Project Assignment (3000 words)

Read the book and must cite something from this book Debbie Stone, Caroline Jarrett, Mark Woodroffe, Shailey Minocha - User Interface Design and Evaluation (Interactive Technologies) (2005, Morgan Kaufmann) - libgen.lc.pdf Follow the Project00 and Project Introduction which is attached This assignment covers the material in parts 1 and 2 of the textbook. It is worth 25% of the continuous assessment points for the project and should take about 8 hours to complete. The total word count should be about 3000 words.

Report on your system Before starting this part of the assignment, read the instructions in the Project Introduction and Project Assignment 00 about selecting a system or a piece of software on which to base your coursework.

In this part of this assignment, you will produce a report on your system, extending on what you produce for Project Assignment 00. You need to supply enough material for the TA to understand what the system does and what it looks like. You may supply an appendix with background detail if this will help to explain the system but try to keep it brief and avoid including unnecessary detail.

You will be assessed on how well you can describe the system, so do not submit all the available material on the system – be selective. If you find that you cannot describe your system within the word counts mentioned, then contact the grader about changing or limiting your choice of system.

Question 1: Introduction - [about 200 words, 3

points]

Write a brief introduction that (i) places the report in context as the first project's assignment for CSE class by saying how it relates to the course material you have learned thus far, (ii) summarises the purpose and content of the report and (iii) explains why you chose this system for your coursework.

Question 2: Description of the system and its users

- [about 1200 words, 45 points]

Chapters 3 and 4 from the book illustrate how to describe the system.

2.1 (5 pts) Describe the user interface to the system. Include as much visual material as possible (for example screen dumps, figures, diagrams) to show how the system or software works. The use of 'before and after' sketches or screen displays might be helpful to show a change in the interface. For example, you might illustrate a screen before and after a particular button has been selected, showing the changes that occur. If you have chosen part of a system, describe how this part fits within the overall system.

2.2 (8 pts) Write profiles of two contrasting groups of users of your system, describing their main characteristics. Make sure to pick groups of users that you will be actually able to interview for this project.

2.3 (8 pts) Describe the domain in which your system operates. List briefly the goals of the users when they use this system. Briefly explain how you derived your domain description and goal list.

2.4 (8 pts) Describe the tasks involved in achieving one or two of the goals you have listed above. Describe the characteristics of the tasks that the users are engaged in when they try to achieve their goals.

2.5 (8 pts) Describe the physical environment, the social or organizational environment, and the user support environment.

2.6 (8 pts) Discuss the relative importance of efficiency, effectiveness, and satisfaction in your system. Construct three usability metrics, one for each of efficiency, effectiveness, and satisfaction. Explain whether these metrics are sufficient as the usability requirements for your system.

Question 3: Investigation and analysis - [about 1000

words, 30 points]

Chapters 3 and 4 explain how to investigate and analyze systems.

3.1 (7 pts) Briefly interview or observe users from one of the user groups identified in 2.2 to find out how they use the system. Based on the findings of

your interview or observation, choose a task that causes problems for these users. Describe the task and explain why you consider it to be problematic. Regarding the problems they experienced, justify your answer by including comments from these users, or other evidence, such as observation notes.

Concrete use cases are explained in Chapter 4.

3.2 (6 pts) Create a concrete use case for the selected task for your chosen system.

The cognitive walkthrough is described in Chapter 4.

3.3 (8 pts) Using the concrete use case from 3.2, carry out a brief cognitive walkthrough for the selected task for your chosen system.

3.4 (9 pts) Compare and discuss what you learned about the problematic task from:

1. interviewing and observing users 2. your creation of a concrete use case 3. your cognitive walkthrough.

If you think that you did not learn anything from your investigations or analyses then explain why not.

Question 4: Conclusion and quality of the report -

[about 200 words, 3 points for the conclusion, 4

points for quality]

Write a conclusion that (i) describes what you have achieved in the report and (ii) re-states the main points of your work, including any recommendations and proposed future actions. Your report will also be assessed for its overall quality – its consistency, coherence, completeness, and legibility.

Rubric Grading rubric for Assignment 01

Grading rubric for Assignment 01

Criteria Ratings

This criterion is

linked to a

Learning

OutcomeQuestion

1 Introduction

3.0 pts

Full Marks

(1) Reason for choosing system – this must include an HCI reason, not just ‘I

use it at work’ [1 pts]. (2) Purpose and content - What the student hopes to

achieve by the study and how he or she will go about it [1 pts]. (3) Context of

CSE class - how this report fits with the subsequent two reports for

Assignment 02 and Assignment 03. [1 pts]

0.0 pts

No

Marks

This criterion is

linked to a

Learning

OutcomeQuestion

2.1

5.0 pts

Full Marks

After reading this answer the grader should be able to understand what the

purpose of the application is and how the interface is used. The grader should

also understand how the part to be studied fits into the system as a whole.

