Coursework 2
(Individual Cwk – Design and
Evaluation)
Please add marks and full comments below. The consolidated mark must then be agreed with the second marker
before final marks are recorded on the Student Record System, and in ODL Admin’s student files.
Class:ODL224
Due date
19/4/2005
submitted
On time
1st Mark:
Individual
Final
Agreed
31/40 Mark
2nd Mark:
/40
DE746
/40
Learning Outcomes

Establish and analyse user requirements for a potential design using appropriate
techniques.

Develop a prototype design from user requirements

Evaluate designs using think-aloud discount user testing, making recommendations for
improvement.

Evaluate designs using Cognitive Walkthrough, making recommendations for
improvement

Write reports on user requirements and prototypes justifying design decisions made.
Coursework Evaluations
Justification of Overall Grade Given / Main suggestion for improvement
Develop requirements in the separate categories.
Marks Deducted for poor presentation
1
–0
Specific Feedback Comments
Requirements
Requirements
Marks
Description
A: Excellent
8-10
Clear requirements method followed thoroughly. Clear,
wide ranging and appropriate requirements established
appropriate for brief. Outstanding both in method, results
obtained and analysis of those results
B: Good
6-7
As above though with some parts less than outstanding.
C: Satisfactory
5
Method followed and a range of requirements established
though some aspects superficial
D: Bare Pass
4
Some evidence of method but superficial, some evidence
of appropriate requirements established though some
aspect such as link to method perhaps superficial.
E: Fail
0-3
Little or no evidence of method, requirements unclear or
inappropriate.
Comments, Justification and Suggestions for Improvement
Mark
7
Good that specify a user profile
Need formal requiremtns developed in the separate categories eg environmental usability
Should use and describe formal protocol used for collection – otherwise anecdotal
2
/10
Designs / Prototypes
Designs /
Prototypes
Marks
Description
A: Excellent
8-10
Outstanding design both in functionality, usability and in
meeting of requirements generally. Clear link to
requirements. The Prototype clearly show the design and
is appropriate for user testing. Something special /
innovative!
B: Good
6-7
Generally good design. As above though with some
aspects less than outstanding. Perhaps flaws in usability or
overly limited functionality, given the brief. Appropriate
but not special. Prototypes sufficient for user testing
C: Satisfactory
5
Good design but with a range of flaws, or prototypes only
just sufficient.
D: Bare Pass
4
Design meets brief though barely. Prototypes only just
sufficient.
E: Fail
0-3
Design inappropriate for brief, unusable or wrong
functionality. Prototypes poor.
Comments, Justification and Suggestions for Improvement
Mark
Very good idea to stick to radio metaphor given user profile
Good prototypes that give physical functionality
3
8
/10
User testing
User testing
Marks
Description
A: Excellent
8-10
Clear user testing method followed thoroughly, based on
appropriate task(s), useful, deep and insightful evidence
about the design obtained and turned into appropriate
suggestions for design changes. Outstanding both in
method, results obtained and conclusions drawn from of
those results
B: Good
6-7
As above though with some parts less than outstanding.
C: Satisfactory
5
Method followed and a range of results about the usability
of the design obtained though some aspects superficial
D: Bare Pass
4
Some evidence of method but superficial, some evidence
of appropriate results obtained but conclusions drawn
superficial.
E: Fail
0-3
Little or no evidence of method, little in the way of results
of any practical use obtained.
Comments, Justification and Suggestions for Improvement
Mark 8
Very good use of scripts
4
/10
Cognitive Walkthrough
Cognitive
Walkthrough
Marks
Description
A: Excellent
8-10
Clear cognitive walkthrough method followed thoroughly,
based on appropriate task(s), useful, deep and insightful
evidence about the design obtained and turned into
appropriate suggestions for design changes. Outstanding
both in method, results obtained and conclusions drawn
from those results
B: Good
6-7
As above though with some parts less than outstanding.
C: Satisfactory
5
Method followed and a range of results about the usability
of the design obtained though some aspects superficial or
questions in part inappropriately applied
D: Bare Pass
4
Some evidence of method followed but superficial, some
evidence of appropriate results obtained but conclusions
drawn superficial.
E: Fail
0-3
Little or no evidence of understanding of cognitive
walkthrough. Little in the way of practically useful results
obtained.
Comments, Justification and Suggestions for Improvement
Mark 8
/10
Cognitive walkthrough task should be more specific – which programme ? What information are
they starting with?
Separate step 3 into the separate steps
5
6