COMP1649 (2023/24) Human Computer Partner- Contribution: 100%

Interaction and ships of course

Design
Module Leader: Coursework Deadline Date:
Dr. Annemarie 24 November 2023
Zijlema
This coursework should take an average student who is up-to-date with tutorial work
approximately 50 hours

Feedback and grades are normally made available within 15 working days of the
coursework deadline
Learning Outcomes:
1 Deploy theory, design principles, tools and methodologies to implement and
evaluate human- computer interactions;
2 Carry out design research to inform development of systems and applications;
3 Construct and create prototypes of human-computer interactions;
4 Demonstrate the origins of ideas by correctly citing and referencing sources used in the
work.

Plagiarism is presenting somebody else's work as your own. It includes: copying

information directly from the Web or books without referencing the material; submitting
joint coursework as an individual effort; copying another student's coursework; stealing
coursework from another student and submitting it as your own work. Suspected
plagiarism will be investigated and if found to have occurred will be dealt with according
to the procedures set down by the University. Please see the assessment misconduct
procedure for further details of what is / isn't plagiarism.
Note that including writing generated by AI as your own work is an Academic Offence (see
also the Guidance on the use of artificial intelligence (AI)), and penalties apply as detailed
in above procedures.
All material copied or amended from any source (e.g. internet, books) must be referenced
correctly according to the reference style you are using.
Your work will be submitted for plagiarism checking. Any attempt to bypass our plagiarism
detection systems will be treated as a severe Assessment Offence.

Coursework Submission Requirements

 An electronic copy of your work for this coursework must be fully uploaded on the Deadline
Date using the link on the coursework Moodle page for COMP1649.
 For this coursework you must submit a single PDF document. In general, any text in the
document must not be an image (i.e. must not be scanned) and would normally be generated
from other documents (e.g. MS Office using "Save As .. PDF"). An exception to this is hand
written mathematical notation, but when scanning do ensure the file size is not excessive.
 For this coursework you must also upload your prototype file.
 There are limits on the file size (see the relevant Moodle page).
 Make sure that any files you upload are virus-free and not protected by a password or
corrupted otherwise they will be treated as null submissions.
 You must NOT submit a paper copy of this coursework.
 All courseworks must be submitted as above. Under no circumstances can they be accepted by
academic staff.
 All mid-fidelity prototypes for this module must be submitted as Axure RP file unless agreed
with the module leader otherwise. Submissions of prototypes submitted in other formats or as
1
 proprietary file types from other prototyping tools will not be accepted and marks for the
prototype will be reduced to 0.

The University website has details of the current Coursework Regulations, including details of penalties for
late submission, procedures for Extenuating Circumstances, and penalties for Assessment Offences. See
https://www.gre.ac.uk/student-services/exams/regs and the Academic Regulations for Taught Awards.

Detailed Specification

Design brief
You have been commissioned to write a report and create a prototype for a new interactive product for
snorkelers and amateur scuba divers, of which some features will be used under water. The basic brief
you have been given for the product is that, 1) it should enable users to take photos and videos of their
underwater experiences and view them later when back on land or boat, and 2) track and view details
of their diving activity (e.g. monitoring their (current) depth, ascent time, air left in tank, duration of the
dive etc.). The user should be able to browse and view their photos, videos and details for each dive or
snorkel activity taken (dive log with additional photos and videos) on their mobile app.
The scope of the interactive prototype should be limited to the above mentioned two main areas, for
interactions underwater AND on land. You are asked to create a proof of concept for the interactions of
this system to see if users find it usable and desirable. The basic brief is open for interpretation, and
you can and should design desirable interactions as you see fit based on your background readings and
your research activities.

