| Category | Assignment | Subject | Computer Science |
|---|---|---|---|
| University | Arden University | Module Title | COM5009 Human Computer Interaction |
| Word Count | 4000 Words |
|---|---|
| Assessment Type | Coursework |
As part of the formal assessment for the programme, you are required to submit a Human-Computer Interaction assignment. Please refer to your Student Handbook for full details of the programme assessment scheme and general information on preparing and submitting assignments.
After completing the module, you should be able to:
1. Demonstrate a theoretical and practical understanding of underlying concepts and principles associated with HCI methods and techniques
2. Apply appropriate HCI theories and practices to the design and implementation of interfaces
3. Evaluate the effectiveness of user interfaces using appropriate methods
4. (Graduate Attribute) Reflective Practitioner: Undertake critical analysis and reach reasoned and evidence-based decisions, contribute problem-solving skills to find and innovate in solutions.
All learning outcomes must be met to pass the module.
Your assignment should include: a title page containing your student number, the module name, the submission deadline and the exact word count of your submitted document; the appendices if relevant; and a reference list in the AU Harvard system(s). You should address all the elements of the assignment task listed below. Please note that tutors will use the assessment criteria set out below in assessing your work.
You must not include your name in your submission because Arden University operates anonymous marking, which means that markers should not be aware of the identity of the student. However, please do not forget to include your STU number.
Maximum word count: 4000 words equivalent (Persona + prototype + 2400 words)
Please refer to the full word count policy, which can be found in the Student Policies section here: Arden University | Regulatory Framework
The word count includes everything in the main body of the assessment (including in text citations and references). The word count excludes numerical data in tables, figures, diagrams, footnotes, reference list and appendices. All other printed words ARE included in the word count.
Students who exceed the wordcount by up to a 10% margin will not be penalised. Students should note that no marks will be assigned to work exceeding the specified limit once the maximum assessment size limit has been reached.
You are a user experience designer for a company that develops apps for a variety of audiences. You have been asked to take part in ONE of the following design projects:
A multilingual hand-held museum guide app that provides directions through the museum as well as further details and audio commentary about the exhibits.
Or:
A healthy meal planning app, with integrations for buying the ingredients from online supermarkets.
Or:
A dashboard for a new brand of electric car that displays common controls and instruments and also integrates safety and navigation features, controlled using buttons on the steering wheel.
In part 1 of this assignment, you will design user interactions for one of these apps, in the form of a high-fidelity paper prototype, i.e. a representation of the interface that will be printed on paper for testing. In part 2, you will explain your design decisions, and in part 3, you will test and evaluate your prototype.
You will submit a report containing all three parts of the assignment as a digital document on the submission portal. However, you should use a physical printout of your high-fidelity prototype for testing. You should check your understanding of the difference between low-fidelity and high-fidelity prototypes by referring to the module lessons.
Create a persona for a typical user of the app, informed by your user research. Your persona should be sufficiently detailed to give the members of the team a good understanding of who they are, so that the app design will be user-centric.
Consider two typical tasks that users will need to complete using the app, and design a high-fidelity prototype with a series of screens to show the full interaction for completing these tasks from beginning to end. Your prototypes should be suitable for printing on paper as full size (i.e. filling as much of an A4 page as possible in landscape or portrait format with one
screen per page) So that you can test them for part 3.
Note: You do not need to create a fully functioning app; only a printable paper prototype is required. You also do not need to create every interaction for the whole app; just create sufficient screens needed to complete the two typical tasks identified from beginning to end.
In part 1 of your report, you should submit:
Note that the word count for this part is a 1600-word equivalent – this means that the amount of work and time required to complete this part should be similar to that of producing a 1600-word academic report. Since most of the work is design-based, it is expected that your written work will be significantly less than 1600 words.
(1600 words equivalent)
(40 marks)
(LOs: 1)
In part 2 of your report, justify the decisions taken for your high-fidelity prototype design, and support them with references to relevant theories, principles and guidelines.
You should refer to screenshots of the user interface, discussing how and where these principles and guidelines have been applied.
You will also be assessed for the structure and presentation of your report, your selection and use of appropriate references to good quality academic sources.
