D687: Computer Science Project Development with a Team

D687 is a late course in WGU's Bachelor of Science in Computer Science, worth 3 competency units in the guidebook. WGU describes it as a course where students prepare a prior project for submission to a mock technical and executive leadership team, building on coding work from an earlier course.

The challenge is communication rather than code. You write for different readers: executives who decide, IT staff who build and peers who review. Students often have working software but struggle to explain its value, requirements and design in the right voice for each audience.

What D687 Covers

WGU adds that artifacts are evaluated by peer team members before submission, so giving, receiving and using feedback is part of the course.

Key Concepts Explained

Writing for Different Readers

The same project needs three voices. Executives want the problem, the benefit, cost, risk and a decision to make. Technical readers want architecture, data, testing and limits. The summary for IT professionals sits between: what the product must do and under what constraints.

Requirements That Can Be Checked

A good requirement can be tested. "The tool should be fast" cannot be verified; "the tool processes the sample file within a stated time on stated hardware" can, once you have measured it.

Feedback as a Process

Peer review works when you ask specific questions, such as "Is the benefit clear in the first paragraph?", and record what you changed afterwards.

Typical Assignments and How to Approach Them

A Competency-by-Competency Study Approach

1. Re-read your project first. Confirm what it actually does, what data it uses and what you can demonstrate.
2. Draft the requirements summary. It forces clarity, and the other two documents can draw on it.
3. Write the technical report. Include testing evidence and honest limits.
4. Write the proposal last. By then you know what you can promise.

Where Students Get Stuck

• One voice for every reader. Technical jargon in an executive proposal loses the decision-maker.
• Claims without evidence. State what you measured and how.
• Repeating the code. Explain decisions and results, not line-by-line logic.
• Late peer feedback. Review time is part of the schedule; leave room for it.

Planning Table

A Custom Outline for the Requirements Summary

The summary for IT professionals works best as a short, numbered document. This outline is a general pattern, not a WGU template, so follow your task instructions first.

1. Purpose in one sentence. What problem the data product solves and for whom.
2. Users and context. Who will run it, on what systems and with which data.
3. Functional requirements. What the product must do, each as a testable statement.
4. Constraints. Performance, security, data quality or compatibility limits.
5. Out of scope. What the product deliberately does not do.

Each requirement should have one clear test. "The product accepts a CSV file with the stated columns and rejects rows with missing values, reporting how many were rejected" can be demonstrated. "The product handles bad data well" cannot.

Running a Useful Peer Review

Because peers evaluate your artifacts before submission, give them a short list of questions rather than "any comments?". Useful questions include: Can you state the problem after reading the first paragraph? Which requirement is least clear? Where would an executive stop reading? Record each answer and what you changed in response.

When you review a peer's work, comment on the reader's experience rather than rewriting their sentences. Saying "I could not tell what decision you want from the executive" is more useful than correcting grammar.

Study Tips for D687

• Write the first paragraph of each document for its reader before anything else.
• Keep a glossary and define each term once.
• Use screenshots or output samples only where they prove a claim.
• Read each document aloud; clumsy sentences show up quickly.

How We Help with D687

Send your project description, drafts, the rubric and peer comments. A writer with technical experience can explain how each audience reads, review your own drafts for structure and tone, or prepare a custom outline on a different project for you to adapt. See our capstone help guide for wider project-writing support.

GradeEssays is independent of Western Governors University. We provide study support, model references and editing of your own work. You write and submit your own artifacts under WGU's academic integrity policy. Orders are written from scratch, with free revisions within the scope of your original request and a full refund if late. No pass is promised.