1. Rob Gleasure R.Gleasure@ucc.ie www.robgleasure.com
IS4446 Advanced Interaction Design Lecture 1: Introduction to IS4446 and the science of design
Rob Gleasure

2. IS4446 Today’s session Outline of course Core ideas
Outline of assessment

3. IS4446 Contact me at Ext 2503 Room 2.112 R.Gleasure@ucc.ie
Website for this course
robgleasure.com

4. IS4446
Module objective
To provide students with an advanced understanding of interaction and interface design principles and development methods for desktop, web and mobile software.
Learning outcomes
Articulate and apply core Human-Computer Interaction principles
Elicit user interaction requirements
Analyse, design and prototype user interfaces
Effectively utilise interface paradigms and patterns and the methods associated with usability engineering, information architecture and information visualisation
Rigorously evaluate existing software interfaces

5. Learning interaction design
Interaction design concepts & experience
Design thinking (focus of IS4445)
Design Science (focus of IS4446)
Re-usable design methods & practices
Re-usable design outputs & archetypes

6. Exercise Imagine we want to design a new brochure for BIS
What might we do?
Would the ability to use Google be helpful?
Why/why not?

7. Science vs. learning Collective reusable knowledge Science
Your reusable knowledge
Learning
Instance

8. The interdisciplinary nature of design
Psychology
Neuro-science
Economics
Software engineering
HCI
Cyber crime
Electronic markets
Computer science
Management
Machine learning … … …
Out/ crowd-sourcing …
Information System
Statistics
Sociology AI … … …
Health
Maths
Anthro-pology … … … …

9. Let’s revisit our brochure design
The design process
What worked/didn’t work?
The outcomes we want but are not currently realising
The interventions that realise those outcomes
Problem
Solution
Let’s revisit our brochure design
How does the problem environment work?
What can I add/change to influence those related aspects?
What aspects of the environment impact on the problem?

10. The role of embedded explanations
Every design is built on some implicit or explicit understanding of a target system
Ultimately, the point of design science is to ask
Why do I think a particular design will work?
How can I be sure it is working as intended?
Design decisions
Assumed impact on specific objectives
Desired outcomes

11. The role of embedded explanations (cont.)
You might add a navigation menu to a website because you assume users want to be able to jump to different parts of a website
You might keep the menu in the same place because you assume consistency will help users find it
You might choose a particular part of the page because you assume users will expect to find it there, based on experience with other websites
Is there research explaining how users typically jump around a site?
Is there research explaining how consistency is best achieved?
Is there research explaining general browsing patterns?

12. The role of embedded explanations (cont.)
Often there is a lot of research done to inform the assumptions you make. Spelling these assumptions out allows you to
Be clear in your thinking
Challenge assumptions and fuel novel thinking
Draw on existing related knowledge
Diagnose why a design isn’t working as intended

13. An example from this course
Learning to do interaction design is notoriously difficult
Typically skill-based learning requires experiential learning that draws on
Personally practicing the skill
Closely observing others practice the skill in different contexts
Lots written on peer learning as a complement to teacher-led stuff
Empowers students to be more proactive in their learning
Encourages students to relate course material to a wide range of personal experiences and frames of reference
Forces students to identify and reconcile contrasting interpretations of the concepts and information discussed

14. An example from this course (cont.)
Review of research on peer learning suggests the following major components
Concept
Sub-concept
Explanation
Peer tutoring
Perceived tutoring of others
Ability to explain ideas to others and provide feedback
Perceived tutoring by others
Ability to have ideas explained and receive feedback
Peer support
Perceived empowerment
Ability to assume ownership of learning
Perceived social connection
Ability to discuss shared experiences/challenges
Perceived reinforcement
Ability to have work validated by others
Peer collaboration
Perceived shared meaning
Ability to establish shared language/ meaning
Perceived collaboration
Ability to share ideas and improve creativity
Perceived challenging of ideas
Ability to engage in constructive conflict
Perceived safe space
Ability to ask unstructured or peer-specific questions
Perceived reciprocity
Ability to build mutual helping relationships

