Assignment 2: Individual Assignment

Weight: 25%

1. Aim

This assessment will allow students to demonstrate the understanding of basic concepts of user requirements gathering and evaluating interfaces from a user design perspective. This assessment will also enable students to learn how to critique existing UX designs.

2. Learning Outcomes Assessed

The following course learning outcomes are assessed by completing this assignment:

• LO1. Apply an evidence-based approach to user-experience requirements elicitation, specification and evaluation.
• LO2. Plan, conduct, analyse and interpret the results of User Centred Design activities to model users, goals, tasks, system environment and domain.
• LO3. Plan, conduct and document usability tests of software systems.

3. Assignment Details

This assignment carries 25% weightage and is to be done individually.

Schedule:

• Interviews: Conducted in person during class in Week 5/6.
• Final Submission: Report + Presentation Due Date: Sunday, 2nd February 2025, at 23:59 hrs.
• Presentations: 5-minute presentations will be conducted in-class in Week 11.

Part A: Website Critique

You will choose any company of your choice. You can choose any one of the following:

• Hospital
• Bank
• Real-estate
• Furniture store
• Electronics Store

Study their website design and user interface. You will critically analyse the website to list and describe 5 attractive design features in regard to accessibility, usability, design principles and engagement. You will identify 2 design features that can be improved for the website. You must provide brief and concise explanation of your answers.

Word limit for Part A: 1000 words.

Part B: User Experience Research

Your task as a UX designer is to conduct user experience research for the company you selected in Part A.

Users can use their smart phones, desktops and laptops to access the website of your chosen company. On the website, the users can perform any task like booking, buying, searching etc. You must:

1. Interview at least four users (must be your own classmates).
2. Create a User Persona based on your findings.
3. Conduct competitive research and create a Lightning Demo that will consist of a Mood Board.
4. Use the Affinity mapping technique to analyse your interview data (feel free to use Miro, Figma or any other tool and include screenshots in your report).

You must attach interview questions in the appendix at the end of the report. You must provide brief and concise explanation of your answers.

Word limit for Part B: 1500 words.

Overall Report: Students are required to submit a report that includes both user requirements gathering and a critique of an assigned website's design. The report is divided into two parts as described above.

Marking Rubric (Total 25%)

Report – 20%
Presentation – 5%

Criteria

Fail (0-49%)

Pass (50-64%)

Credit (65-74%)

Distinction (75-84%)

High Distinction (85-100%)

Good Understanding of User Requirements Gathering (5%)

Minimal or no understanding of user requirements gathering. Key concepts are missing or incorrectly applied.

Basic understanding of user requirements gathering. Key concepts are present but lack depth or clarity.

Good understanding of user requirements gathering with most key concepts correctly applied. Minor gaps in explanation.

Strong understanding of user requirements gathering. Key concepts are well-applied and explained with few errors.

Excellent understanding of user requirements gathering. All key concepts are thoroughly applied, demonstrating deep insight.

Critique of UX Design (5%)

Poor or incorrect critique of the assigned website's design. Little to no analysis or justification provided.

Basic critique of the assigned website's design with limited analysis. Some points are justified but lack depth.

Good critique of the assigned website's design. Most points are analyzed and justified, but some areas lack thoroughness.

Very good critique of the website's design. All points are well-analyzed and justified with a strong understanding of UX principles.

Exceptional critique of the website's design. Deep analysis with insightful justifications grounded in UX principles.

Structure and Organization of Report (5%)

Report is poorly structured and lacks logical flow. Sections are missing or unclear.

Basic structure with some organization issues. Report includes necessary sections but may be disjointed or unclear in parts.

Well-structured report with clear sections. Logical flow is present but could be improved.

Very well-organized report with clear sections and a logical flow. Minor issues in clarity or detail.

Exceptionally well-organized report with clear, cohesive sections. The flow of information is logical and professional.

Presentation and Communication (5%)

Presentation is unclear, disorganized, or fails to convey key ideas. Poor use of visuals or technical language.

Basic presentation with some clarity issues. Ideas are presented, but visuals or technical language may be lacking or unclear.

Good presentation with clear communication of key ideas. Visuals and technical language are appropriate but could be improved.

Strong presentation with well-organized communication. Visuals and technical language are used effectively.

Exceptional presentation. Ideas are clearly and professionally communicated with excellent use of visuals and technical language.

Referencing and Use of Sources (5%)

No referencing or incorrect use of sources. Over-reliance on direct quotes or poor-quality sources.

Basic referencing with minor errors. Limited range of sources used.

Good referencing with a reasonable range of sources used effectively.

Strong referencing with a wide range of sources. Minimal errors in citation.

Perfect referencing with a wide range of high-quality sources. No errors in citation.