Interface Design, Prototype & Demonstration of an application incorporating students’ daily IT...

“Interface Design, Prototype & Demonstration of an application incorporating students’

daily IT needs”

by

Michelle Ahern

0750379

BSc. Digital Media Design

Supervisor - Dr. Luigina Ciolfi

April 2011

2

Acknowledgements

Upon completion of this project, attempting to single out certain people who aided me

throughout the process seemed impossible. This FYP called on skills and ideas which

came as a result of four years of Digital Media Design, of which completion would not

be possible without the fantastic lecturers, faculty members, classmates, and friends I

have encountered while completing the degree. You have all had an impact on my

college experience, and your support and friendship through the years is much

appreciated, and will not be forgotten.

I would like to thank Luigina Ciolfi, for being a fantastic supervisor throughout this

FYP, meeting every query I held with a clear and calm response, and always being there

to direct me, especially in the final few weeks when she was at her busiest! It is much

appreciated, thank you!

Finally, I would like to dedicate this project to my parents, whom along with supporting

me financially and emotionally, have remained a constant inspiration in my life.

Aspiring to be as strong, kind, and understanding as you has helped me reach this stage

in my studies, and I hope you know how big a part you have played in my life so far.

3

Index

1.o Introduction 5

1.1 Overview 5

1.2 Self – Reflection 5

2.0 Background Research 9

2.1 Background Research – Papers 9

2.2 Background Research – Online Applications 11

3.0 Audience Research 12

3.1 Choosing a Research Method 12

3.2 Choosing Participants 13

3.3 Interview Process 13

3.4 Semi-Structured Interview Results 15

4.0 The Design Process 21

4.1 Brainstorming 21

4.2 Atribute List 21

4.3 Early Prototyping 25

5.0 User Testing 31

5.1 Usability – Why Test? 31

5.2 User Testing – Research 31

5.3 Approach to Testing the System 32

5.4 Tasks 33

5.5 Recruitment of Participants 33

5.6 Method of Testing 34

5.7 Analysis 34

6.0 Reshaping the System 37

6.1 Solutions 37

6.2 Changes to the Interface 39

6.3 Demonstration 39

4

7.0 Conclusions 44

7.1 Future Work 45

References 47

Brainstorming / Paper Prototypes 49

Photographs from the Process 54

Prototype Screen Shots – Pencil Sketch 59

Final Designs – Adobe Illustrator 63

Consent Form Document – Interviews 67

Interview Question Sheet – For Observer 68

Consent Form Document – User Tests 76

User Test Feedback Sheet – Observer 77

5

1.0 Introduction

Todays approach to third-level education in Ireland comes with a heavy influence on

technology; emails between students and lecturers, online research, online group

collaboration, the list is endless. Within the University of Limerick, the use of such

technologies is spread over many applications and devices, which can prove time

consuming and confusing for the user. Thus, we see the need for unified alternative, one

that encorporates the daily IT needs of a student, including improved existing aspects,

those considered most beneficial and most commonly used, and the introduction of

newer attributes to better the relationship between the student and the texhnology.

1.1 Overview

This project is a study of the existing IT services in use by the Unversity of Limerick

students, and the development of a high fidelty prototype of an alternative system,

encorporating the services considered most important and useful.

“self-relevant information is highly available — people have more information about

themselves than they have about other people or things” (Hixon. J & Swann, Jr. W,

1993)

I began my study with a self reflection. Coming from a UL background myself, it would

prove beneficial to the project to consider the options in place at the moment for a

typical student.

1.2 Self-Reflection

The inspiration for this project came directly from experience. As a fourth year student

of UL I have become accustomed to the daily IT needs of a typical student, the sites and

features that are accessed numerous times daily. Though one does grow accustomed to

using these different services, there are existing problems that come hand in hand with

them. At the moment, it is necessary to access a number of different sites to obtain basic

student information. Lets look at a few examples.

6

Firstly, and probably the most accessed of the examples, student email. The UL mail

system is hosted by outlook.com, and in order to access ones email account it is

necessary to visit the main outlook page, type in the full student email (e.g.

[email protected]) and the password assigned to that account. Ideally, a UL

student should access their account 3 to 4 times daily, as this is the primary means of

contact between lectures and students. Last minute changes to classes, assignments, etc.

are communicated through email, and if a student is unfortunate enough not to have

access to an internet connection before a change is made, it is upon the other students

and word of mouth to pass the message on. It can be argued that the students should

make checking their student email a priority, but there are a number of factors that can

hinder a student from doing so, one being that students often have another, private email

account, and would check this on a more regular basis. Most students realise that after

they graduate, this address will no longer be the address they will use. After all, it is not

very professional to use an address with the word “student” in the title after ones studies

have been complete. Also, it is most likely that students would have had an email

address before they came to college, and use this for most of their communication. The

alternative email address is usually given as much, if not more priority than the student

email. This semester, I encountered a scenario, which demonstrates how the UL mail

system can be flawed, not within the system itself, but within the relationship between

the student and the system.

A previous lecturer sent out and email stating that hard copies of a project were still in

his office after being graded last semester, and upon failure of collection within two

days, would be destroyed. The class representative (a student that takes on the role of

representing their class within the students union and dealing with problems that can

arise with lecturers / faculty etc.) took it upon themselves to text every member of the

class to pass on the message, in case they did not read the email. This action, on her

behalf, demonstrates the probability that some students would not receive the email.

The second feature that is accessed regularly by students is the student timetable. This is

accessed in three ways:

1. Go to UL main website, access current students, student timetable, proceed type in the

student number to access the timetable. This brings the student to a new page, poor in

7

layout, and not very clear to read (small text etc.)

2. Go to timetable.ul.ie, type in the student number, again it brings you to the screen

mentioned above.

3. A separate site was developed by a UL student to view their timetable. It is much

easier to read and the layout is clear and clean, using color codes to identify the

modules, thus making it is easier to separate the different subjects.

Apart from accessing it online, a vast number of students print out the timetable and

have a physical copy with them at all times. This can become problematic for obvious

reasons; deterioration of the paper, losing the sheet of paper, discoloration / fading. If

one relies on an online copy of the timetable, accessibility relies on access to the

internet, or failing all else, on the students’ ability to recall from memory.

Reliable access to a timetable is essential for a students’ day as it informs the student of

the time of class, location, and type (lecture, tutorial etc.)

Communication with ones classmates is also important, from my experience, this is

done mostly through face-to-face communication, text messages / phone calls, social

networking sites (Facebook), IM or email. Thus, the communication is spread out over

many different fields. Not all students use the same IM accounts thus this can prove

problematic.

