Hello, if you have any need, please feel free to consult us, this is my wechat: wx91due
Assessment Item 2: User Experience Research Project (Group and Individual) 60%
(Part A) UX Research Project - Group
Working in groups of 3-4, students apply their knowledge and skills of user experience research methods to research and analyse a chosen product or service. Students develop a series of user research methods/activities to better understand the needs, goals and pain points of their chosen product’s end users. Students then workshop, test and refine their user research methods, before conducting relevant research and collecting data. It is expected that students will conduct a series of user research methods/activities including, but not limited to, a contextual enquiry, survey/questionnaire, and interview questions for target users. Based on the data analysis, students will propose relevant recommendations to improve the overall end-user experience. These recommendations will be conveyed in an in-class presentation (including a slide deck) as if to executives who run the company of the chosen product or service.
(Part B) Ethical Research Statement - Individual
Throughout the user experience research, data collection, data analysis, and presentation process, students are to reflect on the ethical research practice and principles of researching with and for Indigenous users. Individually, students reflect critically on the ethical implications of their human-centered design research using specific examples of their own research activities to demonstrate their ethical research practice, and present this as a written statement.
A detailed brief and outline of deliverables are provided below.
Specifications
|
Objective(s): |
a, b, c, d and e |
|
Groupwork: |
Group and Individual |
|
Weight: |
60% |
|
Word Length: |
Part A (Group): UX Research Presentation – 6-8 mins + slides + compiled research data/appendix submitted as a PDF to Canvas
Part B (Individual): Ethical Research Statement – 750 words |
|
Due: |
Part A (Group) The presentation document and compiled research data must be submitted to Assignments on Canvas the day before your presentation:
The group presentation will take place in-class in the student’s allocated seminar (either Monday 12th May or Wednesday 14th May) Part B (Individual) will be submitted to Assignments on Canvas by 11:59pm Friday 30th May (Final Assessment Period) |
Criteria
|
User Experience Research Project |
Weighting |
|
Quality and professionalism of research plan, methods, analysis and recommendations |
35% |
|
Quality and professionalism of presentation delivery and materials |
20% |
|
Effectiveness of individual contribution to the research project |
10% |
|
Engagement with ethical research practice with and for Indigenous users in individual research statement |
15% |
|
Synthesis of relevant theoretical and practice-based UX approaches in individual research statement |
10% |
|
Clarity of expression and accuracy of referencing in individual research statement |
10% |
PART A (Group) – User Experience Research Project
As a group, students are to choose one app from the list of A1 apps. You may choose an app a group member has already studied for A1. You can also refer to work completed in A1 when discussing your findings in A2 e.g. did your data validate your assumptions from A1? Did your data reveal additional pain points?
Each group will conduct the following methods:
Survey: each group member to conduct at least 3 (group total: 9-12 minimum)
Interview: each group member to conduct at least 1 (group total: 3-4 minimum)
Contextual Enquiry: each group member to conduct at least 1 (group total: 3-4 minimum)
Heuristic Evaluation (for groups of 4): each group member to conduct 1 (group total: 4)
Method Leads
Each group member will choose a method and take responsibility for that method eg. Survey Lead, Interview Lead, etc. The Method Lead is responsible for drafting, testing, instructing other team members in data collection, collating and analysing data, and presenting the results of their research method. Other team members will contribute with testing and data collection, under the direction of the Method Lead.
For example, the Survey Lead will:
• draft the survey questions and pilot test them• apply any feedback from the group and finalise the survey questions• instruct the other group members in how to conduct their surveys• collate and analyse the data• present the survey results in the group presentation
The other group members will:
• complete the survey evaluation form and give feedback to the Survey Lead• conduct surveys under the guidance of the Survey Lead• return the data to the Survey Lead in a timely manner
Please ensure you are conducting your research ethically and safely. Make sure you conduct all in-person surveys, interviews, and contextual enquiries in a public space ie. notin someone’s home. If your research involves children/minors, you must only conduct yourresearch with a parent/guardian over 18 years of age.
Presentation Timing
• For groups of 3, you will have 6 mins in total.• For groups of 4, you will have 8 mins in total.
We will have to enforce the time limits to make sure all groups have an opportunity to present.
Individual Contribution
Although this is a group presentation, you will be marked individually. You must provide evidence of effective individual contribution to the project by completing evaluation forms on your group members’ draft methods, and through participation in conducting surveys, interviews, contextual enquiries, and heuristic evaluations. Tutors will be monitoring your uploads and activity on MS Teams throughout semester and checking that you are participating in your group research project.
