1. The Information School of the University of Washington Information System Design Info-440 Autumn 2002 Session #13

2. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 2 Agenda Questions on assignment #3 Feedback on project proposals (continued) Participatory design & prototyping Return quiz #2

3. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 3 Admin Announcements –IA summit 2003 (March 21-23 Portland, OR) Poster submissions: 15 Jan Great opportunity to present assignment #2 http://www.asis.org/Conferences/IA03/ –Anyone?

4. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 4 Admin Upcoming –Design Exercise #3 Nov 15 th –Prototyping project User needs and wants (in Journal now) 1 st iteration of prototype (25 Nov) –Next week: Usability Read Nielsen, Chapters 5 & 6

5. The Information School of the University of Washington Assignment #3: Questions?

6. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 6 Assignment #3: Reminders Two notations: –Conceptual modeling Entities are not nouns (not goals/tasks) –IA specification Scenario –Concerns ‘personalization’ in general (not My Yahoo in particular) Metaphors –Seeking metaphors within the My Yahoo site –An example: my

7. The Information School of the University of Washington Project Proposals: Feedback

8. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 8 Reminder of common challenges: Avoid these The objective is for everyone to be able to do X better –All cooks will cook better The design will replace person X –The ‘joke machine’ will replace all comedians The design will be X because of X –The design will be easy to use because it presents clear and concise information The design will be a super-combination of X, Y, and Z

9. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 9 Vision statements Focus on ‘hook’ or ‘root concept’ that makes your idea innovative and unique Hints –Narrow is better –What is the ‘value proposition’ Why would people be excited by your idea –Strike a balance between user needs and technology for satisfying them

10. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 10 Background Describe –The major factors and issues within the situation –How your design will respond to those issues Hints: –Compare your design to ‘paper books’ or other everyday technology –Suggest how your design with ‘amplify’ or ‘augment’ existing human skills or activities –Try to avoid redundancy between background section and vision

11. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 11 Stakeholders Once you’ve identified the stakeholders –Consider the relationships amongst them –Narrow your focus JudgesStudents Teachers Parents Community at large advise communicates influence mark supports SCIENCE FAIR

12. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 12 Social impact statement Some projects might not have significant social issues – It’s okay to say that (but do justify your belief)

13. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 13 Timetable Many copied it from the assignment –Expected you to enhance it make it your own Some people added things such as: –Methods for working with users to generate requirements (interviews, simple experiments, observations, etc.) –Iterations

14. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 14 Hints Think about who the audience is –Advance Concept Group (ACG) Think about your objective –Convince ACG that you have a great idea and a way to solve it Do some background reading in your domain Find ways to gather feedback from real people Brainstorm and talk about your ideas

15. The Information School of the University of Washington Prototyping

16. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 16 Development process Waterfall model –Linear process with well-define phases –One phase feeds into the next –Documents are outputs and inputs –Example Analysis of functional requirements Software design Implementation Testing Maintenance

17. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 17 Development process Prototyping and iterative development –Create a working model –Demonstrate model and test it quickly –Prototypes can be created at different phases: Requirements Conceptual design Detailed design

18. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 18 Trade-offs Waterfall model + Simplifies management Cost estimation Tracking progress Coordination amongst large number of people – Feedback on system is weak New requirements are uncovered during testing No early feedback Tendency to focus inward on the process

19. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 19 Trade-offs Prototyping + Feedback is strong Early feedback on requirements User involvement throughout process Identification of dependencies –Incremental approach Risk that prototype becomes the system Risk that prototype will reflect incremental changes rather than radical changes

20. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 20 Prototyping can fit into each phase of development Define : Vision/scope Needs assessment Design : Invent the technological solution Develop : Build the technology Deploy : Delivery stable technology Vision/scope document Design specifications document Beta software Version Release

21. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 21 Exercise How might prototyping be used in? –Define –Design –Develop –Deploy

22. The Information School of the University of Washington Prototyping methods

23. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 23 Methods (from Rosson & Carroll) Storyboard –Sketches or screen shots in sequence that illustrate key points Paper mock-ups –Simulated displays and controls Wizard of oz –Workstation connect to invisible person who simulates the computer

24. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 24 Methods Video prototype –Recording of person enacting a scenario or tasks Computer animation –Screen transitions showing flow Rapid prototype –Interactive system created with special tools (Director) Working, partial system –Working implementation of parts of the system

25. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 25 Two key questions What materials to use? –Low fidelity –High fidelity How should users participate? –Indirectly through usability testing –Directly in design process

26. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 26 Trade-offs Low-fidelity (high-fidelity is basically the reverse) + Inexpensive to create + Willing to through away + Users can shape + Effective for understand goals and task flow - Ineffective for understanding Subtle UI issues Dynamic displays Navigation within large info system Social issues amongst a community of people

27. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 27 Patterns for employing prototyping Pattern A 1.A business analyst brings an idea to engineering 2.Engineering builds a specification 3.Visual design paints an interface 4.Using detailed page renderings on paper, usability conducts an evaluation Pattern B 1.Marketing, design, engineering, and usability develop a spec 2.Design mock-ups some pages in paper 3.Using detailed page renderings on paper, usability conducts an evaluation

28. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 28

29. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 29

30. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 30 Participatory design Pattern C 1.Marketing, design, engineering, and usability propose some user goals 2.Design & usability sketch a prototype 3.Design, usability, and a user revise prototype together 4.Iterate #3 for a week 5.Design and usability finalize design spec

31. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 31 Participatory design Intimately involving users in the design process How the process can work? –Agree on goals and activities (from contextual inquiry) –Give users elements of a design (building blocks) –Guide users in constructing a solution –Ask users to complete their goals using their designs –Gather feedback –Iterate Many variations possible

32. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 32 Trade-offs with participatory design Pros + Users are intimately involved in process + Users are giving a continuous stream of feedback + Teams are prompted to look outwards (harder to design for yourself) Cons –Users unlikely to think strategically –Users unlikely to be skilled in sketching, user-interface look-and-feel, etc.

33. The Information School of the University of Washington Quiz 2

34. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 34 Grade distribution (average: 4)

35. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 35 Feedback: Metaphor question Overly literal use of metaphor Physical calculator must optimize use of space because a bigger device costs more to make Examples: –One small display for input & answers –Very small labels to indicate functions –An ‘Alt’ key to set function mode

36. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 13 - 11/13/2002) 36 Feedback: Visual vocabulary Acceptable: –Conceptual model –Task flow –IA specification Entities are not tasks/goals Looking for entities specific to the portfolio