Sketches and/or screenshots should be relevant to the discussion, showing

how the interface works, not just acting as general illustration. Fewer, more

focused illustrations should attract more points than a book full of

unreferenced pictures. The interface must be looked at from a user’s point of

view, not the system designers. Students can show a sequence of screens of

user actions as in Blackwell’s example in Question 4.

0.0 pts

No

Marks

Grading rubric for Assignment 01

Criteria Ratings

This criterion is

linked to a

Learning

OutcomeQuestion

2.2

8.0 pts

Full Marks

To present the information students may use tables modeled on Tables 3.3,

3.4, and 3.5, and personas (see Chapter 3), or any other sensible format. We

are looking for characteristics of users as people, as described in the

textbook, not for users characterized by their tasks, though the two groups

required may be separated on a role basis or on how they use the system. A

frequent problem is that students focus too narrowly on what they see as

relevant: the appropriate IT skills. If they feel that certain characteristics are

irrelevant to their specific system, then they should say so to show they have

considered them. It needs to be pointed out that interface design must take

cognizance of all the characteristics as explained in Chapter 3.

Characteristics to consider, for each user group: Age and Gender, Physical

and cognitive abilities, Education/culture/relevant experience and skills,

Motivation/attitude.

0.0 pts

No

Marks

Grading rubric for Assignment 01

Criteria Ratings

This criterion is

linked to a

Learning

OutcomeQuestion

2.3

8.0 pts

Full Marks

Things to look out for: (1) Observation of or consultation with

users/stakeholders for gathering knowledge of the domain. (2) A valid list of

domain knowledge and concepts. (3) User’s point of view. (4) Understanding

the nature of goals. (5) Goals were valid in context.

0.0 pts

No

Marks

This criterion is

linked to a

Learning

OutcomeQuestion

2.4

8.0 pts

Full Marks

The question asks for the tasks that the user performs, using the interface.

Reference: Chapter 4. Task characteristics are given in Table 4.2. Award

points for following the textbook, for looking at the tasks from the user’s point

of view (not what the system expects), for having consulted real users and for

showing how the tasks contribute to the achievement of the goals in Q2.3.

Here it may be helpful to show which user groups have which goals and

perform which tasks. Tables similar to Table 4.2 will be fine. Action detail, task,

and workflow analysis may be included but are not required for full marks.

0.0 pts

No

Marks

Grading rubric for Assignment 01

Criteria Ratings

This criterion is

linked to a

Learning

OutcomeQuestion

2.5

8.0 pts

Full Marks

The physical, social and organizational environment (see Chapter 4).

Students could provide evidence that they have both asked users and

observed them working, even though they are not specifically asked to do this

until question 3. See Table 4.4. Physical and safety: lighting, temperature,

noise, layout, adequacy of working space, protective clothing, environmental

hazards [2 pts]. Social: pressure, the interaction between workers, task

sharing, etc. [3 pts]. User support: manuals, training, assistance from

colleagues, etc. [3 pts].

0.0 pts

No

Marks

Grading rubric for Assignment 01

Criteria Ratings

This criterion is

linked to a

Learning

OutcomeQuestion

2.6

8.0 pts

Full Marks

Metrics. The idea here is that the relative importance of the three measurable

factors of efficiency, effectiveness, and satisfaction will depend on the

particular system chosen. For example, in a games system measuring the

level of user satisfaction would have a high priority; for a banking system

effectiveness might be of more value; for a library system efficiency perhaps.

We are asking for the student to determine and justify the importance of each

factor for his own system. This is dealt with in Chapter 6 and Table 6.3. Look

for depth of analysis, just copying from bookwork is not enough. For

discussing each of the factors and explaining why it is important/why it is not

important in context [3 pts]. For suggesting an appropriate metric for each of

the categories [3 pts]. For explaining that metrics are not enough, as a

number of usability issues cannot be measured, and can only be found by

user observation [2 pts].

0.0 pts

No

Marks

Grading rubric for Assignment 01

Criteria Ratings

This criterion is

linked to a

Learning

OutcomeQuestion

3.1

7.0 pts

Full Marks

Choice of problem task and background investigation. Chapter 2 deals with

observation and interviews, but we are not looking for even this depth of

evaluation, which will be dealt with fully in Part 4 and Assignment 03. It is,

after all, only 7 points. Make sure the problem task is analyzable in HCI terms.