Submission to Canvas
Due to Canvas the day before your presentation:
One member of the group must submit the presentation slides:
• Please ensure that the cover slide includes the names and student numbers of all members of the group.• Please ensure that the name of each project lead and their method is clearly identified.• You can also submit an online link to your Canva/Google slides to be used during the presentation, but you must submit a PDF by the due date.
Each student must submit their individual compiled research data as a PDF:
• The method evaluation forms you completed for each method• The final survey/questions/outline of your method• The data collected using your method• Your data analysis• Copy of your team contract
These documents will be used to grade the quality and professionalism of your research, as well as your individual contribution.
Suggested Presentation Structure (use as a guide only)
Slide 1: Background to the Project
Slides 2 – 3: Research Objectives and Methodologies
Slides 4 – 6: Survey Method
Slides 7 – 9: Interview Method
Slides 10 – 12: Contextual Enquiry Method
Slides 13 – 15: Heuristic Evaluation Method
Slides 16 – 18: Overview of Key Findings and Final Recommendations
Background to the Project
• Provide a short introduction outlining the app, its key users and user segmentation, plus user needs.
Research Objectives and Methodologies
• List research objectives/goals (what did your research set out to achieve?)
• Provide a brief overview of the research methodologies and methods (behavioural/attitudinal etc.) you have used and why? You may use a methods table to summarise the key information.
For each method, you should discuss:
• Target Participants
- Outline your target users/participants. Indicate who (in terms of demographics) you recruited for the user research and how you found participants (e.g. sampling approach).
• User Research Method
- How did you implement/action these methods?
- What sort of data you were looking for and what you hoped the data would tell you about the users, their needs, their pain points etc?
- This section must be clearly explained and supported with reference to readings/sources to substantiate your research approach.
• Data Analysis and Key Findings
- What data was collected?
- How was the data analysed?
- What were the key observations/findings resulting from this analysis?
Overview of Key Findings and Final Recommendations
• Grounded in your research and analysis, what are the key findings and recommendations you can provide to executives for the improvement of the digital product/service?
• Whenever possible, identify the benefits of your recommendations.
• What were the limitations of the research?
• Include any further research you may need to conduct and why it is needed.
PART B (Individual) – Ethical Research Statement (750 words)
In addition to the above Part A – User Experience Research Project, we want you to discuss the ethical considerations for researching with and for Indigenous peoples. You should refer to relevant principles and responsibilities from the required readings on Indigenous research including the AIATSIS Code of Ethics for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Research (2020). You should also refer to relevant theoretical and practice-based UX approaches, including required readings and industry sources.
Drawing on relevant UX approaches and the AIATSIS Code of Ethics, please discuss the following points in relation to the method you were responsible for and the methods you assisted with:
- How have you considered the inclusion of Indigenous users in your survey/interview/contextual enquiry/heuristic evaluation?
- Which principles and responsibilities from the AIATSIS Code of Ethics were relevant to your methods?
- How did you adhere to these principles when researching with Indigenous users?
- If you did not have Indigenous participants in your research, please explain how you would have ensured that you upheld your ethical responsibilities and adhered to the core principles within your method. Please give detailed examples of how you would have put these principles into practice. You can use the Guide to Applying the AIATSIS Code of Ethics to help you.
Please also provide evidence that you have successfully completed the Ethics module and test on Canvas with a 100% score (include a screenshot of your score at the end of your document).
Rubric
|
Criteria |
Fail |
Pass |
Credit |
Distinction |
High Distinction |
|
Quality and professionalism of research plan, methods, analysis and recommendations (35%)
|
There is limited or no evidence of original user research planned. There is limited or no discussion of research objectives, target participants, research methodologies or methods, and a discussion of how they have been designed and why. The methods are not appropriately aligned to the research objectives. The Milestone Task has not been completed or was of poor quality. The analysis of the original research is of poor quality, lacks rigor and presents unclear results. The recommendations are unclear, poorly explained, or not clearly actionable, and may be missing.
|
There is reasonable evidence of original user research planned. There is some basic discussion of research objectives, target participants, research methodologies and methods, and a discussion of how they have been designed and why. The methods are appropriately aligned to the research objectives, but more detail was needed. The Milestone Task has been completed but further development was needed. The analysis of the original research is of mixed quality and rigor and presents partially clear results. The recommendations are partially identified, explained, and actionable, and are sometimes drawn from the analysis of original research.