There are a number of aspects of a student’s day that could be done electronically, for

example, to do lists and keeping account of deadlines. From my experience, these are

mostly done on paper, and are often lost or forgotten about. Deadlines are

communicated to students through many different mediums, in class, via email, or via

SULIS or the CSIS website. This can be problematic when searching for a particular

project deadline, if one does not remember how it was communicated.

Finally, another aspect that is spread across many mediums is the distribution of course

material. I have seen this done through five different means.

8

1. SULIS; this is a UL portal website designed for communication between

students and lecturers, the exchange of course material, assignments,

communication of assignment deadlines etc. The concept behind the site is

good, although it falls short in terms of usability. The interface is

disorganized and proves very hard to navigate through.

2. CSIS Website; for the CSIS department students only, this site has the

module material efficiently organized, with a folder for each week in the

semester.

3. Via Email; some lecturers prefer to distribute the course material via

email to the students, this can prove problematic when locating the specific

material.

4. Physical Handing out of Material; sometimes lecturers’ distribute the

material within the classes. This can be both beneficial and problematic,

material is easily accessible, but also easily lost.

5. Finally, some lecturers do not hand out any material, and rely on notes

taken in class. This relies heavily on student’s attendance and note taking

abilities.

I will use the information gathered in my self-reflection to compose the first stage of

research: semi-structured interview with the students.

9

2.0 Background Research

2.1 Background Research - Papers

A large amount of my research was based on existing systems in place for students, and

what aspects these included. Firstly, in “An InfoStation-Based Multi-Agent System

Supporting Intelligent Mobile Services Across a University Campus” we see the

proposition of an agency based application for University students. (Ganchev. I,

Stojanov. S, O’Droma. M, Meere. D, 2007) The service would allow an array of

communication devices (laptops, PDA’s, mobile phones etc.) to communicate with each

other and with servers. The paper gives a detailed technical overview of how the

information stations would operate, but for the purpose of this project, I focused on the

services that the application would cover :

1. Obtaining lecture notes ; students would have the ability to gain access to

lecture material through this service. The limitations are set by the device, for

example, handheld devices would only communicate text and audio material,

and the material in full may be access later on a different, more capable

device, e.g. a PC.

2. Self – assessment tests; students are asked a number of questions on the

lecture topic they are accessing, “..evaluating the students acquired

knowledge and provides valuable feedback to students concerning their

progress.”

3. Private Chat Function

4. Virtual Address Book

5. Intelligent Message Notification; if an update has been performed within

the system the user is informed

6. SMS / MMS / Email

7. Phone Calls

This system prioritizes communication between students themselves and between

students and course material. Another project that is of similar subject is the MyCampus

Project . This concept deals with “Context-Aware” services. Context-aware systems take

10

into account the users “contextual attributes” at any instance, e.g. location, weather,

calendar, etc. (Norman M. Sadeh, Enoch Chan, Linh Van., 2002) The MyCampus

system also bring in the users “Personal Environment”. This is a set of predefined

preferences, individual to each users wishes and needs. The contextual information is

used as follows :

Request the value of a current contextual attribute (e.g. location)

Request regular updates of aforementioned attribute (time intervals)

Requesting updates as the particular attribute value changes

This is clearly outlined in the paper when they use the example of a student wishing to

eat on campus. The system takes in contextual information about the user, location and

time left before their next class. It also takes into account the weather at that moment.

Given the scenario that the student had 20 minutes before their next class, the system

will suggest to the student the closest fast-food outlet, and direct him/her through

buildings ensuring walking outside is avoided.

The following is a screenshot from the paper :

11

The context-aware aspect of this project could play a major part in the eventual outcome

of this project, and other concepts mentioned in this project could prove beneficial to

students in UL:

Eating on campus

Location on campus

Weather

2.2 Background Research – Online Applications

When researching different organizational tools available to students, I came across an

online course organizer, GradeMate.com (recently updated to SchoolBinder.com). This

site is available to the general public for a fee, and is based on the users input of

information to the database, this information is then displayed in an orderly and clean

manner. (Schoolbinder, LLC. 2007-2010)

Screenshot from GradeMate.com

12

Assignments, weighting of assignments, due dates, and to-do lists are incorporated into

this site, and there is also a collaboration feature between students. Although this is an

obvious advantage to students’ organisation, it is up to the schools / colleges themselves

to filter blogs/discussions on the site to just the students taking that class. Also, there is

no instant collaboration between students, e.g. live chat, ability to see who is online, etc.

Other online applications include Backpack.com, Evernote, Studyrails, etc. These

mostly deal with organization of material, note taking, or in the case of Studyrails, the

blocking of certain websites during a specific study time to avoid distractions for the

user.

3.0 Audience Research

3.1 Choosing a Research Method

During the initial stages of the project, the approach to the research was debated. Both

Qualitative and Quantitative methods were analysed and considered. Quantitative

research, a method based on the notion ‘there is only one truth, an objective reality that

exists independent of human perception’, was a strong contender, mainly for the broader

range of participants it allowed for, but when considering my research topic, a more

detailed and personal form of research was needed. (JOANNA E. M. SALE, LYNNE H.

LOHFEL, KEVIN BRAZI., 2002) This is why it was decided a Qualitative approach

would be taken.

Qualitative research methods are known for their richness in detail, and their true

representations of our thinking patterns and emotions. (JOANNA E. M. SALE, LYNNE

H. LOHFEL, KEVIN BRAZI., 2002) A number of techniques were available to us, those

strongly considered were Observation, whereby the users would be observed in their

naturalistic setting, interacting with the existing technologies available to them, but

considering the vast number of topics that were to be covered, this approach was

deemed unsuitable. Other methods considered were shadowing, and task analysis with

the existing technologies (where users would be asked to perform tasks related to the

13

topics) but again, this approach would not result in the most desirable and detailed

information. Finally, semi-structured interviews were decided upon, with questions

predefined, but the interview allowed for improvisation and additional questions to be

asked. This approach was considered most effective as it would determine how the

existing technologies benefit, or hinder, the participants. (Robert S. Weiss, 1994) It

would allow us to obtain detailed, one to one feedback from the users of the

technologies, while also providing us with insight into each of the topics chosen to

explore.

3.2 Choosing Participants

Participants were chosen from the 2nd, 3rd and 4th year students of both Digital Media

Design and Music, Media and Performance Technology courses in the University total

of 8 interviews conducted. An email was sent to the possible participants outlining the

aim of the research, and the topics that would be covered.

Why choose these participants?

The participants were chosen from this group as the classes and students were easily

accessible as they were in the one department. Also, the courses have many cross-over

modules, modules completed by both courses, thus each participant would have

experience using the different resources available to students within the college, for

example, the Department of Computer Science and Information Systems’ website

(www.csis.ul.ie).

