Syllabus – Weekly schedule. Project Sharing – Exercise 3 Team level discussion Teams share results of contextual inquiry Note: Jennifer & Anita circulate,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Network of Dynamic Learning Communities C 107 F N Increasing Rigor February 5, 2011.
Advertisements

Welcome to EDUC 490 Spring 2007 Pick up a copy of each of the papers on the front table. Find your name card.Pick up a copy of each of the papers on the.
Technovation Lesson: Business Plan Week 6. Check-in: Business model You should have completed the business model page in your workbook. You’ll need this.
Technology as a solution to implementing active-learning pedagogies... Ann C. Smith University of Maryland College Park MD PKAL 2003 Boulder Colorado.
Administrivia  Review Deliverable 2 –Overview (audience) –Excellent additions  User Goals  Usability Goals  User Group (who are you designing for?)
Heuristics  Basis  Evaluators –Qualifications –Training  Preparation –Scenario  Results –List of problems –Severity –Group synthesis.
Project Sharing  Team discussions –Share results of heuristic evaluations –Discuss your choice of methods and results  Class-level discussion –Each spokesperson.
Administrivia  Feedback on first Deliverable –Audience: Management –Requirements  Description of the system (what it is, how it works)  Define user.
Administrivia EPost and Portfolio EPost and Portfolio Analysis of Design process Analysis of Design process.
Syllabus – Weekly schedule. Project Deliverable 1 Required elements –Product statement –One use case –Redesign justification Format-specific additional.
Design Process …and the project.
Agenda – Week 8, Day 1 Debrief from Flash Transition to Professional Portfolio Tuesday: Unpack assignment, Personas, Examples Tuesday: Conceptual designs,
Analysis of Design Process Lewis/Gould 1981 Study TC518 W ’06 Students Early Focus on Users 62%58% Empirical Measurement 40%69% Iterative Design 20%62%
Warm-up, Free-write Task: –On a blank sheet of paper, begin to write down what you know about the users of your product, the tasks they use the product.
CIE 500D “Introduction to Graduate Research in Constructed Systems” (3) Spring Semester, 2007 Friday, 3:00 – 5:30 pm, 140 Ketter Hall Instructor: George.
Elicitation Methods Information types Information types Information Information Internal Perspectives Internal Perspectives Behavior Behavior Facts Facts.
Topical Interest Groups as Communities of Practice: Strategies for Building a Community of Practice Facilitated by: PK12 Educational Evaluation TIG Evaluation.
Capstone Design Project (CDP) Civil Engineering Department First Semester 1431/1432 H 10/14/20091 King Saud University, Civil Engineering Department.
Y. Rong June 2008 Modified in Feb  Industrial leaders  Initiation of a project (any project)  Innovative way to do: NABC ◦ Need analysis ◦ Approach.
Best Practices in Active Learning “Team Based Learning (TBL)” Ilene Harris, PhD.
Basics of Conducting Focus Groups Applied Research Focus groups are a powerful means to evaluate services or test new ideas. Basically, focus groups are.
1-2 Training of Process FacilitatorsTraining of Coordinators 4-1.
The Use of Student Work as a Context for Promoting Student Understanding and Reasoning Yvonne Grant Portland MI Public Schools Michigan State University.
© 2008 by PACT PACT Scorer Training Pilot.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike.
S556 SYSTEMS ANALYSIS & DESIGN Week 11. Creating a Vision (Solution) SLIS S556 2  Visioning:  Encourages you to think more systemically about your redesign.
1 Ensuring the Future of the Arthur W. Page Society Communications Committee Plan Paul Capelli Peter Debreceny.
EngageNY.org Adapting and Designing Additional Module Assessments Session 5, February 2014 NTI.
1 Welcome to Senior Design 4106 Fall 2005 Section B: Dr. Marc Goetschalckx Dr. Spyros Reveliotis Webpage: Acknowledgement:
Skills 4 Success.
Complex Aerospace Systems Exchange (CASE) 2012 Conference Planning Committee Meeting 11 Jan 2012.
OVERVIEW PRESENTATION