Interactive prototype
You need to create a mid-fidelity prototype of the mobile application that enables people to experience
at least the core user journeys that are available in your mobile application in an interactive manner.
This prototype should be developed in Axure RP10, unless agreed otherwise with the module leader.
You are required to describe the physical prototype but not required to do any material or technical
studies or create a physical prototype of the product. A description and visualisation of the physical
product (e.g. a waterproof case) and its buttons and interactions, as part of the conceptual design in
the report is sufficient. You need to submit an interactive digital prototype demonstrating the interface
and interactions of your application and explain how one interacts with its components.
Your design and research activities need to be in alignment with your target group and justifications for
all your assumptions and design decisions need to be provided.

Report
In the coursework report, you document your research and design activities, and the required future
research study and other future work for the product. This includes a review of relevant literature that
informed your design, a discussion of the conceptual design for the product, and a discussion of how
design principles will be applied. The report will also discuss your (design) process of developing the
interactive mid-fidelity prototype and how relevant HCI theory has been implemented. A plan for an
empirical research study should be proposed to test an assumption made in the design of the study,
and the conclusion should also detail other aspects of future work required. More details can be found
in the assessment criteria below. You may also want to consult the annotated table of contents
available on the COMP1649 Moodle page to help you structure your report.
Your report needs to be professionally and academically written and structured, based on your own
research and reading, and written by yourself using appropriate in-text citations and referencing. This
includes the demonstration of English language proficiency, appropriate level of detail, professional
formatting of the report, and the writing should be supported by at least 12 relevant academic
2
references (journal papers, conference papers, academic books - not blogs or online tutorials etc.).
References and in-text citations should be formatted in Harvard style. The report word limit is 3000
words. If the submitted work exceeds the limit by more than 10%, marks will be reduced.

Deliverables
o Report of 2000-3000 words uploaded as a pdf file.
o Mid-fidelity prototype uploaded as .rp.

The prototype should be submitted as an Axure RP file unless agreed with the module leader otherwise.

Assessment Criteria

Report
Professional writing style, English language proficiency, writing with appropriate level of detail,
professional report formatting, sufficient and appropriate referencing in Harvard style of academic
sources (journal papers, conference papers, or academic books) throughout the report. A minimum of
12 sources is expected.
5%

A review of relevant and appropriate HCI background literature written in your own words and
appropriately referenced, to inform the design of the product and to generate requirements. Relevant
background should support the requirements of the proposed solution (e.g. related work, HCI
literature in relation to the product’s context, interaction design theory, cognitive psychology etc.).
20%

A discussion of the product idea (conceptual design) explaining the components of the product and
how the user will interact with the product, and how requirements will be met.
Also design principles (by Don Norman) and their application to the coursework product are
discussed. A brief discussion for each principle/concept and suitable visual representations should be
included.
15%

A detailed proposal for an empirical HCI research study that uses your interactive prototype to test at
least one assumption that you have made when designing your prototype. In this proposal, you need
to provide the details for a research study including the question(s) or hypothesis that your research
study attempts to investigate, who the participants of your study will be, how the study will be run,
the data collection, and how you will analyse the data. You do not need to run the study but you need
to create all necessary instruments and documentation that are required for a usability expert to run
the study.
20%

A conclusion drawing together the key facts, critical reflections on the limitations of the work that has
been carried out and a discussion of potential future work if the project would be developed further.
The conclusion needs to go beyond repeating what has been said elsewhere and show a clear vision of
what the next steps for such a project would be.
10%

Mid-fidelity prototype of an interactive product

Clear links between the coursework report and the prototype with design decisions explicitly
documented and justified in the report. Evidence of the effective and successful application of HCI
theory and design principles to create a prototype that can be used to test core assumptions of your

3
design and that is suitable for researchers and designers to test and evaluate the product. The
implementation of design research and theory is evident in both the report and the prototype.
30%