3.3 The Interview Process

The interviews were conducted in a quiet classroom, located in the students main

campus building, the Computer Science and Information Systems Building. Participants

were asked to bring with them the tools they would have with them during a typical

study session and to set up as if they were about to undergo study. This will allow the

participants to look at and make reference to their personal set up while answering the

14

questions. At this stage, photo’s were taken of the participants set up. The following

paragraph was read out before the interview commenced:

“For my FYP, I am studying how UL students use IT services within the university,

for example UL’s online timetable and email system, etc. This is the initial stage

of my research, where I will be asking you questions about your typical

encounters with technology during your day. The questions I am asking are

straight-forward and cover the following topics (handout with main sections

named). This interview will not affect any relationship you hold with the college,

and the information you give will be used solely for this project. Additionally, if at

any stage you feel the need to terminate the interview, you are free to do so. I

will be documenting the information via audio recording and note taking. Please

feel free to be as honest as you like, as any information obtained during this

session will benefit me greatly in gaining a deeper understanding of UL students

and how they go about their typical study regime.”

The questions were divided into the relevant sections, determined by the topics being

researched. I, the interviewer, had with me a print out of the questions, with additional

text boxes for each question to be used for documenting striking points and/or additional

questions to be asked. Aditionally, the interview was recorded via Audacity, a computer

recording application, for analysis afterwards. As the interview is semi-structured, any

questions that come to mind during the process, or questions I feel needed asking to gain

sufficient understanding are allowed to be added. Throughout the interview, it was

necessary to keep questions phrased from an observant and unbiased perspective. It was

also necessary to allow the participant enough time to answer each question fully, and

ensure that the participant feels comortable and are aware that they can terminate the

interview whenever they feel like it.

15

The interview sessions were organised so that each participant had 90 minutes, allowing

sufficient time for set up, questions and the interview.

3.4 Semi-Structured Interviews – Results

Interviewees #1 & #2 part of the fourth year Digital Media Design class, interviewees #3

& #4 part of the fourth year Music, Media and Performance technology class, #5, #6

were students in second year Digital Media Design, #7 was a student in third year

MMPT and #8 was a student in third year Digital Media Design. The interviews were

analysed by listening to the audio recordings with the additional notes and pictures as

guides. The sections considered particularly relevant were then transcribed for further

analysis.

Participant #1 – Digital Media Design Student

16

From the interviews completed, the main feature UL’s IT services seem to be lacking is

‘unity’. This is evident in almost every aspect touched on. Firstly, let’s take the UL

Email system. One student links the UL email system with a personal Gmail account. In

terms of accessibility, most use their laptops; one student has the main page

bookmarked, but has to type in the username and password every time he logs in. Two

of the students express concerns about the relevant aspects of the emails coming in.

“For me some aren’t relevant, like the sports arena ones, they aren’t for me”

The second subject where a lack of unity is obvious is the timetable. Each student, when

asked how they access their timetable, had a different approach. One has the page

bookmarked on their laptop, but has to type in their student number every time. Another

uses Google to search for UL’s timetable page. Another user searches for Skynet's

alternative UL timetable, created by a past student, and one of the most time-consuming

approaches was presented by a third year MMPT student, where the timetable is

transferred manually into a Microsoft Excel Document. And finally, one student has a

screenshot of the alternative Skynet timetable saved on his/her laptop and smart phone.

Students that use this alternative timetable both convey why they prefer this option to

UL’s official page.

“..an awful lot cleaner, looking at it. Everything’s color-coded. You can

differentiate between the classes, it actually includes the names of the classes

instead of just the code.”

Below are screenshots of the two available timetables:

17

timetable.ul.ie – Official Students timetable site [3]

Alternative timetable created by a former student [2]

When asked about keeping a physical copy of it, one participant commented that he did

in first year, but

“I just ended up losing that”

In terms of communication with the lecturers, most common means was via email. Some

have used IM chat with lecturers, and one student, although having never used this

means, expressed the wish to have an IM option between students and lecturers, for

“quick questions”. The student is obviously somewhat dissatisfied with the length of

time it takes for replies via email for such ‘quick questions’.

When asked about locating a specific lecturers contact details, again, the answers varied

with each student. The questions asked of the students was:

18

“Do you keep a phonebook of their email addresses? If not, how would you find

the email address of a lecturer you wish to contact?”

Students highlighted a number of means of doing this. Searching through previous

emails to find the contact information, Google searching the lecturers name

“I’d have to Google them to find their email address..”

Or some remarked that they would ‘guess’ the email address, based on the typical layout

of lecturers email addresses.

“.. type in their name, usually they’re first name second name @ ul.ie”

“I’d usually find an email that they sent to you, and reply to that, and delete all

the other text ha! Or you’d have to ask someone”

“I’ve never seen a phonebook option!”

Communication with their class members was spread across many means. The most

commonly used was the social networking site, Facebook. The Digital Media Design

students considered their class page as the most useful means of contact.

“If we had a query, like what we think is going to come up in an exam or

something like that, we’d just start a thread on the group page, because everyone

in the class is a member of it, and everyone can see.”

Although the Music Media and Performance students do not have a class page

established, they still consider facebook as their preferred means of communication.

“Most are on it, and it has an IM chat built into it”

Other means listed during the interview are email, text messaging, and other forms of

IM chat, e.g. MSN & GoogleChat.

When asked about collaboration with other students during projects etc., apart from face

to face, two students both mentioned Googlewave as a preferred collaboration tool. One

student choose email as their preferred means, and another participant described how

they would set up a facebook group page to discuss the various aspects.

19

“the chances are they are already on facebook.. and ask them their preferred

time and date would be to meet up.. It saves money and it’s less time consuming”

Means of keeping track of deadlines and to-do lists are also shown to vary with each

participant. The college does not support a unified means of communicating deadlines,

thus it is up the lecturers themselves to choose their preferred method. One student

speaks of the “hassle” of tracking deadlines, as they can be communicated via email,

SULIS, CSIS website or announced in class. Other students take it upon themselves to

record the different deadlines.

“I write a not n the desktop when I hear a deadline, and tick them off once

they’re done.”

“..always there in front of me on my phone, so it’s kind of hard to miss what I

have to do.”

The participants also expressed discontent when asked about obtaining module

materials, as this too, is spread across many different means.

“Log-in Details vary with departments and labs and sometimes that can get

confusing”

Students seemed to prefer the layout of the CSIS website for module material, but

commented that it is up the lecturers to use this site to its full potential, with all means,

SULIS, CSIS, Wiki Pages.

“..up to the lecturer if they put up the material or not”

[SULIS] “Resources not organized, up to the lecturer to organize them but even

then its just one long list!”

