Overview

Assigned readings are worth 5% of your overall course grade.

We expect to assign approximately five readings over the length of the quarter. Each assigned reading has a corresponding open-ended question that will be submitted and graded. We have tried to set reading deadlines that give you the flexibility to read before or after the related lectures. Do whichever is best for your personal learning style.

Responses are expected to be at most several paragraphs. Their role is to get you engaged with and thinking about the material. They will be graded according to whether they provide evidence you understood and considered the material in responding.

We will make additional resources available for students as interested.

Assigned Readings

Reading 1: Contextual Inquiry

Due: Uploaded Thursday, January 12, 2017 (before section on Friday, January 13, 2017).

Read:

• Beyer and Holtzblatt (1997). Contextual Design. Chapter 3.

Optionally, check out these additional design method resources:

• IDEO (2003). Method Cards.
• Martin and Hanington (2012). Universal Methods of Design.

After reading, consider how you might apply this approach to a project proposed in Assignment 1b. You may complete this reading in terms of your own project proposal, or you may complete this reading in terms of a “funded” proposal on which you have bid.

• Briefly, what was the proposal (e.g., two sentences).
• Who and what might you propose to observe in a contextual inquiry (e.g., two sentences).
• What focus might you bring to your observation, and why? (e.g., two or three sentences).
• Identify a pitfall or limitation of contextual inquiry (i.e., as a method) or your experience (i.e., as a new design researcher) that seems likely (e.g., two or three sentences).
• Describe how you might avoid or attempt to correct for this pitfall in your inquiry while still primarily using a contextual inquiry method (e.g., two or three sentences).

Then consider alternative design research methods, such as those in the resources above. Note that you are still in early-stage research, so the relevant methods from Universal Methods of Design are likely in Design Phase 1 or Design Phase 2.

• Suggest an alternative method you might propose to also apply to the above proposal (e.g., two sentences).
• Describe what additional benefit or complementary perspective it might provide (e.g., three or four sentences).

This reading thus serves as some practice planning design research before moving on to your primary project.

No more than one page of text in PDF format.

Submit via Canvas here:

https://canvas.uw.edu/courses/1098203/assignments/3571765

Reading 2: Storyboarding and Video Prototyping

Due: Uploaded Friday, January 27, 2017.

Read these storyboarding resources:

• Colville-Hyde (2016). UX Comics: Visually Communicating User Experiences.
• Excerpts from Greenberg et al. (2012). Sketching User Experiences: The Workbook

Watch the video prototypes linked from Lecture 7, noting the context in which they are linked as a comment on aspects of their effectiveness.

• Lecture 7 - Storyboarding, Video Prototyping

Specifically, that is these videos:

• Mackay Stop Motion
• Mackay Stop Motion Result
• Document Interaction on Microsoft Surface
• Context Lens on Microsoft Surface
• Don’t Forget 1
• Don’t Forget 2
• Don’t Forget 3
• Buddy Map Backcountry
• Consumester
• Pickup
• Graffiti Karma
• ParkSmart
• Plantr

Optionally, check out these additional storyboarding resources:

• Greenberg et al. (2012). Sketching User Experiences: The Workbook.
• Truong, Hayes, and Abowd. (2006). Storyboarding: An Empirical Determination of Best Practices and Effective Guidelines.
• Quesenbery and Brooks. (2010). Storytelling for User Experience.
• McCloud (1993). Understanding Comics.

Optionally, check out these high-production “vision of the future” video prototypes:

• Starfire
• Knowledge Navigator
• A Day Made of Glass

The Starfire video prototype is notable for including a ‘bug’, where the system behaves in a manner counter to the person’s wishes, but consistent with how we might expect such technology to work. For fun, see if you can spot this ‘bug’ in the video.

After viewing and considering these examples, think about what approaches were more or less effective.

• In one paragraph, describe a technique you saw in these examples that was highly effective (i.e., in either storyboarding or video prototyping, in the readings or the videos), which you might therefore want to apply in your storyboarding or video prototyping. Be specific, such that it is clear you considered the examples. Discuss why it was effective.
• In one paragraph, describe a technique you saw that was ineffective (i.e., in either storyboarding or video prototyping, in the readings or the videos), which you might therefore want to be mindful of in your storyboarding or video prototyping. Be specific, such that it is clear you considered the examples. Discuss why it was ineffective.

These examples thus support your reflection on how to effectively convey a design. Techniques in these and other examples will also directly apply as you prepare your storyboards and video prototypes.

No more than one page of text in PDF format.

Submit via Canvas here:

https://canvas.uw.edu/courses/1098203/assignments/3584938

Reading 3: Paper Prototyping and Usability Testing

Due: Uploaded Friday, February 3, 2017.

Read:

• Rettig (1994). Prototyping for Tiny Fingers.
• Snyder (2003). Paper Prototyping. Chapter 4.
• Snyder (2003). Paper Prototyping. Chapter 8.
• Gomoll (1992). Some Techniques for Observing Users.

Optionally, check out these additionally paper prototyping resources:

• Nielsen Norman Group. Paper Prototyping: A How-To Video.
• Snyder (2003). Paper Prototyping.

After reading, consider how you might apply these techniques in your paper prototyping and usability testing.

• Describe an specific idea or thought you might be able to apply in your paper prototyping and usability testing.
• Describe why this idea is non-obvious or how it well help ensure good results for your paper prototyping and usability testing.
• Describe what in the readings gave you this idea.

Your thoughts here should be specific. You are already required to do a paper prototype with usability testing, so that is obviously too high-level for this reading. Convey a specific idea that indicates you did the reading and thought about how to apply it in the context of your project.

This reading thus serves to get you thinking about these methods in the context of your project. What actual techniques your team applies will depend on your larger decisions as a team. This reading is not intended to require that you actually apply the ideas you individually develop here.

No more than one page of text in PDF format.

Submit via Canvas here:

https://canvas.uw.edu/courses/1098203/assignments/3595630

Reading 4: Patterns

Due: Uploaded Friday, February 24, 2017.

Check out these design patterns:

• van Duyne, Landay, Hong (2003). The Design of Sites: Patterns for Creating Winning Web Sites.

Consider how one of these patterns, or a pattern you find elsewhere, may be relevant in your project design.

• Briefly, what pattern did you identify as relevant (e.g., by name and ID from Design of Sites, by URL).
• Describe why this pattern is relevant in your design.
• Describe how you might modify your design or your design process based on insights on perspective surfaced by the pattern. (e.g., describes changes in text, before / after images).

If you wish, you can do this assignment in pairs from your project team. If you do, include both names in your document. Also ensure you both upload that document.

This reading thus uses your project as a context to have you engage with a set of patterns.

No more than one page of text in PDF format.

Submit via Canvas here:

https://canvas.uw.edu/courses/1098203/assignments/3608154