1. The Information School of the University of Washington Information System Design Info-440 Autumn 2002 Session #6

2. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 2 Admin/Review Quiz –Comments? Admin Last time: reminder Assignment #1: Comments Case study: Trouble with personas Task analysis

3. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 3 Admin Assignment #2 –Any questions? –Due: Oct 23 (next Wednesday) Interactive design project –Any questions? –Proposal due: Oct 28 –About the Journal Lou Rosenfield, IA guru –Mary Gates Hall 420 3:00 to 4:00 PM

4. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 4 Last time Challenge: –Many systems fail because the design team does not understand who the user is When encountering a website, users ask these questions*: –Do you know who I am? –Do you understand my needs? –Do you have something of potential value to me? –Can I trust and depend on you? * Burke, D. & Morrison, A. (2001). Business @ the Speed of Stupid: Building Smarter Companies after the Technology Shakeout. Cambridge, MA: Persues Publishing.

5. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 5 Solution Scenarios –Scenarios are stories about people, activities, and artifacts –Scenarios have a plot: sequences of actions and events that people perform –Scenarios can be visual but are usually a combination of graphics and text Personas –A precise description of the user and what she wants to accomplish

6. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 6 Recall this simple, very short scenario Jack is a 4 th year student, studying environmental science. For the last 2 years he has been collecting data on the health of a local stream. His data includes, graphs of temperature readings, pictures of fauna and flora, essays and scientific reports, visual simulations, and so on. He would like to create an online portfolio that showcases all these materials. Jack will be looking for a graduate school this fall. versus A user would like to store his data and information online. ?

7. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 7 Why are scenarios important? Promote reflection about your design –Make assumptions explicit and concrete Focus on ‘whole’ situation –People, artifacts, activities Support multiple views/interpretations –Software engineers, visual designers, etc. For examples, see Rosson, M. B. & Carroll, J. M. (2002). Usability Engineering: Scenario-based Development of Human-Computer Interaction. New York: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers. [Library Reserve] For theory, see Carrol, J. M. (2000). Making use: Scenario-based design of human-computer interactions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

8. The Information School of the University of Washington Case study: Some troubles with personas

9. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 9 The problem Conversation –Product team: We plan to proceed with a redesign… –UI Research: Who are your users? What are their needs? What tasks are central? –PT: How do we do that? –UIR: What don’t you try personas? One week later (12 personas) …

10. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 10 Heather: Facts –Female, no specific ethnicity, single, 26 year old grad student –From Lincoln, Nebraska; now lives in Berkeley, Ca, grad dorms –2 brothers – both play football at U of Nebraska –Family is middle class and well-educated, she’s a starving grad student –Goes to Berkeley for Marine Biology, full scholarship, works in the lab –Took time off between to work for non-profit (Greenpeace) –Interests: marine biology, oceans in general, wildlife,… –Advanced web user and builder ETC….

11. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 11 Explore and clarify

12. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 12 Relate by dimensions DIMENSION: Knowledge DIMENSION: Complexity

13. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 13 Complexity vs. knowledge TECHNICAL KNOWLEDGE WEBSITE COMPLEXITY high low highlow Chuck Heather’ Jason Theo Jeff BrianBen Brianna Heather Esther Hamden

14. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 14 Additional Dimensions TYPE Family Album Journal One splash page Pop Culture Small Business School/Education AUDIENCE Self Family Friends Organization Neighborhood TOOLS Site Builder, FreeForm/HTM FrontPage DEPTH Low …. High COMPLEXITY Low …. High

15. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 15 Crossing Dimensions Esther Heather Ben Hamden Jason Chuck Esther Jason Chuck Esther Ben Hamden Chuck Hamden TYPE Family Album Journal One splash page Pop Culture Small Business School/Education COMPLEXITY Low …. High TOOLS Site Builder, FreeForm/HTM FrontPage AUDIENCE Self Family Friends Organization Neighborhood

16. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 16 Lessons Personas –With minimal coaching the team created a rich view of its users –HOWEVER, the focus was often on extraneous detail –AND, it was difficult to compare the needs across different types of people Dimensional analysis –Key features of the domain surfaced –Allowed users to be compared in standard ways –Ready to assert needs and goals

17. The Information School of the University of Washington Task Analysis

18. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 18 Definitions Goals Tasks Actions

19. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 19 Definitions Goal –An end-condition that is currently absent Task –A process (step) that leads to the goal Action –An atomic, quick event (mouse-click, button press, etc.)

20. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 20 Example Goal: –Read the science section of New York Times Tasks seq –Walk to office –Start computer [action: press button] –Dial-in [actions: click icon, click ‘connect’] –Open browser […] –Type ‘www.nyt.com’ –…

21. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 21 Next week Topics –More on task analysis –Start into conceptual design One reading: –Read: Green, T. R. G. and Benyon, D. (1996.) The skull beneath the skin: entity-relationship models of information artifacts. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 44(6) 801- 828. [Note: This is a fairly difficult academic paper. Sections 4-5 are optional.]

22. The Information School of the University of Washington Assignment #1

23. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 23 Assignment #1: Feedback It was a pleasure to see your thinking –Some of the breakdowns and objects were very interesting –Some were surprising, lot’s of creativity –In general, good layouts and structure –Good use of pictures, sketches, and schematics –Good use of bullets, headings, etc.

24. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 24 Grades I feel that I graded relatively easily But, you may disagree: I would appreciate your feedback on this Average: 3.4

25. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 25 What the scores mean? 3.9 -- 4.0Superior performance in all aspects of the assignment 3.5 -- 3.8Superior performance in most aspects of the assignment 3.2 -- 3.4High quality performance in all or most aspects of the assignment 2.9 -- 3.1High quality performance in some of the assignment; satisfactory performance in the remainder 2.5 -- 2.8 Satisfactory performance in the assignment 2.2 -- 2.4Satisfactory performance in most of the assignment, with the remainder being somewhat substandard

26. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 26 Common points to consider No one used page numbers! –Always put a footer with page numbers, etc. Only two people included citations –(Surprising – I didn’t mark down for this) Only a few people made good distinctions between tasks and features –(I didn’t mark down for this)

27. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 27 Common points (cont.) Some people included too much material –(Unless it was extreme, I didn’t mark down for this) Many people did not raise trade-offs, mention complexity, ‘technology paradox’’ –(I did mark down here)

28. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 6 - 10/16/2002) 28 When criticizing artifacts, use a very simple structure –Problem 1 picture/sketch (concrete) 3 descriptive points –Reasons 1 schematic (abstract) 3 reasons –Solutions 2 solutions (include trade-offs )