One student referred to a situation he believed to be confusing for other classmates,

where students outside of the CSIS department were directed to the CSIS site for the

module material, although they might have never used the site before. The lecturer gave

the students a URL to follow to the material, which was saved on one of the PowerPoint

slides.

“People are not overly familiar with an of these, because they haven’t had

enough usage”

20

Students also use handheld devices to access their email accounts, although they are

restricted by the capabilities of their devices.

“I have my email on there as well so if I’m in wireless places I’d use my phone

to check that as well.”

Participant #3 – Music Media and Performance Technology Student

Each topic that was asked of the participants resulted in varied answers. Some

organizational issues were influenced by the students own initiative, thus takes into

account available applications to that student, or the students knowledge of what

methods can be used. This was most evident in the ‘deadlines’ where students had their

own interpretations on how to keep track of dates and assignments.

Overall, the lack of unity is the most striking result. I took this into consideration when

beginning the design of an alternative system for the students.

21

4.0 The Design Process

4.1 Brainstorming

I began brainstorming by extracting each possible attribute from the interviews,

research, and existing interfaces that could be applied to this project. Each attribute was

written on a post-it, and placed on a whiteboard for examination. This method proved

both useful and productive, as each attribute was visible, and using a whiteboard marker,

relationships and links can be created between the post-its.

4.2 Attribute List

The biggest aim of this stage of brainstorming was the ‘grouping’ of attributes under

certain headings. At the initial stage, Model 0, the postits were scattered over the

whiteboard with no order to them. Looking at the cluster of post-its, I began to place

relative attributes beside each other, and according to the groups that emerged, headings

were placed over each cluster. For example; Class on now and Class on next are relative

attributes, thus are placed beside each other on the board. Once the post-its were

grouped, I looked at the attributes in each group and began to brainstorm of relevant

headings or buzz-words which would apply to each post-it in the group. By writing

down every word that comes to mind when looking at the group, eventually appropriate

titles were developed. This lead to the next stage of the process, Model 01.

Model 01 contained four preliminary headings;

Main/Home Page

Campus

Communication

Organisation & Class Material

22

Using the different coloured markers, this model was analysed and edited. At this stage,

I decided to draw the existing relationships between each post-it, and where the idea and

inspiration for this attribute came from. I decided on two sources, and used different

color markers to indicate the sources; red underline – attribute derived from interview

information, green underline – attribute derived from literature research / existing

interfaces. This helped me understand the model better, as seeing where the attributes

derived from, helped me reflect on the previous research and keep my overall aim in

view. Any new attributes added to the diagram at this stage were added in a different

color post-it.

Reviewing the model, it was decided on to split the Organisation and Class Material

section into two seperate menus; Organisation and Studies. It was also obvious to me

that there were definite links between certain attributes, even within those belonging to

23

different main menus. These relationships were demonstrated by linking the attributes

on the board together with a line drawn between them.

The following attributes were found to be linked in some way;

Deadlines > To Do List.

Which Class is on next > Where on Campus

Events > Where on Campus

Eating > Where on Campus

Module List > Module Material

Deadlines > Assignment Information / Submission

These relationships created in the early stage will help determine how the attributes will

be placed in the interface, for example, the Where on Campus option might be a pop up

option placed beside Which class is next.

Model 02 was created after all the necessary edits of Model 01 were completed and

recorded. This model was laid out clearer, with four main sections, and

subsections/submenus within the sections. The different color markers helped lay out the

interface structurein a clear fashion;

Continuous green line > Submenu

Broken green line > Linked Information

24

Model 02 was broken down into the following categories:

Main / Home Page

Log in / out

Class Now

Class Next

Where is Class Now / Next

Class Duration Bar

Todays Date

Time

Weather

Organiser

To Do List

Calendar

Reminder

Alarm

Communication

Email Inbox

Contacts List

IM

Class Page

Campus

25

Events on Campus

Eating on Campus

Sat. Nav of Campus

Studies

Timetable

Deadlines

Assignment Information

Assignment Submission

Module List

Module Material

All above material was recorded via pictures, as they would need to be referenced at a

later stage.

4.3 Early Prototyping

Initially, I began sketching out a possible interface layout. I wanted to enphasise

continuity within the system, and so decided on having a header/title bar which would

be present on all pages. This bar would include all the info I had originally planned on

having on the Main / Home Page. Underneath this Header bar, the user will be able to

access the other four sections, while the header bar stays intact, and updates the

information such as time, class on now, class progress etc.

The first aspect I decided to work on was the logging into the system. I wanted the user

to be able to do this without moving onto a different page, so decided on using a pop-up

26

style menu for this action. Before the user is logged in, and while the pop-up menu is

present, every other aspect on the page is greyed out, and inaccessible to the user.

I continued sketching out the various system aspects, until a basic framework for the

system had been compiled, and a working paper prototype was completed. For the initial

usability tests, I wanted to complete these using an interface design application, as

although paper prototypes have proved useful for user testing on many occasions, I

wanted the system to feel as real and appear as operational as possible. I researched a

few different prototyping methods, and decided on using the free prototyping tool

‘Pencil Project’, an add-on for the web browsing application Firefox. Although the

program proved to be somewhat problematic, it had numerous advantages which greatly

outweighed the existing bugs.

Within the interface design principle, there are a set of ‘rules’ devised by Jacob Neilsen,

which apply to any system design. These ‘rules’, known as the Ten Usability Heuristics

are definititive and recognised guidelines for designing a usable interface. (Neilsen, J.

2005) These were incorporated into the initial prototype and the system was analysed

using these as a starting point. The ten heuristics are as follows:

Visibility of system status

Match between system and the real world

User control and freedom

Consistency and standards

Error prevention

Recognitions rather than recall

Flexibility and efficiency of use

Aesthetic and minimalist design

27

Help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors

Help and documentation

These were used during the initial design in the following way:

Visibility of system status

The system keeps a constant form; header bar, which gives the user up to date

information about the time, date, weather, and what class is currently taking place and

what class is next. Underneath this are the four main menus, this tells the user in which

menu they are at that moment, for example, when the users in the communication menu,

all other options are faded out, apart from the communication title, which is in bold, and

thus stands out.

Match between system and the real world

The menus were designed and organized in a logical manner, and were grouped together

by similarity in concept, or general usage similarities. The words used are clear and

common to avoid confusion. The groupings of the menus were put under the following

four headings;

Communication

Campus

Organiser

Studies

These titles are easy to understand, the language used being that of a colloquial nature

for the students. The menus follow a logical order, with a constant theme and structure

28

to each. The header bar stays constant throughout the system, giving the system an

anchored and concrete feel.

User control and freedom

Within the system, there is always a ‘return to home’ and a back option when the menus

are entered. Thus, regardless of where the user is in the system, the availability of the

home button on the constant header bar means they can return to the main menu at any

stage. Alternatively, after entering a sub-menu, there is a ‘back’ button located at the

same position on each page, this button would bring the user to their previous step.