(1200 words)
(30 marks)
(LOs: 2,4)
Evaluate your interface using the following methods
In part 3 of your report, present the results of your evaluation and analyse your findings concerning appropriate literature, making appropriate recommendations.
You will also be assessed for the structure and presentation of your report, your selection and use of appropriate references to good quality academic sources.
(1200 words)
(30 marks)
(LOs: 3,4)
You have the opportunity to submit a draft to receive formative feedback.
The feedback is designed to help you develop areas of your work, and it helps you develop your skills as an independent learner.
If you are a distance learning student, you should submit your work by email to your tutor, no later than 2 weeks before the actual submission deadline. If you are a blended learning student, your tutor will give you a deadline for formative feedback and further details.
Formative feedback will not be given to work submitted after the above date or the date specified by your tutor, if a blended learning student.
You MUST underpin your analysis and evaluation of the key issues with appropriate and wide-ranging academic research and ensure this is referenced using the AU Harvard system(s). Follow this link to find the referencing guides for your subject: Arden Library
Assignments submitted late will not be accepted and will be marked as a 0% fail.
Your assessment should be submitted as a single Word (MS Word) or PDF file into the portal labelled PowerPoint (Once uploaded, you should be able to check your similarity score from Turnitin). For more information, please see the “Submitting an Assignment - Guide” document available on the A-Z key information on iLearn.
If you choose to submit multiple files, you must name each document as the question/part you are answering, along with your student number, ie Q1 Section A STUXXXX. If you wish to overwrite your submission or one of your submissions, you must ensure that your new submission is named the same as the previous one for the system to overwrite it.
You must ensure that the submitted assignment is all your work and that all sources used are correctly attributed. Penalties apply to assignments that show evidence of academic unfair practice. (See the Student Handbook, which is available on the A-Z key information on iLearn.)
|
Level 5 reflects the continuing development in knowledge, understanding and skills from Level 4. At Level 5, students are not expected to be fully autonomous but are able to take responsibility for their own learning with appropriate guidance and direction. Students are expected to further develop their theoretical knowledge within a more intellectual context and to demonstrate this through more complex forms of expression which move beyond the descriptive or imitative domain. Students are expected to demonstrate skills of analysis in both problem-solving and resolution. |
|
|
Generic Assessment Criteria |
|
|
An exceptional information base exploring and analysing the discipline, its theory and any associated ethical considerations. There is sophisticated use and management of learning resources and a high degree of autonomy is demonstrated. Writing is exceptionally well structured and accurately referenced throughout. Where appropriate, outstanding professional skills are demonstrated. The work is original and with some additional effort could be considered for internal publication. |
|
|
An excellent knowledge base within which the discipline is explored and analysed. There is a good degree of originality in the approach. The work demonstrates confidence and autonomy and extends to consider ethical issues. Learning resources have been managed confidently. Writing is exceptionally well structured and accurately referenced throughout. Where appropriate, an excellent level of professional skills are demonstrated and the work demonstrates a high level of intellectual and academic skills. |
|
|
A very good knowledge base which explores and analyses the discipline, its theory and any associated ethical issues. There is evidence of some originality and independence of thought. A very good range of learning resources underpin the work and there is evidence of growing confidence and self-direction. The work demonstrates the ability to analyse the subject and apply theory with good academic and intellectual skills. Academic writing skills are good, expression is accurate overall and the work is consistently referenced throughout. |
|
|
A satisfactory understanding of the discipline which begins to analyse the subject and apply some underpinning theory. There may be reference to some of the ethical considerations. The work shows a sound level of competence in managing basic sources and materials. Academic writing skills are good and accurate overall and the work is planned and structured with some though. Professional skills are satisfactory (where appropriate). The work lacks original thought but academic and intellectual skills are moving into the critical domain. The work is referenced throughout. |
|
|
Basic level of performance in which there are some omissions in understanding the subject, its underpinning theory and ethical considerations. There is little evidence of independent thought and the work shows a basic use of sources and materials. Academic and intellectual skills are limited. The work may lack structure overall. There are some difficulties in developing professional skills (where appropriate). There is an attempt to reference the work. |
|
|
