non-funtioning prototype,report

HS2031 Human Computer Interaction Assignment 2 Page 1 of 5

Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines

Trimester T2 2019

Unit Code HS2031

Unit Title Human Computer Interaction (HCI)

Assessment

Type

Group Assignment

Assessment

Title

HCI - Heuristic evaluation plan for a university learning management system

Purpose of the

assessment

(with ULO

Mapping)

Students will be able to:

c. Demonstrate skills in designing and evaluating interactive systems and web- based applications

d. Apply knowledge of theoretical foundations of HCI to practical situations

Weight 20% of the total assessments

Total Marks 100% scaled to 20%

Word limit 2000-2500 words

Due Date Week 10

Submission

Guidelines  All work must be submitted on Blackboard by the due date along with a completed

Assignment Cover Page.

 The assignment must be in MS Word format, 1.5 spacing, 11-pt Calibri (Body) font and 2 cm margins on all four sides of your page with appropriate section headings.

 Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately at the

end in a reference list using Harvard or IEEE referencing style.

HOLMES

INSTITUTE

FACULTY OF

HIGHER

EDUCATION

UNDERGRADUATE

PROGRAM

HS2031 Human Computer Interaction Assignment 2 Page 2 of 5

Assignment 2 Specification

The purpose of the report is to provide a heuristic evaluation plan for university learning management

system. In this group assignment (maximum 5 students) you are required to produce a non-functioning

prototype, usability analysis and heuristic evaluation plan for an organisation, in the format of a report

(2000-2500 words) documenting your design rationale.

All members must contribute equally to the assignment and the walkthrough. Non-attendance at the

walkthrough will mean a mark of ZERO is awarded to the group member.

Many Universities in Australia and the world are using learning management systems (LMS) such as

Blackboard and Moodel. As an HCI specialist team you have been requested to propose the user interface

design modifications for the LMS Blackboard of our university HOLMES institute.

1. Perform a user analysis. You must have a clear view of the users of this system. Consider that not

everyone is comfortable with the technology. For example, you need to deal with user variation

such as age or language skills.

2. Perform a task analysis to identify the tasks the potential users will perform, and in what order.

3. Consolidate your findings from your user and task analysis and propose a design and specify

system requirements to realise the recommended interface. For example, the number of items to

display, the screen size, what colours, how many different screens to display, the devices to you,

the physical design.

4. Develop a low-fidelity (paper) prototype (a minimum of 4 screens). Based on the above

requirements, develop a preliminary design of the user interface. At this stage, the prototype is

basically a medium to support your initial concept and ideas. For example, the prototype should

show where the relevant button locations, how much information would be presented on each

screen etc. Low- fidelity prototyping is mainly to allow designers to produce alternative designs

expediently without having to go into depth or functionality. Think of low-fidelity prototyping as

the 5D tool for: design, draft, decide, discard and do-over.

5. Perform an interim evaluation of your design by creating a method of feedback and asking 3-4

potential users (e.g. friends, family members, classmates, etc.) to complete the feedback for your

low-fidelity paper prototype. Carry out the evaluation according to prescribed methods found in

the textbook (Shneiderman & Plaisant, 2017) or from other scholarly sources. Use appropriate

survey techniques. Analyse the data you have collected from the user evaluation and note down

any recommendations as to how you could refine and improve on your initial design.

HS2031 Human Computer Interaction Assignment 2 Page 3 of 5

6. Based on the user test feedback and recommendations develop a high-fidelity prototype. The high-

fidelity prototype should be an online mock-up of your proposal and should demonstrate some

navigation, although it does not need to work as a complete interface. A minimum of 4 screens

should be produced in correspondence to your storyboard. The high-fidelity prototype must be

computer based and any software is acceptable including PowerPoint, storyboarding, etc.

7. Create an evaluation plan with recommendations on the tools and methods you intend to use to

evaluate the usability of your interface.

Upon the completion of the task, you are to required provide a formal report to document the tasks and

the outcome of your efforts undertaken for the project. Remember, this report is intended for your

employers and as such be professionally formatted and presented. Your report will support the viability

of your interface and as such needs to convince your employer that your interface design is satisfactory

and that it meets user acceptance test.

REPORT STRUCTURE:

In your report please follow the below structure:

1. Introduction – State the purpose and objectives of the report.

2. Discussion – Build your arguments into a cohesive thread, presenting your observations and

findings that you have collated.

3. Recommendation – This is the section where you present your recommendations.

4. Conclusion – Summarise your findings, consolidating and drawing attention to the main points

of the report.

5. References. (a minimum of 10 references)

HS2031 Human Computer Interaction Assignment 2 Page 4 of 5

Marking criteria

Marking criteria Weighting

Analysis – User Analysis and Task Analysis 15% Design - Interface Design specification 15%

Prototype – Low-fidelity Prototype and High-fidelity 15%

Evaluation – Interim Evaluation and Proposed evaluation Plan for the final implementation

20%

Report - Professionally formatted document including appropriate sections, references and bibliography

20%

Walkthrough - Professionally organised, good timing, pitch and presentation style, appropriate content

15%

TOTAL Weight for this assignment marking: 100 (Total of 100 marks to be scaled to 20% of actual marks for this unit)

100%

HS2031 Human Computer Interaction Assignment 2 Page 5 of 5

Marking Rubrics

Grades Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

Introduction

/20

Demonstrated

excellent

ability to think

critically and

sourced

reference

material

appropriately

Demonstrated

very good

ability to think

critically but

did not source

reference

material

appropriately

Demonstrate

d good

ability to think

critically and

sourced

reference

material

appropriately

Demonstrated

satisfactory

ability to think

critically and

did not source

reference

material

appropriately

Did not

demonstrate

ability to think

critically and did

not source

reference material

appropriately

Discussion

/40

Demonstrated

excellent

ability to think

critically and

sourced

reference

material

appropriately

Demonstrated

excellent

ability to think

critically but

did not source

reference

material

appropriately

Demonstrate

d ability to

think critically

and sourced

reference

material

appropriately

Demonstrated

ability to think

critically and

did not source

reference

material

appropriately

Did not

demonstrate

ability to think

critically and did

not source

reference material

appropriately

Recommendation

/20

Logic is clear

and easy to

follow with

strong

arguments

Consistency

logical and

convincing

Mostly

consistent

logical and

convincing

Adequate

cohesion and

conviction

Argument is

confused and

disjointed

Conclusion

/10

All elements

are present

and very well integrated.

Components

present with

good cohesive

Components

present and

mostly well integrated

Most

components

present

Proposal lacks

structure.

Harvard or IEEE

Reference style

/10

Clear styles

with excellent

source of

references.

Clear

referencing

style

Generally

good

referencing

style

Sometimes

clear

referencing

style

Lacks consistency

with many errors