Consistency and standards

The system boasts a uniform continuity at every stage, keeping with the continuous

presence of the header bar, and continued structure of the sub-menus underneath.

Recognition rather than recall

Visibility of Options – From the start, this was a priority of the systems design. The main

aim was to have most options visible, or to have them at most three clicks away. This

was done during the early organizing and groupings of the menu items. These were

categorized into five sections, those always visible (header bar), and those grouped

under four headings, communication, campus, organization & studies.

Aesthetic and minimalist design

Within the systems aesthetics, there is little or no irrelevant information.

The following is a demonstration of the prototype, through screen shots of the designed

system :

29

Screenshot 01 : Main page after logging in / communication main page

Screenshot 02 : Hover over option, cursor over “Studies” button

30

Screenshot 03 : Hover over option, cursor over “Campus” button

Screenshot 04 : After user enters the “Campus” menu option

31

5.0 User Testing

5.1 Usability - Why test?

One of the main aims of this project was the design of usable interface for the target

audience specified. Making an interface usable relies on a number of different factors;

how easy it is for the user to navigate around the system, how quickly the user can

perform tasks, etc. (Neilsen. J, 2005)

According to Jacob Neilsen, one of the key attributes to consider when designing a

system is utility, which is essential what the users want the system to do. This concept

was used as the starting point when designing the system. From the earlier research, we

determined where the students experience difficulty and/or frustration with regards to

their daily IT encounters. This was used as the foundations of the brainstorming and

prototyping stages.

5.2 User testing – Research

When considering the possible user-testing methods, there were a number of options

researched. At a low-fidelity level, there are advantages to using a paper-prototype of

the system to test the interface. The process is cost-effective, versatile, proves hassle

free in terms of making changes to the system, and needed to continue to re-test the

system after necessary changes are made. (Snyder. C, 2003) This concept used early in

the design stages, but solely to brainstorm different layouts and menu structures.

Considering the time-frame and nature of this project, it was decided that the actual user

testing would be done using a computer application.

The system itself is designed to be used as a computer program, thus testing it on a

computer screen essentially means that the system would be tested in its “real” or

“natural” environment. This would allow the users feel more connected with the project

and will allow them to visualize how it would play a part in their daily routine. This

32

connection with the real world will pave the way for more feedback from the users being

tested. (Walker. M, Takayama. L, and Landay. J)

5.3 Approach to testing the System

Before the tests are conducted, the user is informed on how the procedure will be carried

out. The system will be tested on the computer program Pencil Sketch for Firefox Web

Browser. Each action will have a corresponding reaction, each possible result open on a

separate page located in the tab bar. For example, if the user would like to click on the

Campus option, they would hover their cursor over the desired interface button, and

indicate that they would like to click this option. The observer would then locate the

relevant page (from the tab bar) and display it to the participant, stimulating the result of

the participant’s action. Both the observer and participant will be working off the one

screen, with one mouse assigned to the user and one assigned to the observer.

It is vital at this stage to communicate to the participants that it is the system itself which

is being tested, not their actions.

33

5.4 Tasks

When creating this list, a number of aspects were kept in mind. Firstly, a strong contrast

between the tasks was deemed essential to avoid any repetition of tasks, and to ensure

the participants stay interested and focused. Secondly, it was vital to test as many areas

of the system as possible. This involved choosing tasks which test the different heuristic

evaluation points outlined by Jacob Neilsen. Thirdly, the test aimed to explore the

systems solutions to the problems and frustrations expressed by students in the earlier

interview research. With these aims in mind, the following tasks were allocated:

1. Log onto the system

2. Search for en email address for a staff member named ‘Mary Nelson’

3. Find out what events are on campus this lunchtime, return to previous menu

4. Bring up your student timetable

5. Check the deadlines section to see if there is anything due up next week

6. What time is your next class on at? And where?

7. What is today’s date?

8. Who is online and active at the moment?

The setting for the tests are be decided by the users, based on where they feel most

comfortable. They will be given the option of completing the test in their own setting, or

a designated room on campus.

5.5 Recruitment of Participants

The participants were chosen from the initial target audience; 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th year

Music Media and Performance Technology and Digital Media Design students. It was

decided that 10 users would be tested overall, ranging between the four years and two

courses. This number is based on Jacob Neilsens ‘Why you only need to test with 5

users’ technique. The concept is based on a ‘learn as you proceed’ idea.

34

“As soon as you collect data from a single test user, your insights shoot up and you

have already learned almost a third of all there is to know about the usability of the

design.” (Neilsen. J, 2005)

With this information, and visual representation, it was decided that 10 users would give

the project substantial results and allow it to progress to the next stage of design.

The main aim of these tests is to determine the existing problems within the system

interface, and the reasons behind the difficulties.

5.6 Method of Testing

Throughout the ten tests, Neilsen’s concept of ‘learn as you proceed’ was kept in mind,

and played a major role in how the process was carried out. (Neilsen.J,2005)The

participants were firstly presented with a consent form, explaining the aim of the tests,

and how they would be carried out. The participants were then given the chance to ask

any questions about the procedure.

35

The observer used a comment sheet for each user test, similar to that used in the earlier

research, with each task printed, numbered, and underneath an designated area for

comments or remarks. Once each test was completed, the observer would review the

comment sheet, and decide if any changes were necessary before the next test. Overall,

two changes were made to the test. After the first test, the observer became aware that

the user did not have sufficient time to ‘absorb’ the systems layout. For the remaining

tests, the users were given a minute after completion of the first task (logging in) to

reflect on the systems layout. The second change came after completion of the second

test. The observer noticed that the participants answers, although relevant, did not

include any reflection of the task. From this point on, users were asked to include any

comments, if any, after each task was completed.

5.7 Analysis

The aim of the user tests is to determine the problems within the system, and use this

data to re-design the interface and render it ‘usable’ and pleasant for the users to interact

with. With this in mind, the tests results were analysed and the main problem themes

were extracted. The method of analysis involved the exploration of the users actions,

and contrasting one with another. This was done by placing all feedback sheets beside

one another, and looking at the different approaches adopted by participants.

36

The results were laden with information, both comments from the observer, and quotes

from the users, voiced during and after the tasks. The following outlines the main

problems encountered by users per task:

1. Log onto the system – This task proved hassle free with most users, with only one

user clicking the profile photo instead of the Log in button. The comments made

indicated that one user was happy with the visibility of all options, and another

liked the darker color of the pop-up.

