Assignment Tasks

Criteria Marks MaximumLength

Suggested finishing date

Description of users and personas 5 2 pages 18 February

Task analysis and scenarios 5 2 pages 18 February

Use of user involvement methods (like Contextual Inquiry, Focus groups, Interviews, Questionnaires) to find out what users are like, what they want, what they do, the context of the work, etc.

15 3 pages + appendices for q’aires, results etc.

25 February

Information Architecture: organisation structure(s), organisation scheme(s), labels

15 3 pages 4 March

Navigation: global, local, contextual, supplemental (as appropriate)

10 1 page 4 March

Prototype (paper prototype or other form of prototype as you prefer)

10 1 page + appendices for pictures

11 March

Analytical usability evaluation of your paper prototype. You can choose whether to do a cognitive walkthrough, heuristic evaluation, KLM or a combination of these (applying multiple methods may result in higher marks).

25 3 pages 18 April

Plan for a user test (assuming this will be conducted once the system has been implemented)

15 3 pages 22 April

Assessment Criteria

As built up in lectures. Incomplete.

Description of users and personas (5)

• User Characteristics relevant to application, e.g. how much experience in booking flights, how much experience in Internet, how much English,

• Why relevant• User classes, not missed something obvious

(e.g. business flyers)• Personas: Picture, number of examples, realistic

(have a life, age, name), not just about system topic, …

• Informed by research• Quantity

Task analysis and scenarios (5)

• No implementation details!• Hierarchy• Don’t forget plans in your task analysis• Realistic scenarios, involving personas,

doing one or more tasks• Informed by research• Not forgetting an obvious task• Quantity

Use of user involvement methods (15)

• Are the results used?• Quality of questionnaires, interview scripts,

….• Evidence of having done them (this could

include screen shots, pictures taken in shops,…)

• Realism (with group mates, “real” people)• Quantity (how many methods applied)• Detailed analysis of the results

Information Architecture (15)

• Good groupings. May have different types, using various exact or inexact schemes: e.g. for curtains, grouped by type (blind, ..), by colour, by material, alphabetically, …

• Good labels (and consistent)• Groupings based on research, e.g. how items

are grouped in shops or in internet sites, or using card sorting

• Labels based on research

Navigation (10)

• ‘good’ navigation

• Global, Local, Contextual, Supplementary navigation used appropriately

• Linked to Information Architecture

• Branding: make sure user always knows where they are, where they can go, how to go back…

Prototype (10)

• Screens, and how to go from one screen to the other

• Maybe multiple versions

• How complete (e.g. complete in the sense of vertical: showing all screens for buying one particular curtain)

Analytical Usability Evaluation (25)

• Appropriateness of method(s) chosen• Good quantity of work if bigger group (e.g. four

people in group, than try multiple methods)• If doing Heuristic Evaluation, in bigger group use

multiple evaluators• Good defence of why something is good (if you

cannot find problems)• Could also evaluate somebody else’s system • Tell me exactly where the problems are, and

maybe even how to improve them

User Test Plan (15)

• What you want to find out• What users you want to use, how many, where

to get them from, …• What tasks they will do• What you will measure• Where will the test take place (lab, real

environment)• Observational method• Questionnaires maybe for afterwards and user

selection• Experimental Design