the composition of standardized and reusable components (CLO 8) | 6 | Case-based lecture; interface-contract station; primary source (Meyer 1992) | Assignment 7 (contract, BOUND, build); final examination |
| 1.3 | Explain distributed systems engineering and distributed systems architectures (CLO 9) | 6 | Case-based lecture; remote-failure station; primary source (Helland 2012) | Assignment 8 (remote-failure reasoning, build); final examination |
| 1.4 | Explain the idea of a system of systems and discuss the challenges of building complex systems of software systems (CLO 10) | 6 | Case-based lecture; staged-acceptance station; primary source (Maier 1998) | Assignment 9 (governance, BOUND, build); final examination |
| 2.0 · Skills · المهارات | ||||
| 2.1 | Design dependability in systems by using redundancy and diversity (CLO 1) | 2 | Case-based lecture; redundancy and common-cause station | Assignment 1 (FIT, BOUND, ACT and EVIDENCE); Assignment 2 (redundancy and diversity); midterm examination |
| 2.2 | Write functional and non-functional dependability and security requirements (CLO 2) | 2 | Case-based lecture; requirement-writing station | Assignments 1, 2 and 4; midterm examination |
| 2.3 | Apply metrics for reliability specification to specify measurable reliability requirements (CLO 3) | 2 | Worked calculation (POFOD, ROCOF, MTTF, AVAIL); operational-profile station | Assignment 2 (MEASURE); midterm examination |
| 2.4 | Design safety in safety-critical systems (CLO 4) | 2 | Case-based lecture; hazard-trace station; primary source (Vesely et al. 1981) | Assignment 3 (TRACE, fault-tree build); midterm examination |
| 2.5 | Design and test secure systems (CLO 5) | 2 | Case-based lecture; misuse-case station; primary source (Saltzer and Schroeder 1975) | Assignment 4 (secure build, negative tests); midterm examination |
| 2.6 | Design systems to support resilience (CLO 6) | 2 | Case-based lecture; recovery station; primary source (Helland and Campbell 2009) | Assignment 5 (RECOVER, merge build); midterm examination |
| 2.7 | Design and implementation of test cases in the different testing strategies (CLO 11) | 2 | Weekly 90-minute practical session: Python build with tests, mutation testing and coverage | Build and TESTS RUN criteria, Assignments 3–9; micro-viva; final examination |
Student outcomes. SO 2 · Design, implement, and evaluate a computing-based solution to meet a given set of computing requirements in the context of the program’s discipline. SO 6 (IT) · Use systemic approaches to select, develop, apply, integrate, and administer secure computing technologies to accomplish user goals.
Values, autonomy and responsibility. The course develops this domain through the iSCARB framework (section 1): students name the accountable owner of each decision, state its limits, declare any AI assistance, and revise their decision when new evidence arrives.
C · Course content
| No | Topic | Weeks | Contact hours | On the website | Assessed in |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Dependable systems | 1–2 | 6 | Chapter 10 | Assignment 1 |
| 2 | Reliability engineering | 3–4 | 6 | Chapter 11 | Assignment 2 |
| 3 | Safety engineering | 5 | 3 | Chapter 12 | Assignment 3 |
| 4 | Security engineering | 6–7 | 6 | Chapter 13 | Assignment 4 |
| 5 | Resilience engineering | 8–9 | 6 | Chapter 14 | Assignment 5 |
| 6 | Software reuse | 10 | 3 | Chapter 15 | Assignment 6 |
| 7 | Component-based software engineering | 11 | 3 | Chapter 16 | Assignment 7 |
| 8 | Distributed software engineering | 12 | 3 | Chapter 17 | Assignment 8 |
| 9 | Systems of systems | 13 | 3 | Chapter 20 | Assignment 9 |
| 10 | Code coverage: testing strategies and levels, coverage tools | 14–15 | 6 | Practised in every Python build, Assignments 3–9 | Coverage step, Assignments 3–9 |
| Total | 15 weeks | 45 |
D · Student assessment activities, Fall 2026
| No | Assessment activity | Timing | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Assignments 1–9 (written analysis and, from Assignment 3, a Python build) | After each chapter, weeks 2–14 | 30% |
| 2 | Midterm examination (written test), Chapters 10–14 | After Chapter 14 (20 October 2026) | 30% |
| 3 | Final examination (written test), the whole course | Final examination period | 30% |
| 4 | Participation (preparation, in-class activities and questions; an optional flipped-lecture presentation counts for up to 3 of the 10 marks) | Weeks 1–15 | 10% |
| Total | 100% |
How assignment points are converted to marks is explained in How the course is graded.