2. Search for en email address for a staff member named ‘Mary Nelson’ – This task

proved one of the most problematic processes. Eight out of ten users hesitated

when attempting to locate the interface option. One user attempted to search for

the contact via the Instant Messaging option. Two users indicated that they

assumed the ‘Contacts’ section only included either contacts they had added, or

contacts they had previously emailed/received emails from. This assumption is

based on the current email system is use by UL students. One user searched for

the contact by guessing the email address; [email protected]. She commented

on this action by saying “this is usually the way the email addresses are typed”.

This again links back to the system in use; during the earlier research, ‘guessing’

email addresses was a prominent occurrence by the students. One user chose the

‘email’ option before the contacts option. In general, most users were confused

by this task. One commented that they would have “given up and Googled it!”,

while another indicated that ‘Communication’ was the wrong choice of label for

the menu.

3. Find out what events are on campus this lunchtime, return to previous menu –

There was no difficulty in relation to this task. Users found the link between the

task and the menu title strong, “events on campus – campus, easy!”. When asked

to return to the previous menu, each user completed the action quickly, one

commented that the back button could stand out more.

4. Bring up the student timetable – This task proved confusing for most users, with

most of the confusion caused by lack of distinction between the ‘Organiser’ and ‘

37

Studies’ menu titles. Five of the users encountered difficulty when choosing

menus. One user could not complete the task. One user searched the header bar

for a timetable link, commenting that “I saw classes up there and thought the

timetable would be too”. Other comments included that there are too many

menus to go through.

5. Check the deadlines section to see if there is anything due up next week – Again

with this task, eight of the users got confused by the menu titles. One commented

on why they choose the ‘Organiser’ option, “I went to organiser because I

thought all dates would be there”. Once the deadlines section was found, most

users appeared impressed with this section. “Very cool, I don’t know when

anything is due!”.

6. What time is your next class on at? And where? – This task pointed out that the

header bar, although present on every page of the systems interface, was not

fully visible to the users. Four out of ten users did not see the header bar

immediately, with one user searching through Organiser, Campus, and Studies

sections before locating the information. Once the information was found, there

were a number of comments made regarding this task. One user commented that

the header section should be more prominent, and suggested a different color

background. Others liked the idea of the map link, “..it would be handy for first

years coming in.” There was also a comment made about the progress bar, where

the user questioned the need for its inclusion in the system.

7. What is today’s date? – Users did not have any difficulty with this task.

8. Who is online and active at the moment? – Again, no difficulty was encountered.

One user commented on why the task was so easy, stating that it reminded them

of an existing IM system they were familiar with. “It’s like the Facebook

system.”

38

From the above analysis of the tasks, it is clear that the systems biggest interface

problem is it’s visibility and it’s menu structure. Using this analysis, interface solutions

were derived and implemented into an improved system.

6.0 Reshaping the System

6.1 Solutions

The analysis of the low-fidelity prototype presented to the user is used as a starting point

for the creation of the high-fidelity prototype. The revised system will be designed using

the Adobe Illustrator application, as it allows the designer more creative control over

every aspect of the interface; button creation, color control, text, etc.

To begin creating solutions to the problems, a list was compiled, with the name of the

problem, and corresponding possible solutions. This was done on paper, while viewing

the existing system, so as to fully understand where the difficulties lie.

The solutions to the problems outlined in the previous section are as follows:

Problem No. 1 : Users confusion between the menus

Origin of Problem : Unclear distinction between the different menu titles / incorrect

use of wording and labels.

Solution : This problem indicated that the entire menu system needed to be

revised. This would require returning to the initial stages of

brainstorming and paper prototyping to create a new structure.

Problem No. 2 : User using the IM search bar to search for contacts.

Origin of Problem : The visibility of the search bar as a constant on the system.

Solution : Removal of the IM option as a constant, instead incorporate it as

a hidden / pop-out menu.

Problem No. 3 : User’s assumption that the ‘contacts’ only include their own

39

contacts / those imported from pervious emails

Origin of Problem : Users experience with existing system in the college / Incorrect

use of wording / labeling

Solution : Rephrase option title / More obvious Search option

Problem No. 4 : Back button not as visible / not an obvious ‘button’

Origin of Problem : The use of text outside the shape.

Solution : Creation of a new button for the system.

Problem No. 5 : Users difficulty when finding the timetable option

Origin of Problem : Unclear within which menu the option is located / No link

between class information on header bar and timetable.

Solution : Create link between timetable and class information in header

bar / restructure of menu.

Problem No. 6 : Users confusion when locating the deadlines section

Origin of Problem : Unclear within which menu the option is located.

Solution : Restructure menu / Re-label menu sections.

Problem No. 7 : Header Bar not visible to users / Users did not notice the

information available in the header bar

Origin of Problem : Users’ attention is not drawn to this section

Solution : Header Bar more prominent / different color scheme / different

theme / Highlight or animation of section when the user first logs

in.

40

6.2 Changes to the Interface

With the above problems in mind, the systems structure was broken down to its main

attributes and redesigned. The basic interface layout remained the same, with the profile

picture and header bar as a constant. To re-structuring of the menus, and the different

system attributes, involved the exclusion and grouping of some attributes.

Firstly, attributes in the header bar were re-designed. The progress bar, initially in place

to indicate the duration of the current class, was excluded as it was indicated that this

feature was not a necessity. The timetable option was re-located to the header bar. This

was done for two reasons:

1. There is a definite link between the Class on now / Class on next attributes and the

timetable attribute. This link comes natural to users and should be taken

advantage of to ensure natural movement around the system. (Neilsens 10

heuristic evaluation)

2. The timetable attribute itself is one of the most commonly used IT element of a

students day, which when investigated, resulted in a wide variety of usage

approaches from the students. The main ‘lack of unity’ theme found to run

through the earlier research is especially evident with regards to this attribute,

thus should be given priority in the system.

The second set of changes made to the system was the presence of the Instant Messaging

41

option. In the first system, the IM attribute was a constant on all screens. This resulted in

confusion for the users, as the users mistook the option as a general search box. Within

the revised system, the IM option will be hidden from view, apart from a tab, which

informs the user how many people are online at that moment. Once the tab is clicked on,

the full IM attribute can be accessed.

The next set of changes deal with the main menu structure. Initially, once the user

logged in, he/she was directed to the Class Page, with all other menu options located

across a bar on top. Incorrect wording, assignment of different attributes to main menu

theme, was found to be the most confusing aspect of the interface. Within the new

system, a more minimalistic approach to menu structure was taken. Instead of the user

being directed to a new page displaying relative options, the button itself would be

replaced by the different option links. This avoids having to enter a new page to display

what is available to the user.

Another change to the system is the inclusion of a constant ‘Home’ button. This aspect

is located below the header bar, and will be visible in the system on every page. This

button replaces the Back button on the previous system.

