- It was discussed that more work was needed on each of the prototype areas, which as a reminder were assigned to each person as follows: Andy - Phone; BJ - Emergency Help; Jenny - Lighting; Max - Web/Email; Sam - GPS Travel. Each team member should ensure that, if not already done, they should write an explanation of the workings of their prototype and a justification of their reasons for certain choices.
- For the same areas team members need to do some research into the current technological capabilities, as well as background on older people's grasp of that technology.
- Questionnaires should also be formulated for each prototype area. These should focus on clarity and usability, and should all follow the following format:
- Open ended questions should be avoided at all costs. It is better to have a long question than a long answer. The questions should be answered using a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is generally bad, and 5 is good. A DON'T KNOW option should be offered as well.
- There should be a minimum of 5 questions per section, and a maximum of 10.
- The questionnaires will be submitted to 10 people, and required information is AGE, SEX, FRAILTY (on a scale of 1-10 where 1 is good motor skills, and 10 is severely disabled) and TECH LEVEL (also on a scale of 1-10 where 1 is low and 10 is high)
- The different types of evaluation were also discussed. Since it is normally not desirable to have the designer involved with the evaluation, the evaluations will be divided out as thus: Max will carry out a think aloud evalulation on the GPS prototype; Andy and Sam will carry out a cognitive walkthrough evaluation on the lighting and emergency prototypes; Jenny will carry out a heuristic evaluation on the phone prototype; BJ will carry out a heuristic evaluation on the Web/Email prototype. The constructive interaction evaluation will be posted as a group effort later on.
No comments:
Post a Comment