Assignment 2 – Design Documentation
Submit Assignment
Due 4 Oct by 23:59 Points 15 Submitting a file upload Available 31 Aug at 0:00 – 11 Oct at 23:59 about 1 month
COURSE NAME: User-centred Design
COURSE CODE: COSC2628
ASSIGNMENT TITLE: Assignment 2 – Design Documentation WEIGHTING: 15%
DUE DATE: 4th October 2020 11.59pm
Submission: Design document PDF
Assignment spec Assignment 2 part 1 sample
Assignment 2 part 1
Criteria
Ratings
Pts
User Research
Users, personas, context scenarios.
4.5 to >3.6 Pts Examplary -HD
-Provided a
good and useful
introduction to
the project and
document. –
User groups
described for
the target
application,
contains
specific
attributes that
are relevant and
distinct. –
Personas
contains all the
necessary
elements, are
not based on
real people and
is representative
of the user
groups. – There
should be at
least three
personas
provided. –
4C.o5nttoex>t3.6 Pts
sEcxenmapriolasryar-eHD
clear to
– Wireframes
understand and provided are easy
shows the to
motivation of understand(proper
the persona. sizing, labelled
Had a proper with clear lines). –
setting and Keypaths contains
resolution of the transition arrows
story. Is high that originates
level and has a from the
narrative that interaction
flows logically. – element to the
At least three next screen. Flow
context
can be clearly
scenarios followed. –
provided, one Keypaths is based
for each
on the context
persona.
scenario and uses
3.6 to >3.15 Pts Accomplished – DI
-Provided a good and useful introduction to
the project but may have missed the purpose of
the document. – User groups described for the target
application, contains specific attributes that are relevant. – Personas
contains all the necessary elements, are not based on real people and is representative of the user groups. – There should be
at least three personas provided. – Co3n.6tetxot >3.15 Pts scAencacroiomspalrisehed – cleDaIr to understand and
shows the provided are
motivation of the easy to
persona. Had a understand, but
proper setting
may have lacked
and resolution of labelling or were
the story. Is high not formatted
level and has a properly. –
narrative that Keypaths
flows logically. – contains
At least three transition arrows
context scenarios that originates
provided, one for from the
each persona. interaction
element to the next screen. Flow can be
– Wireframes
3.15 to >2.7 Pts Developing – CR
-Introduction
described the
project but am
lacking details
as to the goal
and the purpose
of the
document. –
User groups
described for
the target
application,
contains specific
attributes that
were sufficiently
descriptive. –
Personas are
lacking certain
elements, are
not based on
real people and
is representative
of the user
groups. –
Context
scenarios are
cl3e.a1r5toto >2.7 Pts
uDndeevresltoapnidngan-d
shCoRws the
motivation of the – Wireframes
persona. Is provided are
sufficiently high complete but
level and has a contains some
narrative that formatting
flows logically. issues. –
Keypaths contains transition arrows that did not originate from the interaction element. Slightly difficult to follow the flow. – Keypaths seems separate from
2.7 to >0.0 Pts Beginning – PA
-Introduction described the project but am lacking details as to the goal and the purpose of the document. – User groups described for the target application, contains specific attributes that were sufficiently descriptive but may not be enough to differentiate the groups. – Personas are lacking certain elements, are not based on real people. Personas only fits the user g2ro.7uptos r>o0u.g0hPlyt.s – BC eo gn i t ne nx i t n g – P A scenarios did
not show the provided were
motivations of not complete
the persona, or and contains
did not actually some
mention the formatting
persona as the issues(Too
actor. There was large/small, not
no proper labelled, too
resolution. messy) –
Narrative flow Keypaths
slightly illogical lacking
or have gaps. – transition
Lacking arrows, quite
sufficient difficult difficult
number of
to follow the
personas and/or flow. –
context Keypaths
scenarios.
– Wireframes
0.0 Pts Missing
4.5 pts
Keypaths and Wireframes
0.0 Pts Missing
4.5 pts
Criteria
the persona as the
the context
seems
3.0 to >2.4 Pts
2.1 to >1.8 Pts
1.8 to >0.0 Pts
actor. – The
scenario or did
separate from
Exemplary – HD
Developing –
Beginning – PA
persona’s actions
not use the
the context
– Design were clearly
principles described, as well
provided is
as the systems
relevant, reactions or
accurately feedback
chosen and sequence.
analysis is
contextual tied to
the design. –
Analysis is
properly
formatted so that
it was easy to
follow the design
principles touted.
– Analysis
provided cogent
and strong
r3a.0tiotnoa>le2.f4orPtthse
pErxinecmiplleasr.y– HD
Analysis was – Each feature
backed by provided ties
screenshots that back to the
was properly client’s goals. –
formatted and Each feature has
labelled. sufficient
description that makes it clear what it allows the user to accomplish and the value it brings. – Each feature is
CR
– Some of the scenario or did
design principles not use the
chosen does not persona as the
match the actor. –
design and were Description of
not accurately the persona’s
described. – An actions and
explanation was system
provided for response could
each principle use more
but could use details, it was
some more too generic.
justification. – There were too few design principles that were showcased. –
1A . n 8 a t l y o s >i s 0 w. 0 a Ps t n s o t bDaecvkeelodpbinyg – PA screenshots or
Ratings
Pts
Design principles
clearly followed.
2.4 to >2.1 Pts
– Keypaths is
Accomplished
based on the
– DI
context scenario
– Design
and uses the
principles persona as the
provided is actor. – The
relevant, persona’s
accurately actions were
chosen. – described but
Analysis the system
provided response was
cogent and not sufficiently
strong rationale elaborated on or
for the provided.
principles. – Analysis was backed by screenshots.
0.0 Pts Missing
3.0 pts
Feature list discussion
2.4 to >2.1 Pts Accomplish – DI
– Each feature provided ties back to the client’s goals. – Each feature has sufficient description that makes it clear what it allows the user to accomplish. – Each feature is accompanied
persona as the
– Design actor. –
principles Description of
chosen
the persona’s
demonstrated actions and
understanding of system response
the subject but could use more
some choices details, it was
were not
too generic.
sufficiently
explained or
accurate. – An
explanation was
provided for
each principle
but could use
some more
justification. –
A2n.1altyosi>s1w.8asPts
bDaecvkeldopbiyng –
sCcRreenshots but
only for some of – Most features
the principles provided ties
and/or not back to the
properly client’s goals. –
formatted. Although each
feature has an description it is too vague and not clear specifically how it benefits the user. – Each feature is
– Features
any other provided does
supporting not tie back to
materials.
the project and
client’s goals. – Although each feature has an description it is too vague and not clear specifically how it benefits the user. – Features were not
Total points: 15.0
3.0 pts
accompanied by data/findings from the first assignment and the connection is clear and logical.
by data/findings from the first assignment
accompanied by data/findings from the first assignment.
accompanied by data/findings from the first assignment
0.0 Pts Missing