ahandrewh teaches IAT-334interface design

P4: Interface Design (due July 24)

On this page:

This is old content

Andrew is not currently teaching IAT-334. This material is left online for reference only.

Introduction

This project has you designing an interface to solve a problem. Taking one of the opportunities or problems found in P3 you will develop a high-fidelity interface prototype to demonstrate your solution.

This project is completed in groups of two to three. Your group can change or stay the same as it was in P3.

P4: Interface Design is worth 30% of your final grade.

Weekly instructions

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

From July 3 to July 10

This week is for generating ideas for potential solutions.

Please complete the following:

  1. If you have a different team please fill out a new team contract. One contract is due per team.
  2. As a group decide on what problem you will focus on. Consider your research and the P3 feedback to help you decide and focus.
  3. As a group identify three existing solutions. Explore what kinds of solutions — interface or otherwise — may exist. If no specific solutions exist, find interfaces that are related to the problem. Briefly describe each solution with words and images.
  4. Individually generate two ideas of how you might resolve the problem. For each idea identify what makes it different from existing solutions.
  5. Individually for each idea sketch wireframes that show a user scenario or storyboard to guide us through the user's journey in context.
Bring to your July 10 class

A copy of the following:

  • The problem your group is focusing on.
  • 3 brief descriptions of existing solutions (using images and text).
  • 4-6 user scenario storyboards (2 per individual).

We will chat about your deliverables in-class.

From July 10 to July 17

This week is for building a testable prototype.

Please complete the following:

  1. Based on the feedback you receive as a group select one idea to move forward with.
  2. As a group generate a high-fidelity prototype of your idea. The prototype should showcase the 'core functionality': the part of the application that solves the problem found in research. This prototype will also:
    • Show actual content (text, icons, images, etc).
    • Be able to move through the core functionality by interacting with the prototype.
    • Allow for multiple paths, for example: if I choose to cancel an action, it should take me back (not do nothing).
Bring to your July 17 class

A URL (link) to your interactive prototype. We will chat about your deliverables in-class.

From July 17 to July 24

For those who completed the Week 11 in-class activity, you have until July 31st to complete all deliverables.

This week is for testing your prototype.

Please complete the following:

  1. As a group develop a plan for a heuristic evaluation of the prototype. Follow a similar process to the one used in P2: Heuristics.
  2. As a group complete your heuristic evaluation. Collect notes to ensure you can identify where there are issues to be addressed.
  3. As a group refine your final prototype based on your testing as well as the feedback you have received. Prepare it for submission along with the rest of your project materials.
  4. As a group create a three-minute presentation. Imagine these will be presented to an audience who knows little-to-nothing about your work. We expect to see:
    • A description of the context of the problem.
    • A rational for why it is a problem.
    • An explanation of what your solution is.
    • A rationale for why your solution is effective.

Grading rubric

Your project will be graded on the following criteria:

A B C D/F

Team contract and teamwork reflections (4 points):

  • Team contract has been completed.
  • All teamwork reflections completed (graded individually).
  • Team contract has been completed.
  • One teamwork reflection missing (graded individually).
  • Team contract has been completed.
  • Two teamwork reflections missing (graded individually).
  • Team contract missing.
  • Three teamwork reflections missing (graded individually).

Interface design (10 points): 'Does this look and feel like an effective interface?'

The designed interface provides an exceptional design — legible, clear hierarchy, excellent use of space/composition, interactions, and consistent elements.

The designed interface provides an effective visual design — legible, clear hierarchy, excellent use of space/composition, interactions, and consistent elements.

The designed interface provides a somewhat problematic visual design — somewhat illegible, unclear hierarchy, somewhat ineffective use of space/composition, confusing interactions, and, or inconsistent elements.

The designed interface provides a ineffective visual design — illegible, unclear hierarchy, ineffective use of space/composition, confusing interactions, and inconsistent elements.

Effective argumentation (10 points): 'Am I convinced?'

Pitch presentation uses artifacts — screenshots, gifs, user scenarios, etc. — that compliment the oral arguments to make a strong case for why the designed interface is effectively solving a user need.

Pitch presentation uses oral arguments to make a strong case for why the designed interface is effectively solving a user need.

Pitch presentation uses oral arguments that do not make a strong case for why the designed interface is effectively solving a user need due to gaps in knowledge or the rationale.

Pitch presentation uses oral arguments that do not explain why the designed interface is effectively solving a user need.

Audience (3 points): 'Who would understand this?'

Pitch presentation uses a language understandable by a lay — naive or new-to-the-topic — audience.

Pitch presentation uses a language understandable by a professional or design audience.

Pitch presentation uses a language understandable by a design audience.

Pitch presentation uses a language not understandable by a design audience.

Polish (3 points): 'Would a professional read this?'

  • Presentation completed between 2:45 to 3:15 minutes.
  • Presentation's design — layout, type, content — allows for easy interpretation.
  • Presentation 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).
  • Presentation completed between 2:30 to 2:45 or 3:15 to 3:30 minutes.
  • Presentation's design — layout, type, content — allows for easy interpretation.
  • Presentation 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).
  • Presentation completed between 2:15 to 2:30 or 3:30 to 3:45 minutes.
  • Presentation's design — layout, type, content — leads to some confusion.
  • Presentation is proofread and edited with few errors. It consistently follows the rules of Standard English.
  • Citations are used appropriately but use an inconsistent formatting.
  • Presentation completed in less than 2:15 or more than 3:45 minutes.
  • Presentation's design — layout, type, content — leads to lots of confusion.
  • Presentation 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.

Final submission requirements (July 24)

For those who completed the Week 11 in-class activity, you have until July 31st to complete all deliverables.

The final submission for P4 is a link to an interactive prototype and a three-minute presentation.

Your project submission is due to Canvas before your July 24 class.

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.