42

With this new menu structure, the user will only ever be one step away from the main

homepage. For example, if the user wishes to enter the map section, he/she would click

on the campus option, the button itself would change to display the three available

options, eating on campus, events on campus, campus map, the user would then choose

the map option and be directed to the map page. Returning to the main menu can be

done by clicking the home button.

The final biggest change to be made to the system is the inclusion of icons. Icons are an

important part of an interface, and in terms of this system, will represent what options lie

behind each button, and aid the user in determining which option he/she needs. (Horton.

W, 1996)

The creation of these icons involved brainstorming a number of different visual

representations for each section, and deciding which one suited the sections best.

The results were as follows;

Email - Envelope with wings (conveys to the user the transfer of

information or ‘mail’)

Campus - This section is represented by the UL Logo

43

Modules - This section is represented by a stack of books, typical of a study

setting

Network - This section is represented by two figures appearing to exchange

information via speech bubble. This implies discussions and/or

exchange of opinions

44

Search - This section is communicated visually via a magnifying glass

Calendar - Section is represented by a calendar and list type drawing

45

Screenshot from the final design of the system’s homepage

All above icons were sketched in Adobe Illustrator.

6.3 Demonstration

The system was demonstrated to the public by having a number of working tasks

operational within an Adobe Flash SWF movie clip. This involved bringing the

Illustrator files into Flash, and manipulating certain aspects of the system to create

‘buttons’ and relative ‘actions’. This would simulate how the system would operate and

the users are able to move around the system and get a feel for its structure and overall

appearance and operations.

Chat Box - 5 Online

Class N o w - Class N o w -

P e r c eptual S y s t ems & M ultim.. T echnolo g ical M a them a tics 2..

mo r e

mo r e

V iew F ull T imetable

T hursd a y , 5th A p r il 2011 2.30 P M

mo r e

C alendar

Log Out

Calendar

46

7.0 Conclusions

This project resulted in the design of a system which meets the needs of a typical UL

student, firstly by determining what exactly these needs are, and then by building on the

users actions and means of interacting with an interface to render the system as usable as

possible. Upon demonstrating the system to the students and faculty of the University, it

was met with great interest. There is an obvious need for a unified system such as this,

and this was reflected in the observer’s reactions. Many commented that the system

would be useful, and that the project should be taken further.

7.1 Future Work

The basis of interface design for the system has been developed, in terms of future work

ideally this interface would be tested with users again and any other existing problems

rectified. This design process would be continued until the system is deemed fully

usable. At this stage I would like to add that preferably the system would be designed by

a group, rather than an individual. Although I did enjoy the design process up to this

point, I believe, and it has been said, that having other designers involved would be of

great benefit.

The system, if built correctly, could be easily adapted to the daily life of a UL student.

The unification of all IT aspects would reduce the time taken at present to gather all

information needed by the students. It would also help lecturers, as confusion would be

kept to a minimal, and the idea of communicating deadlines, module material, etc.

would be prompted by the system itself.

If implemented, it would be necessary to develop a separate system for lecturers to

upload the information etc. It might also be of benefit to incorporate a separate iPhone

and Android application, which would include all information a student would need on

the go, and exclude such aspects as module material etc.

Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed this project. What I especially found interesting was the

creation of the systems attributes, based on what the users needed, and also the

development of the interface, shaped by how the users interact with it. The project can

be seen as the ‘journey’ of a system, molded by the target audience it is designed for,

and I would be delighted to see the system taken further.

47

References

Carolyn Snyder (2003). Paper Prototyping: The Fast and Easy Way to Design and Refine User Interfaces (Interactive Technologies). Massachusetts: Morgan Kaufmann

Ganchev. I, Stojanov. S, O’Droma. M, Meere. D, (2007). An InfoStation-Based Multi-Agent System Supporting Intelligent Mobile Services Across a University Campus. JOURNAL OF COMPUTERS. 2 (3), 21-31

Hixon. J & Swann, Jr. W (1993). When Does Introspection Bear Fruit? Self-Reflection, Self-Insight, and Interpersonal Choices. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1993. 64 (1), 36.

JOANNA E. M. SALE, LYNNE H. LOHFEL, KEVIN BRAZI. (2002). Revisiting the Quantitative-Qualitative Debate: Implications for Mixed-Methods Research. Quality & Quantity. 1 (36), p45-53

Neilsen, J. (2005). Ten Usability Heuristics. Available: http://www.useit.com/papers/heuristic/heuristic_list.html. Last accessed 20th Feb 2011.

Neilsen, J. (2005). Usability 101: Introduction to Usability. Available: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20030825.html. Last accessed 20th Feb 2011.

Neilsen, J. (2005). Why You Only Need to Test with 5 Users. Available: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20000319.html. Last accessed 15th March.

Norman M. Sadeh, Enoch Chan, Linh Van. (2002). MyCampus: An Agent-Based Environment for Context-Aware Mobile Services. AAMAS - First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 1-3.

Robert S. Weiss (1994). Learning From Strangers: The Art and Method of Qualitative Interview Studies. New York: The Free Press. 7.

Schoolbinder, LLC. (2007-2010). Available: http://www.myschoolbinder.com/. Last accessed 12th December 2010.

48

tipsandtricksforpc. (April 9th, 2010). 15 Best Essential Tools for Students. Available: http://tipsandtricksforpc.com/2010/04/15-best-applications-available-for-students/. Last accessed 12th December 2010.

UL Timetable, Available: http://www.skynet.ie/~daniel/tt/. Last accessed 12th December 2010

University of Limerick (Timetable), Available: http://www.timetable.ul.ie/tt2.asp. Last accessed 12th December 2010

Walker. M, Takayama. L, and Landay. J. (-). HIGH-FIDELITY OR LOW-FIDELITY, PAPER OR COMPUTER? CHOOSING ATTRIBUTES WHEN TESTING WEB PROTOTYPES.

49

Brainstorming / Paper Prototypes

54

Photos from the Process

59

Prototype from Pencil Sketch

(Add on within Firefox Web Browser)

Home Page

60

Communication – Options

Communication Page

Logging In

61

Studies Menu

Campus Menu

62

Next Class Details

Events on Campus

63

Final Designs – Completed in Adobe Illustrator

Chat Box - 5 Online

Class N o w - Class N o w -

P e r c eptual S y s t ems & M ultim.. T echnolo g ical M a them a tics 2..

mo r e

mo r e

V iew F ull T imetable

T hursd a y , 5th A p r il 2011 2.30 P M

mo r e

C alendar

Log Out

Calendar

Log Out

Hi, User.

Class Now - Class Now -

Perceptual Systems & Multim..Technological Mathematics 2..

more

more

View Full Timetable

Thursday, 5th April 20112.30 PM

more

Calendar

Network - Gary Flaherty posted onDigital Media Designs ...

