Assignment M5 (Fall 2016)
Due: Sunday, November 13th, 2016, by 11:59PM UTC-12 (Anywhere on Earth). This assignment is based on lesson 3.6 (Evaluation), and focuses on executing out your evaluation plan.
Answer the following prompt in a maximum of 1200 words, with a recommended length of 1000 words; if you supply more than 1200 words, the grader will stop reading at the 1200th word, and you will not receive credit for anything written after that. You are encouraged but not required to complement your responses with diagrams, drawings, pictures, etc.; these do not count against the word limit, though any captions, text in tables, etc. does.
Execute the two evaluations you chose in the previous assignment and report the results.
If you selected the qualitative analysis, report first on the pragmatic results: how many participants took part, how did the sessions run, and is there anything you would do differently purely organizationally next time (~50 words)? Then, report first the raw results of your evaluation (~125 words). What feedback did participants give you directly in response to your questions? Then, analyze the feedback that the participants gave you (~125 words). What are the main takeaways for improving the interface? What feedback surprised you? What feedback did you receive that you expected? Finally, describe briefly the changes that feedback would already suggest in your prototypes (~50 words).
If you selected empirical analysis, first report on the testing process (~100 words). Did everything go as expected? What deviations, if any, did you encounter? Then, perform and report the results of your statistical test (~100 words). Do you accept or reject the null hypothesis, and why? Report also the number of participants and any other information relevant to the statistical trial. Then, analyze these results (~150 words). Did they match what you expected? If not, why do you think the results were not as expected? If so, do you believe the results are because of real differences or because of lurking variables or experimental errors?
If you selected the predictive analysis, select seven appropriate principles from unit 2 of the course and use them to evaluate the walkthrough or model(s) you constructed. These principles could be any of the principles from the design principles and heuristics lesson, any of the high-level lesson topics, or any other well-defined topic discussed in unit 2 of the course. For each principle, identify the principle and describe whether or not the walkthrough or model instantiates the principle (~50 words per principle). If so, explain why. If not, explain how the interface could be improved with that principle in mind, or why the interface should not meet that principle (for example, if the difficulty is in a trade-off between two principles).
Finally, based on the results of these evaluations, briefly describe what you would do in the next iteration through the design life cycle. First, what information would you like to understand about the user more fully that could be investigated through additional needfinding exercises (~50 words)? Second, has this experience brought to mind any additional design alternatives you might explore in a second iteration through the design life cycle (~50 words)? Third, what revisions to the prototypes would you already expect to make, either changing them at their current level of fidelity or raising them to the next level of fidelity (~100 words)? Fourth, assuming you made those changes, what type of evaluation would you employ next (~50 words)?
Assignments should be submitted to the corresponding assignment on T-Square in accordance with the Assignment Submission Instructions. Most importantly, you should submit a single PDF for each assignment. This PDF will be ported over to Peer Feedback for peer review by your classmates. If your assignment involves things (like videos, working software prototypes, etc.) that cannot be provided in PDF, you should provide them separately (either through the class Resources folder or your own upload destination) and submit a PDF that describes how to access the assignment.
This is an individual assignment. Every student should submit an assignment individually.
Late work is not accepted without advanced agreement except in cases of medical or family emergencies. In the case of an emergency, please contact the Dean of Students.
This question is graded out of 20 possible points. Your grade and feedback will be returned to you via T-Square. An announcement will be made via Piazza when grades are returned.
After submission, your assignment will be ported to Peer Feedback for review by your classmates. Grading is not the primary function of this peer review process; the primary function is simply to give you the opportunity to read and comment on your classmates’ ideas, and receive additional feedback on your own. All grades will come from the graders alone.
You will typically be assigned three classmates to review. Peer reviews are due one week after the due date of the assignment, and count towards your peer review grade. Remember, peer reviews are graded not just based on completion, but also based on feedback quality. Each peer review should be substantive, whether in the way it critiques, praises, or elaborates on the assignment.