|
There is good evidence of original user research planned. There is solid discussion of research objectives, target participants, research methodologies and methods, and a discussion of how they have been designed and why. The methods are appropriately aligned to the research objectives with some refinement needed. The Milestone Task has been completed on time and was of good quality. The analysis of the original research is of good quality and rigor and presents clear results. The recommendations are clearly identified, explained, and actionable, and are drawn from the analysis of original research.
|
The original user research plan is well developed. There is a strong discussion of research objectives, target participants, research methodologies and methods, and a discussion of how they have been designed and why. The methods are appropriately aligned to the research objectives with little refinement needed. The Milestone Task has been completed on time and was of high quality. The analysis of the original research is of very good quality and rigor and presents clear results. The recommendations are identified well, explained, and actionable, and are clearly drawn from the analysis of original research.
|
The original user research plan is developed extremely well. There is an excellent discussion of research objectives, target participants, research methodologies and
methods, and a discussion of how they have been designed and why. The methods are detailed and appropriately aligned to the research objectives. The Milestone Task has been completed on time and was of excellent quality. The analysis of the original research is of excellent quality, exceptionally rigorous and presents very clear results. The recommendations are extremely well identified, explained, and actionable, and are very clearly drawn from the analysis of original research.
|
|
Quality and professionalism of presentation delivery and materials (20%) |
The presentation structure is very weak, with poorly organised sections and transitions. Visuals have not been used, or they are not clear, engaging, or supporting of the presentation. No eye contact is made with the audience and/or the tone is inappropriate and unprofessional. The speakers have not spoken to the topic. The presentation may be well over or under time limit. |
The presentation structure is imbalanced with poorly organised sections and transitions. Visuals are somewhat clear, engaging, or supporting of the presentation. Minimal eye contact is made with the audience and/or the tone is inappropriate and unprofessional. Some of the speakers stay within the topic. The presentation may be over or under time limit. |
The presentation has good structure with effective organisation of sections and smoothtransitions. Visuals are clear, engaging, and support the presentation. The speakers maintain eye contact and speak with good pace, liveliness and time management. The tone is appropriate. |
The presentation has very good structure with effective organisation of sections and smooth transitions. Visuals are very clear, engaging, and support the presentation. The speakers maintain good eye contact and speak with good pace, liveliness and time management. The tone is professional and engaging. |
The presentation has excellent structure with meaningful organisation of sections and smoothtransitions. The visuals used are of excellent quality, with high audience engagement. The speakers maintain excellent eye contact, pace, liveliness and time management. The tone is professional and engaging. |
|
Effectiveness of individual contribution to the research project (10%) |
The presentation and compiled data do notdemonstrate the required level of individual contribution. There is little to no evidence of individual contribution to the planning, implementation, analysis, recommendation and presentation phases of the user experienceresearch, or what is provided is incomplete or lacking. This includes peer feedback and evaluations provided to peers that could not be considered or actioned. |
The presentation and compiled data demonstrate a reasonable level of individual contribution. There is some evidenceof minimal/appropriate individual contribution to the planning, implementation, analysis, recommendation and presentation phases of the user experience research. The presentation and compiled data may still lack the evidence required to substantiate effective individual contribution to the project. This includes peer feedback and evaluations provided to peers that could not be considered or actioned. |
The presentation and compiled data demonstrate a good level of individual contribution. There is some effective evidence of appropriateindividual contribution to the planning, implementation, analysis, recommendation and presentation phases of the user experience research. The presentation and compiled data may still lack the evidence required to substantiate effective individual contribution to the project. This includes peer feedback and evaluations provided to peers that could not be considered or actioned. |
The presentation and compiled data demonstrate a strong level of individual contribution. There is strong and effectiveevidence of appropriate and consistent individual contribution to the planning, implementation,analysis, recommendation and presentation phases of the user experience research. There is evidence of timely peer feedback and evaluations provided to peers. |
The presentation and compiled data demonstrate an excellent level of individual contribution. There is outstanding evidence of a consistent and insightful individual contribution to the planning, implementation, analysis, recommendation and presentation phases of the user experience research. There is evidence of timely and insightful peer feedback and evaluations provided to peers. |
|
Engagement with ethical research practice with and for Indigenous users in individual research statement (15%) |
The ethical research statement may be incomplete or missing. The ethical research statement shows little or no engagement with the required set readings,pre-seminar content, or class activities. The statement does not adequately demonstrate the required understanding of ethical research practice with and for Indigenous users, requiring significantly further depth, focus, refinement and/or critical engagement. There is no evidence that the Ethics quiz on Canvas was completed successfully. |