CCT 333: Imagining the Audience in a Wired World Class 6: Qualitative Research Methods.
 Now we are ready to write our evaluation report.  Basically we are going to fill our content to the checklist boxes we learned in lec2. S519.
Agenda – Week 10, Day 2 Where we’ve been Professional portfolio assignment guidelines Examples and building blocks Personas Conceptual Designs Portfolio.
Design Process … and some design inspiration. Course ReCap To make you notice interfaces, good and bad – You’ll never look at doors the same way again.
Out of Thin Air: Technology Integration in the Delaware Recommended Curriculum Project Dr. Michael Stetter Director, Curriculum Development Suzanne Keenan.
Writing Tactics and Analyzing Text Across the Curriculum Addressing Common Core: Text Types and Purposes (Grades 6-12) Research to Build and Present Knowledge.
TC 310 The Computer in Technical Communication Dr. Jennifer Turns Week 1, Day 1.
Project Sharing  Team discussions (15 minutes) –Share results of your work on the Project Scope Proposal –Discuss your choice of methods and results –Prepare.
Administrivia  Final Exam –Due Date – Thursday, March 17 –Q & A  Deliverable 2 –Q & A.
Z556 Systems Analysis & Design Session 10 ILS Z556 1.
CREATIVE BRIEF. Creative Brief A document required in preparing for advertising, public relations, promotions, direct marketing, design and digital mediums.
Fundamentals of Workflow Analysis and Process Redesign Unit Process Change Implementation and Evaluation.
A Fundamental Challenge Imagine a world where designers –Realize that they are making decisions that affect users –Make these decisions based on knowledge.
EXAMINING THE MODULES: ASSESSMENT PRACTICES LT 2c. I can analyze the role of student-friendly learning targets, aligned assessment, and effective curriculum-
SCIENCE COMPANION: AN OVERVIEW OCTOBER 13, 2009 Debbie Leslie, University of Chicago Center for Elementary Mathematics and Science Education (CEMSE)
Administrivia  Feedback from the mid-term evaluation  Insights from project proposal.
Teaching Cases in INFORMS Transactions on Education Jill Wilson, Northwestern university Area Editor, cases.
TC 310 The Computer in Technical Communication Dr. Jennifer Turns Week 4, Day 1 (10/21)
©2001 Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville All rights reserved. Today Putting it in Practice: CD Ch. 20 Monday Fun with Icons CS 321 Human-Computer.
Ethnographic Interviews: Interviewing and Observing Users Project: Investigating Sakai 3 Capabilities to Support Learning Activities Jacqueline Mai 10/20/09.
Standards for Student Learning Standard 1: The student who is information literate accesses information efficiently and effectively. Standard 2: The student.
Draft Report Overview: March 20, 2003 Prepared for: Planning Team Meeting Western Regional Air Partnership Presented by: Doug Jeavons — BBC Research &
CCT 333: Imagining the Audience in a Wired World Class 6: Intro to Research Methods – Qualitative Methods.
SCIENCE COMPANION: TRAIN THE TRAINERS OCTOBER 13, 2009 Debbie Leslie, University of Chicago Center for Elementary Mathematics and Science Education (CEMSE)
WebQuest. The WebQuest model was developed by Bernie Dodge at the San Diego State University in 1995.
CSWE Overview This resource highlights key aspects of the mission of the Commission on Research and its goals for the next 5 years. It will then.
RES 320 expert Expect Success/res320expertdotcom FOR MORE CLASSES VISIT
LECTURE 10: THE RIGHT TOOL FOR THE JOB April 18, 2016 SDS136: Communicating with Data.
“Biology Microbial Diversity”
Welcome! Enhancing the Care Team May 25, 2017
Grade 6 – Module 5 Module Focus Session
World of work How do tasks bring the WoW into the classroom?
Amanda Lanza, Specialist, ODL Jennifer Weaver, Resource Teacher, ODL
Course Reminders & Deadlines
Administrivia Issues – EPost and Portfolio
Lesson 8: Focus What do you think is meant by the term literature review, and what purpose does it serve in academic research?
A Fundamental Challenge
Presentation transcript:

Syllabus – Weekly schedule

Project Sharing – Exercise 3 Team level discussion Teams share results of contextual inquiry Note: Jennifer & Anita circulate, distribute exercises, and answer questions Class-level discussion Debriefing, Teams share one challenge, one surprise, and one lesson that they think they would not have gotten with another technique

Discussion of Readings Focus What would we want to record and share about users? About tasks? About the environment and circumstances under which users do tasks? How will information on users, tasks, and the task environment be used in design? What properties do user and task characterizations need to have in order for them to serve as useful tools for the design team? What challenges and issues can arise in user and task characterization? Process Divide into two rooms Position Paper discussants –Jeff Wilson, Main room –Rochelle Parry, Main room –Ralph Brand, Main room –Judy Pet, Secondary room –Michael Braly, Secondary room Everyone else: Last digit of students ID number is –0 through 4, Main room –5 through 9, Secondary room

Project Exercise 4 User Analysis / Task Analysis Using the contextual inquiry data generated collectively by the team, generate either a) a synthesis of what you know about the systems users, or b) a characterization of the tasks users complete in your system including information on the context/circumstances in which the tasks are completed. Prepare a one-page description of these results and potential implications for redesign. Bring to class one copy of this exercise for each member of the team and one copy for the instructors. Due Tuesday, Feb 10 (Week 5)

Analyzing Users and Task Goal of analyzing… Analyzing users and tasks is like –Excavating –Peeling an onion –Unpacking –Surveying, getting the lay of the land How are techniques for analyzing (e.g., user lists, task flows) like –Tools? –Art? –Graded tests? –Scalpel? –Magnifying glass? Challenges?

Background for activity Our user/task analysis Based on prior experience with students, we expect students to facing the following challenges: Not knowing how to choose among ways to represent users and tasks Handling concerns about representativeness and rigor Being overwhelmed Not knowing where to go next Concern about the conceptual issue of how much you can really know your users (from the reading) How much detail to expose, to go into, Understanding the value of seeing differently vs. communicating … Our design principles The event should Provide example representations Address anticipated student concerns Reinforces the notion of the techniques/representations as tools Promote deep not shallow engagement Have closure And also help students Get more from readings Get to know each other Find inspiration

Overview You work for a company that designs and manufactures boutique phones. The design team has learned of a recent study concerning phone use (Lacohee and Anderson, 2001), and wants to introduce that information in their design process. Knowing of your knowledge of user-centered design process, they invite you to help them introduce the relevant information into their process. You immediately recognize that the research contains valuable information about who the users are, what the users do, and the context in which they do what they do. Based on your insight and what you know about the design team, you proceed to develop some information to share…

Your Job… Group 1: Choose and implement one of the following techniques for capturing information about who the users are: a) user list or b) user profile. Group 2: Invent a way to communicate information about what users do. Group 3: Invent a way to communicate important information about the context in which users do what they do.

Analyzing Users and Task - Comments Techniques/Representations –Are tools –That have an audience –Should be complementary –Are varied –Have names that may not be commonly shared

Looking back / Looking ahead Where we’ve been Topics – Rdgs and discussion –What is UCD? –Guidance from professional lit? –What to know about users? –Collecting information about users? –Doing contextual inquiry… Project –Comparative evaluation –Ideas from professional literature –Resulting in… –Insights about users, tasks, and contextual issues –Enlargement of the problem Where we’re going Project exercise 3: –Contextual inquiry results Readings: –More on users and tasks, characterizing and communicating Summaries: Let’s coordinate –Jean Crane, Jill Stutzman, Jeanie Comstock, Jana Jones, Christina Bottomley, Mike Tassielli Position Papers: A reminder –Jeff Wilson, Ralph Brand, Michael Braly, Judy Pet, Rochelle Parry