D.1 · Use of Generative AI استخدام الذكاء الاصطناعي التوليدي
The course follows the FCIT Generative AI Policy Guide for Course Syllabus of the Faculty of Computing and Information Technology and adopts its Option C, Mixed Approach, which the guide recommends when assessments have different learning outcomes or different levels of permitted AI use. Syllabus statement:
This course adopts a balanced approach to the use of Generative AI. Depending on the intended learning outcomes, assessments may be designated as AI-Free, AI-Assisted, or AI-Integrated. The instructor will specify the permitted level of AI use for each assessment. Students remain responsible for demonstrating their own understanding and complying with the AI requirements specified for each assessment. Unauthorized use of AI beyond the permitted level may be treated as academic misconduct.
يتبنّى هذا المقرر نهجًا متوازنًا في استخدام الذكاء الاصطناعي التوليدي. فبحسب نواتج التعلم المقصودة، يُصنَّف كل تقييم على أنه بدون ذكاء اصطناعي، أو بمساعدة الذكاء الاصطناعي، أو مدمج فيه الذكاء الاصطناعي، ويحدد الأستاذ المستوى المسموح لكل تقييم. ويبقى الطالب مسؤولًا عن إثبات فهمه بنفسه والالتزام بمتطلبات الذكاء الاصطناعي المحددة لكل تقييم، واستخدام الذكاء الاصطناعي بما يتجاوز المستوى المسموح قد يُعامل مخالفةً أكاديمية.
The permitted level of each assessment in Fall 2026 is given below. No assessment in this course is AI-Integrated. Each assignment page states the same level for each step, and the acknowledgment wording follows the appendix of the guide.
| Assessment | AI level | What is permitted | Acknowledgment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Assignments 1–5 (Chapters 10–14) | AI-Assisted (as instructed on the assignment page) | AI may assist. The student checks every calculation and engineering claim against the lecture, the scenario and the supplied evidence, and never presents an AI-generated rate or test result as measured evidence. From Assignment 3, a build the student cannot explain or change in the micro-viva loses its credit. | AI-use declaration on the assignment page, or “No AI used.” |
| Assignments 6–9 · Part A (FIT, COMPARE, BOUND, ACT and EVIDENCE, reading, second idea), including the critique of the AI draft in the scenario | AI-Free | Written without AI. The AI draft in the scenario is supplied material to critique, not a tool to use. | Declaration (guide appendix, Option 1, for Part A) |
| Assignments 6–9 · Python build | AI-Assisted | AI may explain an error message. It does not write the functions or the tests; the student reviews, tests and modifies the code and can explain every part of it. | Declaration (guide appendix, Option 4: programming assistance) |
| Assignments 6–9 · after commitment (STRESS and REFIT) | AI-Assisted | AI may question the student’s reasoning. The final decision and its wording are the student’s. | Declaration naming the step |
| Micro-viva and in-class check (Assignments 6–9) | AI-Free | Oral, or on paper with no devices, about the student’s own submission. | None |
| Midterm examination | AI-Free | Written test on paper. | None |
| Final examination | AI-Free | Written test. | None |
| Participation · in-class practice stations | AI-Assisted · for learning (as shown on the slide) | The student starts without AI, then may use it to check an answer, and discloses any assistance on the practice card. | Disclosure on the practice card |
| Participation · flipped-lecture presentation (optional, up to 3 marks) | AI-Assisted | AI may help to brainstorm and to improve the language of the draft. The summary, the source-slide numbers, the new example and the quiz question are the student’s own and are checked against the slides; the presentation and the answers to questions are given live, without AI. | One line at the end of the draft (guide appendix, Options 2 and 3), or “No AI used.” |
E · Learning resources and facilities
| Item | Resources |
|---|---|
| Essential reference | I. Sommerville, Software Engineering, 10th edition, Pearson (ISBN 9780133943030), the latest edition. |
| Supportive references | W. E. Vesely et al., Fault Tree Handbook (NUREG-0492), 1981 · J. H. Saltzer and M. D. Schroeder, “The Protection of Information in Computer Systems,” Proceedings of the IEEE, 1975 · P. Helland and D. Campbell, “Building on Quicksand,” CIDR, 2009 · D. Garlan, R. Allen and J. Ockerbloom, “Architectural Mismatch: Why Reuse Is So Hard,” IEEE Software, 1995 · B. Meyer, “Applying ‘Design by Contract’,” IEEE Computer, 1992 · P. Helland, “Idempotence Is Not a Medical Condition,” ACM Queue, 2012 · M. W. Maier, “Architecting Principles for Systems-of-Systems,” Systems Engineering, 1998 |
