| Recurring |
one_organization |
<Article 19740> provides information about a software failure incident where medical students at King's College London had to resit an exam because the questions on the exam matched those on a revision app designed by their lecturers. This incident indicates a software failure within the same organization (King's College London) as the app was developed with the help of academics linked to the course [19740]. |
| Phase (Design/Operation) |
design |
(a) The software failure incident in this case is related to the design phase. The incident occurred because the questions on the exam paper matched those found on a revision app designed by the lecturers themselves. The app, priced at £1.49 and available on iTunes, provided study aids so close to the actual questions that it essentially armed the students with the answers they needed to pass the exam. The app was developed with the help of academics linked to the course, including Guys and St Thomas’ NHS Trust consultant Rajesh Varma and academic Dr. Kate Spacey, who teaches at the university [19740].
(b) There is no specific information in the articles indicating that the software failure incident was due to factors introduced by the operation or misuse of the system. |
| Boundary (Internal/External) |
within_system |
(a) within_system: The software failure incident in this case falls within the system boundary. The failure occurred due to questions from a revision app designed by the lecturers themselves matching the questions on the exam paper. The app, priced at £1.49 and developed with the help of academics linked to the course, provided study aids so close to the actual questions that the students who used it were essentially equipped with the answers needed to pass the exam. The app was developed by individuals involved in setting the exam, indicating an internal origin of the contributing factors to the failure [19740]. |
| Nature (Human/Non-human) |
non-human_actions |
(a) The software failure incident in this case occurred due to non-human actions. The failure was attributed to the replication of exam questions on a revision app designed by the lecturers themselves. The app, priced at £1.49 and available on iTunes, provided study aids that closely matched the actual exam questions, leading to the need for the affected students to resit the exam [19740]. |
| Dimension (Hardware/Software) |
software |
(a) The software failure incident reported in the article is primarily related to a software issue rather than a hardware issue. The incident occurred because questions from a revision app designed by the lecturers were replicated in the actual exam paper, leading to the exam being declared void and students having to resit the exam [19740]. This issue originated from the software side, where the app provided study aids so close to the actual questions that it compromised the integrity of the exam.
(b) The software failure incident in this case was caused by the replication of exam questions on the revision app, leading to the exam being declared void and students having to resit the exam. The software failure originated in the development and design of the revision app, which closely mirrored the actual exam questions, creating an unfair advantage for students who used the app [19740]. |
| Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) |
non-malicious |
(a) The software failure incident in this case appears to be non-malicious. The failure occurred because the questions on the exam were replicated on a revision app designed by the lecturers themselves. The app, priced at £1.49 and available on iTunes, provided study aids that closely matched the actual exam questions, unintentionally giving an advantage to the students who used it. The incident led to the exam being declared void, and the affected students had to resit the exam with new questions [19740]. |
| Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) |
poor_decisions |
(a) The software failure incident in this case was primarily due to poor decisions. The incident occurred because the questions on the exam matched those found on a revision app designed by the same lecturers who set the exam [19740]. This indicates a lack of foresight and oversight in ensuring that the content of the app did not directly align with the exam questions, leading to the need for hundreds of students to resit the exam. |
| Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) |
development_incompetence |
(a) The software failure incident in this case appears to be related to development incompetence. The article mentions that the exam questions matched those on a smartphone revision app designed by the lecturers themselves. It is stated that the same staff who wrote the exam paper also helped develop the app, leading to a situation where the app provided study aids so close to the actual questions that the exam had to be declared void, and the students had to resit the exam with new questions [19740]. This indicates a lack of professional competence in ensuring the integrity and independence of the exam questions and the revision app.
(b) There is no specific mention of the software failure incident being accidental in the articles. |
| Duration |
temporary |
The software failure incident described in the article is temporary. The incident occurred due to the questions on the exam matching those found on a revision app designed by the lecturers, leading to the exam being declared void and the students having to resit the exam with new questions [19740]. |
| Behaviour |
other |
(a) crash: The software failure incident in this case did not involve a crash where the system lost state and did not perform any of its intended functions. The issue was related to the replication of exam questions on a revision app, leading to the need for students to resit the exam [19740].
(b) omission: The software failure incident did not involve omission where the system omitted to perform its intended functions at an instance(s). Instead, the issue was about the app providing study aids so close to the actual exam questions that it compromised the integrity of the exam [19740].
(c) timing: The software failure incident was not related to timing, where the system performed its intended functions correctly but too late or too early. The issue was more about the content of the app matching the exam questions, leading to the need for a re-sit [19740].
(d) value: The software failure incident did not involve a value failure where the system performed its intended functions incorrectly. The issue was not about incorrect functioning but about the app providing answers that matched the exam questions [19740].
(e) byzantine: The software failure incident did not exhibit a byzantine behavior where the system behaved erroneously with inconsistent responses and interactions. The issue was more straightforward, involving the replication of exam questions on the revision app [19740].
(f) other: The software failure incident in this case could be categorized as an integrity issue where the app's content compromised the fairness and validity of the exam, leading to the need for students to resit the exam [19740]. |