15. An example from this course (cont.)
Six major design decisions corresponding to these objectives

16. An example from this course (cont.)
Rationale for each decision links to specific objectives

17. An example from this course (cont.)
Rationale for each decision links to specific objectives

18. An example from this course (cont.)
Rationale for each decision links to specific objectives

19. An example from this course (cont.)
Rationale for each decision links to specific objectives

20. An example from this course (cont.)
Rationale for each decision links to specific objectives

21. An example from this course (cont.)
Rationale for each decision links to specific objectives

22. Course structure Subject to revision based on feedback
Week 1: Introduction
Week 2: Designing the interface 1 (perception)
Week 3: Designing the interface 2 (affordances)
Week 4: Designing the interface 3 (aesthetics and colour)
Week 5: Designing the interface 4 (aesthetics and form)
Week 6: Designing the community 1 (trusting a platform)
Week 7: Designing the community 2 (trusting a group)
Week 8: Designing the community 3 (boundaries)
Week 9: Designing for practices 1 (tools as mediators)
Week 10: Designing for practices 2 (social mediators)
Week 11: Designing for practices 3 (socio-materiality)
Week 12: Revision

23. Course assessment Continuous assessment: 40 marks Group report – 25%
Peer engagement – 15%
End of semester exam: 60%

24. Group report?
Working in pairs*, you will write a report of 3,000-5,000 words, in which you will deconstruct some IT system of your choice (website, app, or desktop application) across the 10 different perspectives.
This report will
Critique the chosen system using the perspective learned each week in class, e.g. perception, affordances, aesthetics, etc.
Present this critique along two dimensions
What do you like?
What could you change to make it better?
Think of it like an audit for each quality, e.g. an affordance audit, a socio-material audit, etc.

25. Group report (continued)
To make this more manageable with your other deliverables, this will be delivered in two parts
Part 1 (10%) is due Date tbd
This will be a write up of the interface part
Roughly 1,500-2,000 words
Part 2 (15%) is due Date tbd
This will add a write up of the community and practice part
Roughly 3,000-5,000 words

26. Peer engagement? We have a dedicated forum for this course
Go to robgleasure.com, scroll down to IS4446, and follow the link
You may register for that forum by entering your student number and a password. No username is necessary for this term – all comments will be uploaded anonymously.
Once registered, you will be automatically allocated to discussion sub-groups. Each week, you will be presented with a different system to discuss with your sub-group.

27. Peer engagement (cont.)
Each post should build on the one before it
The first person to post will
Describe something they like about the system
Describe something they would change
The next person will
Assume the previous poster’s change has been made
Describe something they like about the revised system (which may or may not predate the previous poster’s changes)
And so on until each person in the group has posted
This should result in a snowballing change, i.e. a collaboration

28. Peer engagement (cont.)
As a simplified example, imagine we were critiquing this PowerPoint style from a colour perspective
Anonymous: “I like the restricted use of colours to keep it easy to read but I think it could use some contrast to make it less clinical-looking, maybe occasional use of red would work.”
Anonymous: “I think the blue/green/red combination is really striking. The red might jar a little if it pops up randomly though, maybe it could be a subtle part of the recurring design – a CUBS logo in the corner or something”
Anonymous: “I like the framing provided by the empty space, it gives it really uncluttered feeling. I would be a little worried we might erode that by adding more colours. Maybe if we softened the colours of the CUBS logo by increasing its transparency and kept it within the framing in the top right corner.”

29. Peer engagement (cont.)
Marks will be awarded for your first post each week only (though you may post as many times as you like)
5 marks for your description of what you like
5 marks for your description of what you would change
Marking criteria include
The positives reinforced made sense
The suggestions made sense
The suggestions were clearly actionable
The feedback built on other suggestions already posted
The feedback was consistent what was covered in class
The feedback went beyond what was covered in class
The feedback was timely enough to help your peers

30. Readings
Cross, N. (2001). Designerly ways of knowing: Design discipline versus design science. Design issues, 17(3),
Gleasure, R. (2015). When is a problem a design science problem?. Systems, Signs & Actions, 9(1), 9-25.
Goldkuhl, G. (2004). Design theories in information systems-a need for multi-grounding. JITTA: Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application, 6(2),
Herbert, S. A. (1969). The science of the artificial. MIT Press, Massachusetts.
Kuechler, B., & Vaishnavi, V. (2008). On theory development in design science research: anatomy of a research project. European Journal of Information Systems, 17(5),