| Electronic materials | The course website: nine lectures, a source ledger for each chapter, nine assessed assignments and offline packages (Course & sources); Blackboard for announcements, submissions and grades |
| Other learning materials | The original slide packs and the textbook chapters, linked for each chapter |
| Facilities | Lecture room; the weekly 90-minute practical session |
| Technology equipment | Projector; a current web browser. Python runs within the browser without installation. |
F · Assessment of course quality
| Assessment area | Assessor | Assessment method |
|---|---|---|
| Effectiveness of teaching | Students; course coordinator | University course-evaluation survey (indirect); coordination meetings and peer review (direct) |
| Effectiveness of student assessment | Faculty | Four-level rubrics with calibration examples; commit before STRESS; micro-viva and in-class check of the written work against the student's explanation (direct) |
| Quality of learning resources | Students; faculty | Survey (indirect); review of each chapter's source ledger against the textbook and slide pack (direct) |
| Extent to which CLOs are achieved | Faculty; program leadership | Rubric criteria and examination items mapped to CLOs (section 3), reported in the end-of-semester course report (direct) |
| AI-supported learning | Faculty | AI-use declarations checked against the AI level of each assessment (D.1, FCIT Generative AI Policy, Option C); the NELC alignment (indirect) |
G · Specification approval data
The approved course specification is held in the department course file. This page, prepared by the course coordinator on 26 October 2026, describes the course as delivered in Fall 2026.
3 · Mapping of course learning outcomes to assessments ربط مخرجات التعلم بأدوات التقييم
● indicates that the outcome is assessed directly in that assessment. Assignment 1 corresponds to Chapter 10, Assignment 2 to Chapter 11, and so on to Assignment 9, which corresponds to Chapter 20.
| Course learning outcome | A1 | A2 | A3 | A4 | A5 | A6 | A7 | A8 | A9 | Midterm | Final |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CLO 1 · Design dependability in systems by using redundancy and diversity | ● | ● | ● | ● | |||||||
| CLO 2 · Write functional and non-functional dependability and security… | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ||||||
| CLO 3 · Apply metrics for reliability specification to specify measurable… | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||
| CLO 4 · Design safety in safety-critical systems | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||
| CLO 5 · Design and test secure systems | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||
| CLO 6 · Design systems to support resilience | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||
| CLO 7 · Identify the elements involved in the re-use of code and describe… | ● | ● | |||||||||
| CLO 8 · Describe an approach to software reuse based on the composition of… | ● | ● | |||||||||
| CLO 9 · Explain distributed systems engineering and distributed systems… | ● | ● | |||||||||
| CLO 10 · Explain the idea of a system of systems and discuss the challenges… | ● | ● | |||||||||
| CLO 11 · Design and implementation of test cases in the different testing… | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● |
4 · IT 456 Dependable Systems in the revised IT program plan المقرر في الخطة المحدثة
In the revised IT program plan, CPIT-455 corresponds to the elective course IT 456 Dependable Systems, which covers dependability, reliability, safety, security and resilience engineering.
5 · Reference documents الوثائق المرجعية
| Document | Note |
|---|---|
| ETEC/NCAAA T-104 Course Specification template, V2022 (English, Word) | Official template, as distributed by the Deanship of Quality, King Saud University. |
| ETEC/NCAAA T-104 توصيف المقرر، إصدار 2022 (عربي، Word) | Arabic version of the same template. |
| iSCARB methodology | The teaching and assessment framework of the course. |
| Saudi alignment | Jaheziah and NELC alignment of every chapter. |
| FCIT Generative AI Policy Guide for Course Syllabus · Faculty of Computing and Information Technology | Option C, Mixed Approach, adopted in D.1: the AI level of every assessment, and the acknowledgment wording of the guide’s appendix on the assignment pages. |