Students sometimes select problems that are due to system implementation,

e.g. speed of response in a search, or which are not based on a clear goal

and sequence of actions, e.g. general browsing on a web site. They then find

that the analysis is unsatisfactory and the re-design is based on their

subjective knowledge of the system. These are real usability problems, but

their solutions are not within the scope of the User Interface Design and

Development text, as they’re not based in the UI per se. Just identifying the

problem gets 2 points. This should be a clear definition of the goal, and the

problem tasks or actions. It should relate to the interface described in previous

answers. In fact, reference back to illustrations, user groups, etc would be

helpful [2 pts]. Justifying it by explaining why it is a problem (student has

0.0 pts

No

Marks

Grading rubric for Assignment 01

Criteria Ratings

encountered it himself possibly) [1 pts]. The remaining 4 points are for the

evidence of observation and interview [4 pts].

Grading rubric for Assignment 01

Criteria Ratings

This criterion is

linked to a

Learning

OutcomeQuestion

3.2

6.0 pts

Full Marks

Concrete Use Case. Reference: Chapter 4. This should follow from defining

the task Chapter 4, and should follow the format in Figure 4.3. It should show

only the user actions and system responses at the interface. No cognitive

user actions and no system functionality are required. Things to watch out for:

The single goal should be clearly defined. No cognitive user effort: no

decisions, remembering, etc, this is a doing model. User and system as active

participants (i.e. not abstract as in essential use case). The sequence of

action and response should be complete and model as it is currently done –

no gaps. The sequence of actions must include the problem in Q3.1.

0.0 pts

No

Marks

Grading rubric for Assignment 01

Criteria Ratings

This criterion is

linked to a

Learning

OutcomeQuestion

3.3

8.0 pts

Full Marks

Cognitive Walkthrough. Again this will only work for a single clearly defined

goal, achieved by a specific sequence of steps as defined in Q3.1 and Q3.2.

The actual analysis should follow the discussion in Chapter 4 and the format

in Box 4.4. The concrete use case in question 3.2 should form Step 0 for the

cognitive walkthrough. If necessary it should be pointed out that cognitive

walkthrough is a theoretical exercise: it is not necessary to observe users.

Steps 1-3 follow the example in the text (see Chapter 4) for the

actions/responses defined above. Step 1/Question 1 – how to do it

knowledge, affordance. Step 2/Question 2 – what to do knowledge, visibility.

Step 3/Question 3 – feedback. Roughly 2 points for each step, but it will

depend on the interface. Look out for: Problems not present in the

actions/responses. Lack of clarity/precision in the description. Wrong

category of Step – confusing 1 and 2. This leaves two points for the overall

understanding of the point of the exercise.

0.0 pts

No

Marks

Grading rubric for Assignment 01

Criteria Ratings

This criterion is

linked to a

Learning

OutcomeQuestion

3.4

9.0 pts

Full Marks

This should be an exercise in interpretation and comparison. Students should

note that the use case is at a higher level. It is really a requirements

analysis/development tool, not a usability problem-solving technique.

However, it may show up unnecessary tasks and over-complex task

sequences in achieving the goal. The real problem-solving exercise is in the

cognitive walkthrough. Here the student should identify the interface features

and action requirements that make the interface difficult to use for the defined

task. They may do so in terms of affordance, visibility, and feedback. They

may note problems in consistency, simplicity, support for the user’s task, or

even mental models from the content of Parts 1 and 2, or just explain in plain

language how the analysis gives greater depth in understanding the identified

problems. For the discussion of what was learned from interviewing and

observing [3 pts]. For the discussion of what was learned from the concrete

use case [3 pts]. For the discussion of what was learned from the cognitive

walkthrough [3 pts].

0.0 pts

No

Marks

Grading rubric for Assignment 01

Criteria Ratings

This criterion is

linked to a

Learning

OutcomeQuestion

4

7.0 pts

Full Marks

For the conclusion - following the instructions in the Assignment Booklet - the

student should: (1) describe what they have achieved in the report. (2) re-

state the main points of their work, including any recommendations and

proposed future actions. Reward students who discuss their achievements

and recommendations in terms of User Interface Design and Development

concepts and techniques, rather than those who focus solely on their

application. [3 pts]. For the overall quality, including illustration and

spelling/grammar as well as the consistency, coherence, completeness, and

legibility. [4 pts].

0.0 pts

No

Marks