A limited piece of work in which there are clear gaps in understanding the subject, its underpinning theory and ethical considerations. The work shows a limited use of sources and materials. Academic and intellectual skills are weak and there are errors in expression and the work may lack structure overall. There are difficulties in developing professional skills (where appropriate). The work lacks original thought and is largely imitative. |
|
|
A poor performance in which there are substantial gaps in knowledge and understanding, underpinning theory and ethical considerations. The work shows little evidence in the use of appropriate sources and materials. Academic writing skills are very weak and there are numerous errors in expression. The work lacks structure overall. Professional skills (where appropriate) are not developed. The work is imitative. |
|
|
Criteria and weighting |
80% and above |
70% - 79% |
60% - 69% |
50% - 59% |
40% - 49% |
30-39% |
|
Persona (30%) |
An outstanding articulation of a user persona which can be used in a professional context and demonstrates a level of understanding and application that exceeds expectations. |
An excellent persona which addresses the key aspects at a very high level with no errors or omissions. |
A very good user persona that addresses the majority of aspects to a high level but with some minor errors of content. |
A good articulation of a user persona that addresses a number of aspects though not all at the same level and there may be a number of errors or aspects lacking in depth. |
A basic user persona that addresses the required aspects but is lacking in depth across many areas and may contain a large number of errors. |
A partially complete persona that omits required aspects and/or lacks depth across a number of areas. |
|
Interface design – high fi prototype (70%) |
An outstanding high fidelity prototype which can be used in a professional context and demonstrates a professional level of understanding of user experience design issues and the creation of interface elements that exceeds expectations. |
An excellent high fidelity prototype which demonstrates an excellent level of understanding of user experience design issues and the creation of interface elements with no errors or omissions. |
A very good high fidelity prototype which demonstrates a high level of understanding of user experience design issues and the creation of interface elements but with some minor errors in implementation. |
A good high fidelity prototype which demonstrates a good level of understanding of user experience design issues and the creation of interface elements but some aspects need further development. |
A basic high fidelity prototype which demonstrates some understanding of user experience design issues and the creation of interface elements but there are a number of aspects that need further development. |
An incomplete high fidelity prototype which displays insufficient understanding of user experience design issues and the creation of interface elements and there are omissions of required aspects or significant errors in implementation. |
|
Criteria and weighting |
80% and above |
70% - 79% |
60% - 69% |
50% - 59% |
40% - 49% |
30-39% |
|
Content (70%) |
An exceptional justification of the design decisions taken with evidence of thorough, impressive and in depth understanding of HCI principles and how they have been applied. |
An excellent justification of the design decisions taken with evidence of excellent understanding of HCI principles and how they have been applied. |
A very good justification of the design decisions taken with a high level of evidence of understanding of HCI principles and how they have been applied. |
A good justification of the design decisions taken with a good level of evidence of understanding of HCI principles and how they have been applied. |
A basic justification of the design decisions taken which requires further work to demonstrate an understanding of HCI principles and how they have been applied. |
An incomplete justification of the design decisions taken with a limited level of evidence of understanding of HCI principles and how they have been applied and with significant errors and/or omissions in terms of relevant principles and/or content. |
|
Structure and presentat (10%) |
Exceptionally presented with no spelling or grammatical errors and in a fluent, logical and engaging style that employs a highly sophisticated use of the appropriate terminology related to HCI. |
An exceptional presentation of the report with no spelling or grammatical errors and in a fluent, logical and engaging style that demonstrates an excellent use of the appropriate terminology related to HCI. |
A very good presentation of the report, though there are some minor spelling or grammatical errors or minor issues with clarity, the report is mostly written in a style that demonstrates the use of appropriate terminology related to HCI. |
A good presentation of the report , though there are some issues with the content in terms of errors and clarity, the report demonstrates the use of appropriate terminology related to HCI though there are issues with clarity, depth and/or relevance. |
A basic presentation of the report, there are major issues in terms of errors and clarity, the report demonstrates a limited use of appropriate terminology related to HCI and there are significant issues with depth and/or relevance. |
A limited report with significant issues in terms of errors and clarity that bring it below a pass standard, the report demonstrates an insufficient use of appropriate terminology related to HCI and there are significant issues with depth and/or relevance. |
|
Use of references (20%) |
