Write-up

The figure above shows the iteration of processes for our project. The problem is that we decided to work on the administrative process of the capstone project on elearn platform. The problem is discussed which focusing more on the student and came up with a solution at the beginning of the project. It is useful to perform PACT analysis on the problem, to have a deeper understanding of the people who are involved in the problem on performing different activities on the portal. The improvement on the design solution will be based on the PACT analysis (refer to Portfolio post).

After listing out all the problems, we decided to go with the low-fidelity prototype that is sketching of the system which is going to be the system design, in the part 3. The reason to jump directly to part 3 is because the feedback from questionnaires from the users can be collected after showing the sketch to the user. Three different sketches are drawn from each of us (refer to Sketch post), then the sketch with the best idea is chosen. After that, the sketching is improved with more functionalities. This produces the final version of the paper prototype that is shown in iteration 1 (refer to Design (Iteration 1) post). In iteration 1, the paper prototype is evaluated by only non-user using Nielsen’s Heuristic approach, but the 2nd and 3rd iterations use Nielsen’s Heuristic approach follows with cognitive walkthrough in interaction, until the final working prototype is achieved. The result of heuristic evaluation and cognitive walkthrough could be found in Iteration1 file as well (refer to Design (Iteration 1) post). Then, the listed problems are discussed and considered. Recommendation on design changes is written based on non-users’ feedback to achieve a better version of the system design. So, part 2 is needed in order to understand what is actually needed by the lecturer, admin and student.

In part 2 (refer to Portfolio post), the two methods that were selected to collect the data with using survey paper questionnaire and interview. The demographics are chosen based on the user of the system, which are lecturer, student, and admin since they are users that are currently involved in using the system. The user research begins with distributing survey a few lecturers to check the satisfaction of the overall performance of the current system. Their feedback on the important features to be included in the system is collected in order to improve the current system and design solution. Besides, the data result of the survey conducted with year three students is collected. This data is used to identify the important feature should consider to adding in the design solution. The purpose, result and analysis of the user research data may refer to part 2 in  (Portfolio post). While the interview is carried out with the subject coordinator and two capstone project supervisor, the data is collected and analyzed as shown in (Portfolio post). Therefore, a list of requirements on the portal is generated as a reference while redesigning the system. For the recordings of the interviews can be found in (Recordings post). As moving back to the second iteration of part 1 because there is some changes in the PACT based on the results of the survey. Even though lecturer is mentioned in the PACT, however, there is some part of the PACT should be changed to involve the other type of user instead of focusing on one user.

Before stepping into the second iteration of part 3, a digital version of the prototype is created. This is to allow users to have a better picture of how the entire system will look like during evaluation. Low-fidelity prototyping is used to create the mock-up, and the tool is PowerPoint presentation in order to give the overall image of the plugin. However, it is realised that the system is still lacking some functionalities. The design of the system is improved from the feedback in part 2, which is questionnaire from students and lecturers and interview from the admin. This leads our group to propose Iteration 2 (refer to Design (Iteration 2) post). From the result, several features are suggested by lecturers and students, or they wish to include in capstone system. Then, the new features are included into the system (refer to Design (Iteration 2) post). The heuristic evaluation and cognitive walkthrough are performed on this digital prototype. The result of the heuristic evaluation refers to (Design (Iteration 2) post)

After redesign, the prototype is presented to lecturers and students. Other than minor issues, lecturers and students are found to be satisfied with the design and overall functions of the system. The heuristic evaluation result on the final digital prototype may refer to (Recordings & Design (Iteration 3) post). Therefore, this wraps up the work of our system design and concluded the final version of the interface. A block diagram that shows regarding how the entire system works is drawn (refer to Portfolio post). In portfolio, the user evaluation methodology is that used mentioned as well.