Peer Evaluations
Course Points: 4
Overview
The Peer evaluation activity is similar to an expert review of a multimedia program or website. The
experts use a set of usability principles, known as heuristics, to evaluate whether the user-interface
elements conform to the principles. Although you are still learning many of the interface,
interaction, and usability principles, your feedback can still be very valuable for your peers. Novices
and experts can provide different perspectives that assist with creating a better project.
Jakob Nielsen (2005) created the original set of heuristics from an analysis of 249 usability
problems. Principles such as making designs consistent, reducing memory load, and using terms
that users understand are examples. Heuristic Evaluation is known to find more than 90% of
usability problems when performed by 3 to 5 experienced evaluators. The first phase of the
evaluation activity is the peer evaluation wherein you will provide peer feedback based on usability
principles.
You are required to evaluate at least 2 different Interactive Animation Projects from your peers and
provide constructivist feedback. This is an easy activity for receiving 4 course points. Thus, make
sure that you take the time to thoroughly review each project in order to provide meaningful
feedback. I anticipate that you would spend 20-30 minutes for each project.
To ensure that everyone receives feedback, you are to evaluate the 2 people listed after your name
in the "Flash Assignment Pages" folder. If your name is at the bottom, then you go to the names at
the beginning of the list. Of course, you are very welcome to complete extra reviews for others. If a
peer has not posted their project by the Version 1 due date, then you can skip their name and go to
the next person in the list.
Submission Process:
1. In the Peer Evaluations discussion forum, create a new thread and include a direct link to your
final project (Version 1) for peer review.
 Note: Do not describe any problems/errors or missing content with current version. Allow
the reviewer to find the problems
2. Reply to a peer's project posting with your feedback. Use the following checklist as your guide
for the peer evaluations and post to the discussion board "Peer Evaluations".
 Paste the feedback in the posting and do not attach a file.
 Comments must be informative and descriptive. "Looks good" is not detailed. Your
feedback and score will not affect your peer’s grades. Thus, you should be honest and
detailed as possible. The feedback should be used to help improve the project before the
final grade. Remember to provide constructive and courteous comments.
 When providing specific feedback you MUST create a short screen cast using a tool like
Jing (http://www.techsmith.com/jing.html) or ScreenR (http://www.screenr.com/) to
illustrate both the problem and any suggestions you have for improvement. For example,
you might record a short video like this one (http://screencast.com/t/HEEBO3UelkP) and
then paste the link in the specific feedback section. (Please note: Your screen capture
should focus on issues or ease of use through demonstrations)
 If another person has already provided feedback for a project, I recommend that you do not
read it before you begin your review. Again, the goal is provide information about your
4364/7364 Flash Authoring
Peer Evaluations
experience with a project, and you do not want to be influenced by a peer’s evaluation.
 Be courteous by posting all peer feedback by the due date.
3. Go to Assignments section, open Peer Evaluations assignment, and post message "Peer
Evaluations Completed" to receive a grade.
 In the text box, list the peer names of the projects that you evaluated.
Note: As the receiver of the feedback, it may be difficult to read the negative comments. Try not to
be defensive and take it personal. This is just opinions that hopefully will show you different
perspectives of how people interact and perceive your project.
Reference
Nielsen, J. (2005). Ten Usability Heuristics. Retrieved on March 29, 2008 at
http:// www.useit.com/papers. http://www.useit.com/papers/heuristic/heuristic_list.html
4364/7364 Flash Authoring
Peer Evaluations
Checklist for Peer Evaluations
Peer Name:
Describe What You Used To Evaluate Project:
 Computer Type:
 Browser and Version:
 Screen Size and Resolution:
Scale: 5 = Excellent, 4 = Very Good, 3 = Good, 2 = Acceptable, 1= Minimal, 0 =Unacceptable
Description
Points
Comments
(1 to 5)
Interface Design
Interface is intuitive, interactions meaningful, and
user is able to navigate easily to different parts of the
movie
User Location/ Orientation
User is kept informed about their location in movie
User Control
User can control when information or animation is
viewed, and when listening to audio; Can control
order of interactions, and escape from places they
unexpectedly find themselves in.
Consistency and Standards
User can perform similar actions throughout project;
Project follows standards such as menu location,
button and audio controls, etc.
Content
Language is familiar and comfortable for intended
audience. Follows basic rules of spelling and
grammar.
Visual Design
Colors, backgrounds, buttons, and text work together
to create a clear and easy viewing experience.
Buttons and text are easy to read.
Animation Quality
Animation works smoothly and appropriately
Error Prevention and Feedback
Verifies empty fields or incorrect input (ex. Input
letters instead of numbers). The user receives
meaningful feedback concerning the nature
interactions (e.g. input, drag/drop interactions,
incomplete actions, etc.)
Technical Performance
All multimedia elements (e.g., sound, animation,
images, etc.) within the movie worked appropriately
Overall Critique
Overall impression of the project, based on project
requirements and creativity
Total Points (50)
Other Comments:
4364/7364 Flash Authoring