To Do - 3 Tasks due today

Inbox - 5 New Emails

Yesterday


To Do -


3 Tasks due today

New Today

View All

Email Campus

Calendar To - Do List

Search for Student / Sta!

Digital Media DesignNetwork

Modules

Calendar

Chat Box - 5 Online

5Events

Eating

Map

Home

64

Log Out

Hi, User.



more

more

View Full Timetable


more

Calendar




Yesterday


To Do -


3 Tasks due today

New Today

View All

Chat Box - 5 Online

Search...

Go!

Home

Campus Map



more

more

View Full Timetable


more

Calendar




Yesterday


To Do -


3 Tasks due today

New Today

View All

Email Campus




Modules

Calendar

Chat Box - 5 Online

5

Log In

Go!

Password

Username

65

Log Out

Hi, User.



more

more

View Full Timetable


more

Calendar




Yesterday


To Do -


3 Tasks due today

New Today

View All

Chat Box - 5 Online

Home

Timetable

Log Out

Hi, User.



more

more

View Full Timetable


more

Calendar




Yesterday


To Do -


3 Tasks due today

New Today

View All

Chat Box - 5 Online

Home

Assignments

2011 SEM1 - 7 Assignments FoundThis Week

Mon. 11th April - HCIAssignment 01 50%

View

Submit

Wed. 13th April - Advanced topics in Digital ...Lab Assignment10%

View

Submit

View All

66

Log Out

Hi, User.



more

more

View Full Timetable


more

Calendar




Yesterday


To Do -


3 Tasks due today

New Today

View All

Chat Box - 5 Online

Home


Mary O’ Brien

Go!

2 Results Found for ‘Mary O’ Brien’

Mary O’ BrienCSIS Depaetment, LecturerCS!005View Details

Mary O’ BrienAdministration, Faculty MemberF1025View Details

Log Out

Hi, User.



more

more

View Full Timetable


more

Calendar




Yesterday


To Do -


3 Tasks due today

New Today

View All

Email Campus




Modules

Calendar

Chat Box - 5 Online

5Home

Module Material

Assignments

Submissions

67

Consent Form Document (Interview) – For Participants

Consent Form (Interview) “Interface Design, Prototype & Demonstration of an application incorporating students’ daily IT needs” Name : _____________________ Course : _____________________ Year : _____________________ For my FYP, I am studying how UL students use IT services within the university, for example UL’s online timetable and email system, etc. This is the initial stage of my research, where I will be asking you questions about your typical encounters with technology during your day. The questions I am asking are straight-forward and cover the following topics : Inventory, Email, Timetable, Communication with/between lecturers & classmates, location on campus and module material. This interview will not affect any relationship you hold with the college, and the information you give will be used solely for this project. Additionally, if at any stage you feel the need to terminate the interview, you are free to do so. I will be documenting the information via audio recording and note taking.

Signed : ________________________

Date : ________________________

Thank you for participating in this study,

________________________

Michelle Ahern

4th Year, Digital Media Design

68

Interview Questions – Observer

Inventory

1. For a typical study session, what would you have with you?

2. What would you use each of the items above for during your studies?

3. What websites / applications would you typically have open?

Email

1. Do you access your email daily?

69

2. Bookmarked / passwords saved / “Remember Me” option

3. How do you access it, is there another method you would use?

4. What do you use it for mostly?

Timetable

1. How do you access your timetable / know it off the top of your head?

70

2.Do you / have you ever printed out your timetable? Did you carry it around with you? Did you find it beneficial to have a physical copy of it?

3.How may times would you check your timetable daily?

Communication Lecturers

1. How do you communicate with your lecturers?

2. Have you ever used an other means of communication, for example IM, facebook etc. If so, what were the advantages/disadvantages of this?

3. Do you keep a phonebook of their email addresses? If not, how would you find the email address of a lecturer you would not have an email to/from saved?

71

Communication – Students

1. How many different means of communication do you use with your classmates, what are they?

2. Which is your preferred means of communication, the advantages/disadvantages?

3. If you did not have contact information for a classmate you needed to get in touch with, how would you find them?

Deadlines

72

1. How do you keep track of your project deadlines?

2. Do you have/make to-do lists? Paper or online / application?

3. What do you think the advantages / disadvantages of to-do lists are?

Location

1. If I were to ask you how long it takes to get from here to the PES building, what would be your answer? How did you estimate this answer, have you checked how long it takes on a previous occasion/know from experience/guessed?

73

2. Have you ever used a GPS system on campus? If so, advantages / disadvantages?

Ideas / Discussions

1. If you were to work on a group project, what would be the steps you would take to organise a group discussion?

2. Would you ever discuss projects with other group members online/over the phone? If yes, how?

3. Do you use any project management applications, googlewave etc?

74

Handheld Devices

1. Do you have a handheld device on you at the moment?

2. If yes, does it have access to the internet? Wifi / other? Do you use it in any way for college, email, contact, obtaining information, etc?

Lecture Material

1. How do you obtain module material, list means.

2. Going through the means one by one, what do you find to be an advantage/disadvantage of each one?

75

3. Which is your preferred means of getting course material, give reasons.

Thank you!

76

Consent Form Documant (User Testing) - Participants

Consent Form (User Tests) “Interface Design, Prototype & Demonstration of an application incorporating students’ daily IT needs” Name : _____________________ Course : _____________________ Year : _____________________ For my FYP, I am studying how UL students use IT services within the university, for example UL’s online timetable and email system, etc. This is the User Testing stage, where I will be asking you to complete a series of tasks on a given interface. Feel free to think out loud during the tasks, and to vocalize any opinions you hold on the system. There are 8 tasks in total, and the allocated time for this test should not exceed 3 minutes. These user tests will not affect any relationship you hold with the college, and the information you give will be used solely for this project. Additionally, if at any stage you feel the need to terminate the tests, you are free to do so. I will be documenting the information via note taking.

Signed : ________________________

Date : ________________________

Thank you for participating in this study,

________________________

Michelle Ahern

4th Year, Digital Media Design

77

User Test Feedback Sheet – Observer

Title : ‘Interface Design, Prototype & Demonstration of an application incorporating

students’ daily IT needs’

USER TEST NO. __________

1. Log onto the system

2. Search for en email address for a staff member named ‘Mary Nelson’

3. Find out what events are on campus this lunchtime, return to previous menu

4. Display up your student timetable

78

5. Check the deadlines section to see if there is anything due up next week

6. What time is your next class on at? And where?

7. What is today’s date?

8. Who is online and active at the moment?

Interface Design, Prototype & Demonstration of an application incorporating students’ daily IT...

Documents

Transcript of Interface Design, Prototype & Demonstration of an application incorporating students’ daily IT...