Community resourceWorksheet
OCR H446 1.2.3 Waterfall lifecycle and spiral model
Part 1 of 6 · H446 1.2.3 · Software development
H446 1.2.3 asks not what waterfall and spiral are called but what their movement changes for a project. This worksheet traces a linear route and a risk-driven cycle against contrasting briefs, so iteration, risk and change are argued as consequences rather than as labels.
Students will:
- follow the stages of a waterfall lifecycle and the repeating structure of a spiral cycle
- explain a benefit and a drawback of waterfall for a project with fixed, signed-off rules
- design a first spiral cycle with an objective, a major risk and a risk-reduction activity
- explain how evidence from one cycle changes the plan for the next
- compare both routes for a project carrying safety and integration risk, then recommend one
Inside: 6 explanation cells, 1 multiple-choice question, 2 fill-in-the-blanks cells and 4 written answers. 36 marks, about 45 to 55 minutes.
Series: H446 1.2.3 · Software development, part 1 of 6.
Shared by Coding PathwayVerified teacher
- 13 cells
- About 45 minutes
- CC BY-SA 4.0
- Shared 31 Aug 2026
- Updated 15 Sept 2026
Preview
The whole resource, exactly as a class sees it. Answers and marking are held back.
Waterfall lifecycle and spiral model
Software development usually includes requirements, design, implementation, testing, deployment and evaluation. A development methodology describes how a team moves through this work.
In this worksheet, you will compare two models. Waterfall moves through planned stages. Spiral repeats a cycle in which risk influences what the team investigates and develops next.
Read two process routes
In the waterfall lifecycle, the team completes planned stages in order. Typical work includes requirements and analysis, design, implementation, testing, deployment and evaluation. Each stage produces a deliverable, such as an agreed requirements document, design or set of test results. This structure can make responsibilities and progress clear. However, a requirement found to be wrong late in development may force changes to several completed stages.
In the spiral model, the team repeats a risk-led cycle. It sets objectives, identifies and investigates important risks, develops and tests an appropriate part or prototype, and then plans the next cycle using the evidence. This can reduce uncertainty before the project makes a large commitment. Specialist risk analysis and repeated planning can also add time and cost.
Worked comparison: archive migration
A council is replacing a system that stores public records. The file format and legal rules are already known.
Why waterfall could help: the team can agree the requirements, design and tests before implementation. Named stages and documents make progress easier to check.
Possible problem: if a missing legal rule is discovered during final testing, the team may need to change the design, code and tests.
Why spiral might help: the team could first test the part of the conversion that carries the greatest risk.
Possible problem: repeated risk analysis and planning may add unnecessary cost when the rules and technology are already well understood.
Which action most clearly distinguishes a spiral cycle from merely repeating development work?
- AIdentifying and resolving the most important project risks before committing to the next approach
- BWriting all documentation after release
- CCompleting every project in one fixed pass
- DAvoiding client evaluation
- stages
- risks
- iteration
- syntax
A payroll system uses fixed tax rules. The requirements and acceptance tests have been formally agreed. Explain one benefit and one drawback of using the waterfall lifecycle for this project.
For each point, name something waterfall does, connect it to the payroll project and explain the result.
Students type their answer here.
Worked spiral cycle: an uncertain sensor
A flood-warning service will use a new sensor. Its readings may be inaccurate in cold weather. A first spiral cycle could be:
- Set an objective: show that the service can make reliable warning decisions.
- Identify the main risk: inaccurate readings could cause a false alarm or prevent a real warning.
- Reduce the risk: build a small prototype and test the sensor at several temperatures.
- Plan the next cycle: use the test results to choose calibration work, a different sensor or the next part of the system.
The prototype is built to investigate a named risk. Simply producing several versions does not, by itself, make a project spiral.
A medical appointment system must connect to an unfamiliar identity-checking service. Plan its first spiral cycle. Include: an objective and a way to judge success; a major risk and its possible effect; an activity that investigates or reduces the risk; and how the evidence would affect the next cycle.
Make the four parts form one connected plan. The activity should address the risk you named.
Students type their answer here.
Apply the ideas in a new context
The next questions give less support. Use the project details in each answer and explain why a feature of the methodology helps or causes a problem.
A student writes: ‘Waterfall and spiral are both iterative because developers can correct mistakes. Spiral is always best for a complex project.’ Explain what is wrong with both claims.
First compare how the two models organise development. Then explain why project risk and cost matter when choosing between them.
Students type their answer here.
A rail-signalling simulator involves safety risks and expensive hardware. Some requirements will only become clear during trials. Compare the waterfall lifecycle with the spiral model for this project and recommend one of them.
Explain how each model would organise the work. Apply benefits and drawbacks to safety, hardware trials, changing knowledge and project control. Finish with a supported judgement.
Students type their answer here.
Review your understanding
Check that you can describe what happens in each model, explain when it could help, explain when it could cause difficulty and apply those points to a project rather than repeating a general slogan.