4
Rubric 0-29% Fail 30-39% Fail 40-49% Satisfactory 50-59% Good 60-69% Very Good 70-79% Excellent 80-100% Exceptional
COMP1649
D1 Knowledge Little to no A poor discussion of A satisfactory A good discussion of A very good discussion An excellent An exceptional
discussion of the the product idea discussion of the the product idea of the product idea discussion of the discussion of the
Demonstratin product idea (conceptual design) product idea (conceptual design) (conceptual design) product idea product idea
g the design (conceptual explaining the (conceptual design) explaining the explaining the (conceptual design) (conceptual design)
process and design) explaining components of the explaining the components of the components of the explaining the explaining the
implementati the components of product and how components of the product and how the product and how the components of the components of the
on of design the product and the user will interact product and how the user will interact with user will interact with product and how the product and how the
principles how the user will with the product, user will interact with the product, and how the product, and how user will interact with user will interact with
interact with the and how the product, and how requirements will be requirements will be the product, and how the product, and how
product, and how requirements will requirements will be met. Also a good met. Also a very good requirements will be requirements will be
requirements will be met. Also a poor met. Also a satisfactory discussion of the discussion of the met. Also an met. Also an
be met. Also little discussion of the discussion of the design principles (by design principles (by excellent discussion exceptional discussion
to no design design principles (by design principles (by Don Norman) and their Don Norman) and their of the design of the design principles
principles (by Don Don Norman) and Don Norman) and their application to the application to the principles (by Don (by Don Norman) and
Norman) and their their application to application to the coursework product. coursework product. Norman) and their their application to the
application to the the coursework coursework product. The report has a good The report has a very application to the coursework product.
coursework product. The report The report has a discussion for each good discussion for coursework product. The report has an
product are has a poor satisfactory discussion principle/concept and each principle/concept The report has an exceptional discussion
discussed. The discussion for each for each good suitable visual and very good suitable excellent discussion for each
report lacks a principle/concept principle/concept and representations. visual representations. for each principle/concept and
discussion for each and poor suitable satisfactory suitable principle/concept exceptional suitable
principle/concept visual visual representations. and excellent visual representations.
and little to no representations. suitable visual
suitable visual representations.
representations.

5
D1 Knowledge Little to no links Poor links between Satisfactory links Good links between Very good links Excellent links Exceptional links
between the the coursework between the the coursework report between the between the between the
Mid-fidelity coursework report report and the coursework report and and the prototype with coursework report and coursework report coursework report and
Prototype and the prototype prototype with the prototype with design decisions the prototype with and the prototype the prototype with
with design design decisions design decisions explicitly documented design decisions with design decisions design decisions
decisions explicitly explicitly explicitly documented and justified in the explicitly documented explicitly explicitly documented
documented and documented and and justified in the report. Good evidence and justified in the documented and and justified in the
justified in the justified in the report. Satisfactory of the effective and report. Very good justified in the report. Exceptional
report. Little to no report. Poor evidence of the successful application evidence of the report. Excellent evidence of the
evidence of the evidence of the effective and of HCI theory and effective and evidence of the effective and
effective and effective and successful application design principles to successful application effective and successful application
successful successful of HCI theory and create a prototype that of HCI theory and successful application of HCI theory and
application of HCI application of HCI design principles to can be used to test design principles to of HCI theory and design principles to
theory and design theory and design create a prototype that core assumptions of create a prototype that design principles to create a prototype that
principles to create principles to create can be used to test your design and that is can be used to test create a prototype can be used to test
a prototype that a prototype that can core assumptions of suitable for core assumptions of that can be used to core assumptions of
can be used to test be used to test core your design and that is researchers and your design and that is test core your design and that is
core assumptions assumptions of your suitable for designers to test and suitable for assumptions of your suitable for
of your design and design and that is researchers and evaluate the product. researchers and design and that is researchers and
that is suitable for suitable for designers to test and Good demonstration of designers to test and suitable for designers to test and
researchers and researchers and evaluate the product. the implementation of evaluate the product. researchers and evaluate the product.
designers to test designers to test Satisfactory design research and Very good designers to test and Exceptional
and evaluate the and evaluate the demonstration of the theory in both the demonstration of the evaluate the product. demonstration of the
product. Little to product. Poor implementation of report and the implementation of Excellent implementation of
no demonstration demonstration of design research and prototype. design research and demonstration of the design research and
of implementation the implementation theory in both the theory in both the implementation of theory in both the
of design research of design research report and the report and the design research and report and the
and theory in both and theory in both prototype. prototype. theory in both the prototype.
the report and the the report and the report and the
prototype. prototype. prototype.

