Week 4: Our Journey Through Software Design

    This week, after the long weekend break due to the Higalaay Fiesta, we finally had the chance to meet with our professor again. As usual, the class kicked off with a brief yet engaging ice breaker. Once more, we were presented with a rebus puzzle, a fun activity that has now become a routine part of our lessons. This time, I was quicker than the others, raising my hand first to answer the puzzle, and I got it right! It was such a good feeling to start the class on a positive note, especially since everyone seemed energized after the long break. Soon after, my classmates eagerly followed, sharing their answers as well, turning the ice breaker into an interactive and enjoyable session.

    With the class atmosphere warmed up, our professor transitioned into the main lesson of the day: the second topic of the course, "Software Design." The discussion was comprehensive, covering essential aspects such as design principles, software methodologies, and how system implementation takes shape in real-world projects. Our professor explained these concepts in detail, touching on coding standards, modularization, and strategies for ensuring effective system deployment. We also delved into topics like code review and refactoring an integral part of maintaining quality in software development.

    Seeing the concepts laid out so clearly helped me grasp how critical it is to have a strong foundation in design before diving into implementation. As the lesson progressed, I found myself thinking back to the previous weeks and how each topic has been building up to form a cohesive understanding of software development. It's exciting to know that we are moving closer to understanding not just the technical aspects of coding, but also the thoughtful planning that goes into building reliable, scalable systems.

A Portion of our Topic Lesson.

    After our lesson, we were split into four groups. Our task was to design a system for a specific client, and once we were done, we had to debate with the other groups. The debate was to see if each group’s system made sense, figure out what was missing, and decide if the system could actually work. My group was asked to design a system for an online bookstore where users could browse books, add them to a shopping cart, and make purchases. We quickly got organized and divided the tasks among us. I was in charge of creating the system architecture. This was an important part because it showed how the system worked, what the different parts were, and how they connected. It was a bit challenging but really rewarding because it was the foundation of our design.

    Once we finished our design, the debate started. The other group presented first, and after they were done, we had to critique their system. We asked if their system was realistic, pointed out any weaknesses, and gave suggestions on what could be better. They defended their work well, but we made sure to analyze everything carefully. When it was our turn, I was one of the presenters because I had created the system architecture. I explained how our system worked, what it did, and how everything was connected. I also talked about why we believed our design could actually work. Presenting was a great experience, and I felt confident because I understood the system well. After the last group finished presenting and defending their system, we said goodbye to our professor, wrapped up the class, and headed home to our own houses.

    

Our Second Group Activity.

    Before the week came to an end, our group decided to consult with our professor about our project. Since we had already finished all the activities that needed to be included in our manuscript, we wanted to make sure everything was on the right track. During the consultation, we presented our work, explaining the details and how we completed each part. Our professor gave us some feedback and said that overall, we were good to go. However, there were a few minor revisions that we needed to address, especially in the database sections and the hardware specifications. These were small adjustments, but still important to make sure the project was solid. Other than that, our professor said we were doing well and could continue moving forward with our project.

Second Consulation with our Professor.