User Centred Systems Design Coursework 2016 This coursework is worth 40% of your module grade. It is an individual coursework, and should be undertaken independently of other students. The marking criteria are given at the end, with descriptions of the achievement expected at each level, from bare fail, through base pass to distinction level pass. Format The final report should be presented in a maximum of five A4 sides, plus appendices including your original material. Proper academic referencing should be used throughout. The five sides should report your process, decisions taken about data gathering and design, and outline the fundamental principles you have used throughout. Reference should be made to the appendices, textbook and academic sources as appropriate. Submission The report should be submitted in PDF format through the module's Moodle area. The submission deadline is Sunday 11th December at 5pm. Expected time input This coursework should take approximately 25-30 hours of study, including writing the final submission. Coursework objectives You should undertake a user-centred design process (see Interaction Design textbook, and lecture 1), doing a full range of user research to arrive at a design for a good user-centred system. We do not expect a full range of features to be designed, but instead two key features of the system should be described in detail, alongside a broad description of the system as a whole. Throughout, clear justification of your decisions should be given, relying on original user data plus good practice and principles of interaction design. Data gathering: (c. 8 hrs) You should plan and execute a limited data-gathering exercise, using questionnaires, interviews or a mixture of both. As a guide, c. 6-8 interviews, or up to 20 questionnaires should be used for the data. Analysis (c. 5 hrs) The data should be analysed into an appropriate number of formats consisting of personas, HTAs, etc. to depict the users' tasks. Conceptual Design (c. 4hrs) Create a basic conceptual design with storyboards or other conceptual design tools to present the overall flow of the system for one complex or two simple tasks.Detailed Design (c. 5hrs) Construct a simple detailed design (e.g. using Balsamiq or paper-based wireframe) of the appearance of the system. Prepare Report (c. 3hrs) Create the final report and attach the raw materials used in your data-gathering, analysis and design work. Coursework Design Task Students and researchers often have to access online journals and other articles in the course of their work or study. Usually, access is provided via a subscription from their university or company, and in the form of access to online databases such as the ACM (in computing) or Wiley (for science). There may be different restrictions about use on-site or off-site, or to only part of the content of a database (e.g. only certain journals, or only for a certain span of years). This can make use of online content complicated, when all they want to do is get on with their work. Furthermore, how users find items will vary from catalogue to catalogue. The university library may list items with different restrictions with a similar appearance, which can be confusing. The search techniques will differ between different online databases (e.g. Springer or the ACM are two common computing databases with different methods), and again the level of access available to the content might not be very visible to the reader. You have been asked to help pilot the design of a new interface that will help make the discovery of and access to the library's content. The answer cannot involve removing all restrictions. Instead, you should make the interface and interaction and simple as possible, taking a user-centred approach. You should undertake original user research to discover the needs of students and researchers, either focussing on a particular group, or taking a broader approach. From your user research, you should specify two key tasks that your system will support, and describe the user needs of each through a storyboard, HTA or other task-focussed description. From this, you should create an initial design, drawing explicitly from your user data and principles of HCI to create a non-functional prototype e.g. wireframes or screen designs. Again, a connection with your user data and task description is critical. Note: note that often the user will have to repeatedly enter and identify themselves. This is redundant work, and it is legitimate to change when or how this happens, to make the user's journey a simpler one.Marking Scheme Overall process: 10% Justification and design of overall user-centred design task, and a clear focus on user needs throughout. Choice of data-gathering technique: 10% Explicit explanation of the methods used for data-gathering, and a justification of the decisions made re. method and numbers. Design of data gathering: 20% Preparation of data gathering instruments: e.g. questionnaire and interview content. Analysis of user data/specification of user task: 25% Synthesis of user data into descriptions of the user's task, and a good connection with the original user data gathered. Design of prototype: 25% Good layout and design of the appearance of the system, with a clear focus on prioritising the key items that support the main user goals and task. Presentation: 10% Grammatical, referenced and clearly laid out presentation of the material. Marking Guidance Distinction: (70%+) Good argument, with all key decisions made explicitly, with reference to the context of the design goals, and including citations of appropriate material. Explicit consideration of trade-offs between different methods at each stage. Thorough user research: data gathering focuses on user task and problems. Clear synthesis of the user's task from the research data. Designs that are well matched with principles of user-centred design and are clear and uncluttered. Merit: (60-69%) Generally good argument, with explanation of each decision from at least one reference, but limited consideration of the design context. Some consideration of trade-offs, or explicit explanations for only some stages. Good synthesis of the user's task, but gaps in explanation and justification, or slight elements of unjustified addition of ideas. Data-gathering is generally userand task-focussed, but also includes some generic questions. Designs that generally follow UCD principles, but have elements that are cluttered or poorly focussed.Pass: (50-59%) Minimal explanation of why decisions were taken: primarily it is only said what is done, not why. Weak or no consideration of trade-offs, mostly simple report of which options were selected. Data-gathering has some user-centred elements, but questions occasionally elicit opinions on desired features or technology. A user task is present, and appears connected to some user data, but many elements are speculative or chosen because they are present in existing systems or are currently popular in general. Designs that are plausible, but have a high density of material on screens, weak or confusing labelling, or locate similar items in very different locations, etc. Fail: (40-49%) Little or no explanation of decisions – many decisions not reported at all. No consideration of trade-offs from a user-centred point of view. Data-gathering includes many elements that are generic or technology-focussed; frequent feature-focussed questions. User task described only in terms of emotions and/or technology, not in terms of goals and actions. Designs regularly contravene UCD principles, or are highly incomplete.