UX Design – Overview
| WK | Practical | Lecture |
| 1 |
|
|
| 2 |
|
|
| 3 |
|
|
| 4 |
|
|
| 5 |
|
|
| 6 |
|
|
| 7 |
|
|
| 8 |
|
|
| 9 |
|
|
| Â Break | ||
| 10 |
|
|
| 11 |
|
|
Assessment
Design Studio – 70%
We will carry out UX workshops as part of a team from week five onwards.
The final mark for this component will be an amalgam of a group mark (60%) and an individual mark (40%).
Students will be marked primarily on their engagement with the process. Engagement can be said to mean; displayed understanding and application of theory (lecture and tutorial content). The team as a whole will be responsible for deliverables and these will be marked similarly i.e. that they display understanding and application of the UX process.
NoteBook – 30%
All students must purchase a hard-backed notebook for the module. In the notebook, students will keep notes form lectures, notes on their participation with their UX team.
The notes should reflect the students’ understanding of the topic, external research or reading, synthesised thought, ideas and questions.
Presentation
Purpose
The purpose of the presentation is to communicate your group’s progress through a problem space to a solution using a UX methodology.
It should illustrate an excellent grasp and application not only of the lecture but also the tutorial content of the module.
It may include;
Team roles
Key hypotheses, MVPs and User feedback
Design decisions
The solution(s) – as presented in screen shots, prototypes of any resolution etc.
The presentation should be complete in a maximum of 10 minutes. One or more team members may be involved. If more than one please co-ordinate effectively.
Assessment Marking
Excellent. 80–100%
The deliverable and observable components are outstanding. The workshops and presentation show a profound understanding of the area of study. The design solutions arrived at are appropriate, original, inventive.
Background research is evident with original critical and analytical assessment of major developments and theories in the area. Presentation and documentation are flawless.
Very good. 70–79%
The deliverable and observable components show mastery. The workshops and presentation, evidence a complete understanding of the area of study. The design solutions are appropriate.
Background research is evident with the critical and analytical assessment of the major developments and theories in the area. Presentation and documentation are almost flawless
Good. 63-69%
The deliverable and observable components show a mature grasp of the task in hand. The workshops and presentation, evidence significant understanding of the area of study with some minor gaps, there may be some aspects of the work that are vague or immeasurable.
Background research is evidenced though there may be some gaps in the learner’s knowledge of the field. Presentation and documentation are satisfactory.
Fair. 55–62%
The deliverable and observable components show a good working knowledge of the task being undertaken. The workshops and presentation, evidence significant gaps. The design solutions are partial.
Background research is evidenced as a collection of facts without insight or analysis. There may be significant gaps in the learner’s knowledge of the field. Presentation and documentation indicate the need for revision.
Pass. 45–54%
The deliverable or observable components show a sketchy knowledge of the task undertaken. The workshops and presentation evidence serious gaps in the learner’s knowledge of the field. The design solutions are few or questionable.
Background research is evidenced as a minimal collection of facts Presentation and referencing are sloppy and indicate. Presentation and documentation indicate the need for significant revision.
Marginal fail/pass. 35–45%
One or more of the deliverable or observable components shows a seriously inadequate knowledge of the task undertaken.
Background research is not in evidence. The learner’s knowledge of the field is very poor. Presentation and documentation are sloppy and indicative of a first draft. The presentation of ideas may border on plagiarism.
Fail. 15–35%
Each of the deliverable or observable components shows a seriously inadequate knowledge of the task undertaken.
Background research is not evident. The learner’s knowledge of the field is almost non-existent. Presentation and documentation are of a very poor quality. The presentation of ideas may border on plagiarism.