6
D1 Research Little to no review Poor review of A satisfactory review of A good review of A very good review of An excellent review An exceptional review
of relevant and relevant and relevant and relevant and relevant and of relevant and of relevant and
Review of appropriate HCI appropriate HCI appropriate HCI appropriate HCI appropriate HCI appropriate HCI appropriate HCI
relevant HCI background background background literature background literature background literature background background literature
literature literature to literature to inform to inform the design of to inform the design of to inform the design of literature to inform to inform the design of
inform the design the design of the the product and to the product and to the product and to the design of the the product and to
of the product and product and to generate generate generate product and to generate
to generate generate requirements. The requirements. The requirements. The generate requirements. The
requirements. The requirements. The background literature background literature background literature requirements. The relevance of the
background background has relevance and has relevance and is very relevant and relevance of the background literature
literature lacks literature has poor supports the supports the supports the background is to an exceptional
relevance and does relevance and requirements of a requirements of a requirements of a literature is to an level and supports the
not or very little supports the proposed solution to a proposed solution to a proposed solution to a excellent level and requirements of a
support the requirements of a satisfactory standard good standard (e.g. very good standard supports the proposed solution to
requirements of a proposed solution (e.g. related work, HCI related work, HCI (e.g. related work, HCI requirements of a an exceptional
proposed solution to a poor standard literature in relation to literature in relation to literature in relation to proposed solution to standard (e.g. related
(e.g. related work, (e.g. related work, the product’s context, the product’s context, the product’s context, an excellent standard work, HCI literature in
HCI literature in HCI li-terature in interaction design interaction design interaction design (e.g. related work, relation to the
relation to the relation to the theory, cognitive theory, cognitive theory, cognitive HCI literature in product’s context,
product’s context, product’s context, psychology etc.). psychology etc.). psychology etc.). relation to the interaction design
interaction design interaction design product’s context, theory, cognitive
theory, cognitive theory, cognitive interaction design psychology etc.).
psychology etc.). psychology etc.). theory, cognitive
psychology etc.).

D2 Research A detailed A poor proposal for A satisfactory proposal A good proposal for an A very good proposal An excellent proposal An exceptional
proposal for an an empirical HCI for an empirical HCI empirical HCI research for an empirical HCI for an empirical HCI proposal for an
Proposal for empirical HCI research study that research study that study that uses your research study that research study that empirical HCI research
an empirical research study that uses your uses your interactive interactive prototype uses your interactive uses your interactive study that uses your
HCI research uses your interactive prototype to test at to test at least one prototype to test at prototype to test at interactive prototype
study interactive prototype to test at least one assumption assumption that you least one assumption least one assumption to test at least one
prototype to test least one that you have made have made when that you have made that you have made assumption that you
at least one assumption that you when designing your designing your when designing your when designing your have made when
assumption that have made when prototype. A prototype. A good prototype. A very good prototype. An designing your
you have made designing your satisfactory standard standard and some standard and some excellent standard prototype. An
when designing prototype. A poor and some details for a good details for a very good details for a and excellent details exceptional standard
your prototype is standard and few research study were research study were research study were for a research study and exceptional details
absent or nearly details for a presented, including presented, including presented, including were presented, for a research study
absent. Nearly no research study were the question(s) or the question(s) or the question(s) or including the were presented,
7
details for a presented, including hypothesis that your hypothesis that your hypothesis that your question(s) or including the
research study the question(s) or research study research study research study hypothesis that your question(s) or
were presented, hypothesis that your attempts to attempts to attempts to research study hypothesis that your
including the research study investigate, who the investigate, who the investigate, who the attempts to research study
question(s) or attempts to participants of your participants of your participants of your investigate, who the attempts to
hypothesis that investigate, who the study will be, how the study will be, how the study will be, how the participants of your investigate, who the
your research participants of your study will be run, the study will be run, the study will be run, the study will be, how participants of your
study attempts to study will be, how data collection, and data collection, and data collection, and the study will be run, study will be, how the
investigate, who the study will be how you will analyse how you will analyse how you will analyse the data collection, study will be run, the
the participants of run, the data the data. The the data. The the data. The and how you will data collection, and
your study will be, collection, and how instruments and instruments and instruments and analyse the data. The how you will analyse
how the study will you will analyse the documentation that documentation that documentation that instruments and the data. The
be run, the data data. The are required for a are required for a are required for a documentation that instruments and
collection, and instruments and usability expert to run usability expert to run usability expert to run are required for a documentation that
how you will documentation that the study were created the study were created the study were created usability expert to are required for a
analyse the data. are required for a to a satisfactory to a good standard. to a very good run the study were usability expert to run
Little to no usability expert to standard. standard. created to an the study were created
necessary run the study were excellent standard. to an exceptional
instruments and created to a poor standard.
documentation standard.
that are required
for a usability
expert to run the
study were
created.