Exemplary referencing and use of a knowledge base that is highly appropriate and relevant. |
An excellent understanding of referencing and use of a knowledge base that is appropriate and relevant. |
A very good understanding of referencing and use of an appropriate and relevant knowledge base, though there are some issues with use of references and the Harvard system. |
A good understanding of referencing and use of an appropriate and relevant knowledge base. |
A basic understanding of the Harvard referencing systems and a limited use of relevant and appropriate sources. |
A limited understanding of the Harvard referencing systems and a limited use of relevant and appropriate sources, which fall below the threshold of a pass. |
|
Criteria and weighting |
80% and above |
70% - 79% |
60% - 69% |
50% - 59% |
40% - 49% |
30-39% |
29% and below |
|
Content (70%) |
A report on the testing and subsequent evaluation that shows an exceptional level of understanding and insight in relation to the task, with a level of independent thought and synthesis of appropriate principles that exceeds expectations. |
A report on the testing and subsequent evaluation that shows an excellent level of understanding and insight, along with a level of independent thought and synthesis of appropriate principles that demonstrate an excellent understanding of the requirements of the task. |
A report on the testing and subsequent evaluation that shows an very good level of understanding and insight, with a level of independent thought and synthesis of appropriate principles that demonstrate a very good understanding of the requirements of the task. |
A report on the testing and subsequent evaluation that shows a good level of understanding and insight, with a level of independent thought and synthesis of appropriate principles that demonstrate a good understanding of the requirements of the task, though there are aspects that require further development. |
A report on the testing and subsequent evaluation that shows a basic level of understanding and insight, with a level of independent thought and synthesis of appropriate principles that needs significant further development in relation to the task. |
A report on the testing and subsequent evaluation that shows an incomplete understanding and insufficient insight, with a level of independent thought and synthesis of appropriate principles that needs significant further development in relation to the task and omits required aspects |
A report on the testing and subsequent evaluation that is mostly lacking in terms of demonstrating understanding and insight, with a mostly absent level of independent thought and synthesis of appropriate principles. |
|
Structure and presenta (10%) |
Exceptionally presented with no spelling or grammatical errors and in a fluent, logical and engaging style that employs a highly sophisticated use of the appropriate terminology related to HCI. |
An exceptional presentation of the report with no spelling or grammatical errors and in a fluent, logical and engaging style that demonstrates an excellent use of the appropriate terminology related to HCI. |
A very good presentation of the report, though there are some minor spelling or grammatical errors or minor issues with clarity, the report is mostly written in a style that demonstrates the use of appropriate terminology related to HCI. |
A good presentation of the report , though there are some issues with the content in terms of errors and clarity, the report demonstrates the use of appropriate terminology related to HCI though there are issues with clarity, depth and/or relevance. |
A basic presentation of the report, there are major issues in terms of errors and clarity, the report demonstrates a limited use of appropriate terminology related to HCI and there are significant issues with depth and/or relevance. |
A limited report with significant issues in terms of errors and clarity that bring it below a pass standard, the report demonstrates an insufficient use of appropriate terminology related to HCI and there are significant issues with depth and/or relevance. |
A mostly inaccessible report in terms of structure and presentation that is well below the standard for a pass. |
|
Use of references (20% |
Exemplary referencing and use of a knowledge base that is highly appropriate and relevant. |
An excellent understanding of referencing and use of a knowledge base that is appropriate and relevant. |
A very good understanding of referencing and use of an appropriate and relevant knowledge base, though there are some issues with use of references and the Harvard system. |
A good understanding of referencing and use of an appropriate and relevant knowledge base. |
A basic understanding of the Harvard referencing systems and a limited use of relevant and appropriate sources. |
A limited understanding of the Harvard referencing systems and a limited use of relevant and appropriate sources, which fall below the threshold of a pass. |
A lack of understanding of the Harvard referencing system and a lack of evidence of the use of relevant and appropriate references. |
Get the Solution of this Assessment
Order Non-Plagiarized AssignmentDo you need help with an assignment for COM5009 Human Computer Interaction ? Look no further! We are here for computer science assignment help. We also provide free assignment solutions written by PhD expert writers—100% original content, no plagiarism! Plus, we also provide assignment help, that too by completing it before the deadline. Quality and accuracy are taken care of completely. So contact us today and be stress-free!
Let's Book Your Work with Our Expert and Get High-Quality Content
