ahandrewh teaches IAT-334interface design

P3: Interface Proposal (due July 13/July 15)

Introduction

This project is for exploring a new context in which you will try to find opportunities for design. It concludes with a proposal describing opportunities for design.

Your deliverable for this project feeds into your final project, where you will develop a high-level prototype for the proposed direction. The final project can be for a variety of digital platforms — desktop, mobile, smartwatch, embedded devices, etc. — though there is a significant interface design requirement regardless of what platform is appropriate.

This project is completed in groups of two or three.

P3: Interface Proposal is worth 15% of your final grade.

Weekly instructions

This project spans multiple weeks. Please read the weekly instructions carefully.

From June 29 to July 8

This week is your research week, to develop a strong understanding of the domain in which you are interested in working and the individuals you would design for.

Please complete the following:

  1. As a group fill in the team contract. There is a quiz on Canvas for filling out the contract. It must be submitted by each individual, but we expect you will submit the same answers to the questions between team members.
  2. As a group select a domain to work with. Try to select a domain that may be of interest to you and where you believe there may be an opportunity for development of an interactive system.
  3. As a group come up with a list of assumptions you may have about the domain chosen. Write it down.
  4. As a group rephrase the list of assumptions as questions. For example, if one of my assumptions about the medical domain is that "Intensive care unit (ICU) nurses are overworked," my question could be "What is an average working day like from the perspective of an ICU nurse?"
  5. Individually define two exploratory research questions. These can be informed by your questions on assumptions or what you need to understand about this domain to find opportunities for design?
  6. Individually locate three secondary sources — i.e. books, articles, documentaries, podcasts, etc. — that summarize or synthesize material related to your research question(s).
    • Summarize what this source is in 100 words or less.
    • Briefly explain how this source will answer the research question.
  7. Individually identify two primary sources — propose a person you could interview and another primary source such as newspaper accounts, recorded interviews, etc. — that you believe could provide you an understanding of someone's experience in the context of the research question(s).
    • Summarize what experience this source shares (or could share) in 100 words or less.
    • Briefly explain how this source will help share an experience that may answer the research question(s).
Bring to your July 6/8 lab

A copy of the following:

  • The domain you will focus on
  • A list of assumptions about the domain
  • A list of questions based on the assumptions
  • 4-6 research questions (2 per individual)
  • 6-9 secondary sources with summaries and explanations (3 per individual)
  • 4-6 primary sources with summaries and explanations (2 per individual)

We will chat about your deliverables in-lab.

From July 6 to July 15

This week is for completing your research and finding design opportunities.

  1. Based on feedback from the last lab, as a group refine the definition of your domain and research questions as needed. Do this before continuing with research.
  2. Individually review your secondary sources and make point-form notes of items that answer your research questions. We recommend capturing these notes on post-its on a collaborative tool such as Miro.
  3. As a group conduct interviews or review your primary sources and make point-form notes on items that ansewr your research question. If conducting interviews, we also recommend making use of our consent form and interview template. All data collected as part of an interview should be kept anonymous and securely destroyed at the end of the term.
  4. Once you have collected all your notes synthesize your research into potential areas for design intervention as a group. We recommend using affinity diagrams as a method, but if you have another preferred method you may choose to do so.
  5. As a group propose two potential areas for design intervention. Identify research that can support your case for why these may be good opportunities for design intervention.
Assembling the 'pitch' document

Your final submission for this project has some very specific requirements.

As a group generate a letter-sized (8.5x11") PDF that will explain the context and potential areas for design intervention. Use citations from your research to support your explanation or arguments. Citations do not count towards the word counts described below.

The first page of this document will contain:

  • A description of your domain and context (maximum 50 words).
  • A description of each potential area for design intervention (maximum 50 words per area; 100 words total)
  • An explanation of why you believe each area is suitable for a design intervention (maximum 50 words per area; 100 words total).
  • A link to the document or tool in which you synthesized your research findings.

The second page of this document will contain all resources from your research (even those not cited in the previous page). Use a proper formatting standard (i.e. APA, MLA).

The rest of this document will contain your interview consent forms and the interview script (if you completed interviews).

Grading rubric

Your project will be graded on the following criteria:

A B C D/F

Team contract (1 point):

Team contract has been completed.

Team contract has not been completed.

Quality of research (3 points): 'How much depth was explored?'

  • More than the required number of sources explored.
  • Research synthesis link shows that sources were explored in depth.
  • Research sources are all reputable.
  • The required number of sources explored.
  • Research synthesis link shows that sources were explored in depth.
  • Research sources are mostly reputable.
  • The required number of sources explored.
  • Research synthesis link shows that sources could have been further explored.
  • Some research sources are reputable.
  • Less than the required number of sources explored.
  • Research synthesis link shows that sources could have been further explored.
  • Few or no research sources are reputable.

Reasonably concise writing (3 points): 'Can I easily understand?'

The writing presents a clear description of the domain, context and areas for potential design intervention without extra, un-related materials.

The writing presents a clear description of the domain, context and areas for potential design intervention with some extra, un-related materials.

The writing presents a somewhat clear description of the domain, context and areas for potential design intervention with some extra, un-related materials.

The document presents an unclear narrative due to extra or un-related materials.

Effective argumentation (5 points): 'Am I convinced?'

The recommendations use artifacts effectively in combination with written arguments to make a strong case for why a particular direction or conclusion is appropriate.

The recommendations use written arguments to make a strong case for why a particular direction or conclusion is appropriate.

The recommendations use written arguments that do not make a strong case for why a particular direction or conclusion is appropriate due to gaps in knowledge or the rationale.

The recommendations use written arguments that do not explain why a particular direction or conclusion is appropriate.

Polish (1 points): 'Would a professional read this?'

  • Document is proofread and edited with few errors. It consistently follows the rules of Standard English.
  • Citations are used appropriately and use a consistent formatting (i.e. APA or MLA).
  • Document is proofread and edited with few errors. It consistently follows the rules of Standard English.
  • Citations are used appropriately but use an inconsistent formatting.
  • Document contains many errors that interfere with meaning. It generally does not follow the rules of Standard English.
  • Citations appear to be missing and/or use an inconsistent formatting.

Follows the rules (2 points): 'Is the document submitted as specified?'

  • Structure of document is as specified in the project brief.
  • Meets all word counts.
  • Structure of document is not as specified in the project brief, or;
  • Does not meet all word counts.
  • Structure of document is not as specified in the project brief.
  • Does not meet all word counts.

Final submission requirements (July 13/July 15)

The final submission for P3 is a letter-sized (8.5x11") PDF.

The first page includes:

The second page includes: A list of all resources drawn upon as part of the research. This includes ones not cited in the first page, but used in the research phase.

The rest of the document includes: Interview consent forms and the interview script (if you completed interviews).

Your project submission is due to Canvas before your July 13/July 15 lab.

Please make sure double-check all your submitted files and URLs to ensure they can be opened. We want to avoid late or problematic submission penalties whenever possible.