8
D3 Little to no A poor conclusion A satisfactory A good conclusion A very good conclusion An excellent An exceptional
Evaluation / conclusion drawing drawing together conclusion drawing drawing together the drawing together the conclusion drawing conclusion drawing
D6 together the key the key facts, poor together the key facts, key facts, good critical key facts, very good together the key together the key facts,
Employability facts, little to no critical reflections satisfactory critical reflections on the critical reflections on facts, excellent exceptional critical
critical reflections on the limitations of reflections on the limitations of the work the limitations of the critical reflections on reflections on the
on the limitations the work that has limitations of the work that has been carried work that has been the limitations of the limitations of the work
Conclusion of the work that been carried out that has been carried out and a good carried out and a very work that has been that has been carried
has been carried and a poor out and a satisfactory discussion of potential good discussion of carried out and an out and an exceptional
out and little to no discussion of discussion of potential future work if the potential future work if excellent discussion discussion of potential
discussion of potential future future work if the project would be the project would be of potential future future work if the
potential future work if the project project would be developed further. developed further. work if the project project would be
work if the project would be developed developed further. would be developed developed further.
would be further. further.
developed further.

D4 A lack of Poor demonstration a satisfactory a good professional a very good excellent exceptional
Communicati demonstrating a of a professional professional writing writing style, good professional writing professional writing professional writing
on / D5 professional writing style, poor style, satisfactory English language style, very good English style, excellent style, exceptional
Referencing writing style, little English language English language proficiency, good language proficiency, English language English language
to no English proficiency, poor proficiency, report formatting, very good report proficiency, excellent proficiency,
Professional language report formatting, satisfactory report good referencing in formatting, very good report formatting, exceptional report
writing and proficiency, the poor referencing in formatting, satisfactory Harvard style of referencing in Harvard excellent referencing formatting, exceptional
referencing report lacks Harvard style of referencing in Harvard academic sources (e.g. style of academic in Harvard style of referencing in Harvard
professional academic sources style of academic journal papers, sources (e.g. journal academic sources style of academic
formatting, largely (e.g. journal papers, sources (e.g. journal conference papers, papers, conference (e.g. journal papers, sources (e.g. journal
incorrect or no conference papers, papers, conference academic books) papers, academic conference papers, papers, conference
referencing in academic books) papers, academic throughout the report. books) throughout the academic books) papers, academic
Harvard style of throughout the books) throughout the report. throughout the books) throughout the
academic sources report. report. report. report.
(e.g. journal
papers, conference
papers, academic
books) throughout
the report.