The ethical research statement shows reasonable engagement with the set readings, pre-seminar content, and class activities but further detail or refinement was needed. The statement includes minimal examples and/or details but lacks specificity, relevance, or appropriateness. The statement demonstrates some basic understanding of ethical research practice with and for Indigenous users but requires further depth, focus, refinement and/or critical engagement. The Ethics quiz on Canvas has been completed successfully. |
The ethical research statement shows good engagement with the set readings, pre-seminar content, and class activities, however further detail or refinement was still needed. The statement includes examples and/or details, but at times these couldhave been more specific, relevant, or appropriate. The statement demonstrates a solid understanding of ethical research practice with and for Indigenous users, however, may requirefurther depth, focus, refinement, or critical engagement at times. The Ethics quiz on Canvas hasbeen completed successfully. |
The ethical research statement shows strong engagement with the set readings, pre-seminar content, and class activities with little detail or refinement needed. The statement includes examples and/or details, but at times these could have been more specific, relevant, or appropriate. The statement demonstrates a strong understanding of ethical research practice with and for Indigenous users, with good depth, focus, refinement, and critical engagement. The Ethics quiz on Canvas has been completed successfully. |
The ethical research statement shows excellent engagement with the set readings, preseminar content, and class activities. The statement includes nuanced examples demonstrating specificity, relevance, and appropriateness. The statement demonstrates an outstanding understanding of ethical research practice with and for Indigenous users, with depth, focus, refinement, and critical engagement. The Ethics quiz on Canvas has been completed successfully. |
|
Synthesis of relevant theoretical andpractice-based UX approaches in individual research statement (10%) |
The individual research statement shows little or no engagement with the set readings, pre-seminar content, or class activities that have outlined the process and approach taken. The statement lacks a demonstrated integration of theory and practice. Relevant sources are missing, poorly integrated, or included without genuine engagement in the submission. |
The individual research statement shows some engagement with the set readings, pre-seminar content, and class activities that have outlined the process and approach taken, however further detail or refinement was needed. The statement demonstrates a reasonable integration of theory and practice. Academic and industry sources may be limited but are present and relevant, however they may lack genuine integration. |
The individual research statement shows solid engagement with the set readings, pre-seminar content, and class activities that have outlined the process and approach taken, however further detail or refinement was still needed. The statement demonstrates a good integration of theory and practice. A good amount of academic and industry sources is present and relevant; however, they may lack genuine integration at times. |
The individual research statement shows meaningful and insightful engagement with the set readings, pre-seminar content, and class activities that have outlined the process and approach taken, with an ability to weave theory with practice. Further detail or refinement might still be needed. The statement demonstrates a very good integration of theory and practice. Academic and industry sources are present, relevant and have been well integrated. |
The individual research statement shows meaningful and insightful engagement with the set readings, pre-seminar content, and class activities that have outlined the process and approach taken, with an outstanding ability to weave theory with practice. Relevant academic and industry sources are integrated seamlessly and meaningfully. |
|
Clarity of expression and accuracy of referencing in individual research statement (10%) |
The ethical research statement is generally poorly written, lacks clarity or ideas are poorly conveyed. The statement lacks the use of academic tone and approach. The submission may be below the required word count. Overall, the submission may be weak, inaccurate, incoherent, or lacking detail. Referencing is incomplete or not formatted according to APA style. |
The ethical research statement is reasonably written, and ideas have been conveyed in a reasonable way. Further editing and refinement is required to improve the clarity of expression. The statement attempts to use academic tone and overall, the submission is accurate and reasonably coherent. References are complete however greater adherence to APA is needed. |
The ethical research statement is well written, and ideas have been conveyed in a clear way. The statement has been edited and proofread well, however some errors remain. The submission uses a solid academic tone and demonstrates a solid academic approach. Overall, the submission is accurate and coherent. References are complete with good adherence to APA style however formatting errors remain. |
The ethical research statement is very well written, and ideas have been conveyed concisely. The statement has been edited and proofread well, with minimal errors. The submission uses a strong academic tone and demonstrates a strong academic approach. Overall, the submission reads with coherence and confidence. References are complete with very good adherence to APA style however, a few minor formatting errors remain. |
The ethical research statement is excellently written, and ideas have been conveyed in a clear, concise and precise way. The statement has been edited and proofread well, with no or minimal errors. The submission uses an academic tone and demonstrates an excellent academic approach. Overall, the submission reads with an exceptional degree of coherence and clarity. References are complete and formatted correctly using APA style with no errors. |