Learning outcomes:
Knowledge & Understanding
A2. Usability constraints in the design and development of IT systems
A3. Theoretical and practical underpinnings of Computer Science
Practical, Professional and Research Skills
B4. Generation, design and evaluation of solutions to practical problems in Computer Science
Intellectual Skills
C3. Synthesis of a range of knowledge and techniques
Postgraduate generic skills
D1. Make informed judgements on the application of appropriate models and techniques
Module Specific Learning Outcomes
The ability to apply and evaluate appropriate techniques for the production of usable interfaces within a variety of paradigms
Thesis Assignment.
You are required develop a portfolio of work to illustrate your knowledge and understanding of Usability and to meet the Learning Outcomes of the module. Your portfolio should be presented in a suitable manner, having a front cover, a contents page, a chapter (with sub-headings where appropriate) for each of the required sections, and a comprehensive bibliography/reference section. Appendices may be used for diagrams, etc.
MSc Dissertation Assignment details.
Your portfolio must include (as a minimum) the following sections:
1. An introductory report on techniques for the design, development and testing of usable interfaces.
A researched report, using relevant references, of a set of models/ theories/ techniques (such as User Centred Design (UCD)) that could be used for the design and development of usable interfaces. (approx 1000 words)
2. A discussion on either accessibility or mobile interfaces.
A researched, referenced discussion on your chosen topic, which should include a summary of at least two relevant academic papers. You should include a conclusion noting the most important issues and also provide a brief discussion on which of these points you feel should most influence the design of your own interface.(approx 1000 words)
3. A report on the practical application of User Centred Design (or other appropriate set of techniques) to a given scenario.
During the workshops, and in your own study time you are required to carry out a design and development exercise on a given project scenario (attached). Your report should show how you have applied relevant techniques for the design/development of your prototype interface. This should include all working documents from your practical exercises, together with additional notes, annotations and comments/conclusions.
4. A report on interface evaluation/testing techniques.
This should comprise three sections:
i) Produce a detailed, referenced plan of how you would carry out an evaluation of your interface using recognised techniques. Include in your plan details of how you would choose your users, how you would organise the evaluation session(s), and how you would record and analyse the results.
ii) Evidence / documents from the practical evaluation exercises that you have carried out.
iii) A discussion of the results of your evaluation/testing
5. A critical evaluation of the work carried out.
This should consider all the models/techniques/theories that you have used, and should include your conclusions on the advantages and disadvantages of using such approaches.
Note, no extensions will be granted for this coursework. If you fall into difficulties because of unforeseen problems you may be able to ask for mitigation. In this case please contact your Course Leader or the Postgraduate Advisor to discuss it further.
Assessment Criteria
| A | B | C | D | E | F | |
| Section 1:
Learning outcome: A2. Usability constraints in the design and development of IT systems A3. Theoretical and practical underpinnings of Computer Science
|
Well written report demonstrating excellent understanding of all major issues. Excellent use of relevant source material | Report demonstrates thorough understanding of most major issues.
Good use of relevant source material |
Report shows good understanding of issues but lacks detail or clarity
Relevant source material used |
Some understanding of major issues but lacks depth or breadth
Some suitable source material used |
Some understanding shown
Rather superficial
Little use of source material |
Little understanding shown
Superficial attempt
Inappropriate use of source material |
| Section 2
Learning outcome: C3. Synthesis of a range of knowledge and techniques |
A good well-rounded synthesis of relevant material
Excellent use of relevant source material |
A good selection of relevant material presented in a suitable manner
Good use of relevant source material |
Generally good understanding of major issues
Relevant source material used |
Some understanding of major issues but lacks depth or breadth
Some suitable source material used |
Some understanding shown
Rather superficial
Little use of source material |
Little understanding shown
Superficial attempt
Inappropriate use of source material |
| Section 3
Learning outcome: B4. Generation, design and evaluation of solutions to practical problems in Computer Science |
Well chosen techniques used and documented in a professional manner | Suitable and relevant techniques used well throughout and documented well | Generally relevant techniques applied and documented in a suitable manner | A few relevant techniques used and presented in a coherent manner | Techniques tried but not applied well, or not documented well | Poor choice of techniques,
poor documentation of process |
| Section 4
Learning outcome: The ability to apply and evaluate appropriate techniques for the production of usable interfaces within a variety of paradigms |
A clearly evidenced, well planned and professionally applied testing strategy | An evidenced, well planned strategy showing understanding of all issues | Evidence of a good plan and test with suitable understanding | A suitable plan provided with evidence of a reasonable test and some understanding of issues | A test plan provided with evidence of some testing
some understanding of major issues |
Poor test plan
little evidence of real testing little understanding shown |
| Section 5
Learning outcome: D1. Make informed judgements on the application of appropriate models and techniques |
A mature and professional evaluation of all elements | Good evaluation of most parts of the project | Evaluation is good in places, but does not demonstrate depth of understanding | Adequate evaluation of most parts of the project, but rather superficial in places | Some evaluation provided but shows a general lack of understanding in places | Inadequate evaluation of all aspects |