2.744
Human-use Analysis Reviews
Home > Assignments > Human-use analysis results > Reviews for Travis Libsack

Travis Libsack
spiro
[review]

 Analysis RatingsPresentation Ratings
Average Rating
 
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Reviewer 3:
Reviewer 4:
1-marginal     2-ok    3-good     4-very good    5-outstanding

Quality and thoroughness of human-use analysis and improvement suggestions

Reviewer 1:

I like the use of a lot of examples that students here might have encountered already. It helps to understand the problem (not that you need to have seen these doors to understand his text). It would have been nice to contrast some of these bad examples with some that were good, so that readers can get an understanding of what represents a "good" door.

Overall I feel like I got a good idea of what makes up a "bad" design, but not necessarily how a door should function in a "good" design. It might have been helpful to consolidate your observations into another page of pros and cons for doors.

I felt myself wondering in what situations different handles and door types should be used. While you focused on MIT doors, and these were great examples to show how something functioned, I think it would have been helpful to have more detail about what aspects and features make a design better. For example, when should vertical vs. horizontal handles be used? What handles should be used on doors that swing both ways?

return to top of page


Reviewer 2:

Good attempt at tackling a wide spread problem enveloping the MIT campus and beyond. Broad analysis of the many problems posed by door design on the campus with relevant examples.

Suggestion 1: The handicap door improvement boils down to "make it better." Include a recommendation on how to implement the design change.

Suggestion 2: The door problem is very broad. Dive deep on one of the door uses: connecting hallways/buildings, main entrances, lobby/room to hallway interface. This will allow for more depth in the analysis and multiple recommendations, since most doors are plagued by more than one design flaw.

return to top of page


Reviewer 3:

Great job of really talking about all the different problems that arise with door design and interesting background info on it as well. Maybe it could have been substantiated with examples of good door design or comparisons between what a good push door should look like vs a bad push door. But, in the end, we're all pretty familiar with doors, so I think people are aware of what good designs you were talking about.

return to top of page


Reviewer 4:

Travis's analysis has shown me that even though doors are such simple devices, many fail at designing doors that make it easy for the users to use. I love the examples of bad doors in MIT that Travis mentioned as I too had bad experiences with these very same doors. The suggestions he recommended are both relevant and easy to implement.

return to top of page



Clarity and presentation of human-use experience analysis

Reviewer 1:

I appreciate the attempt to get the point across at the beginning and it still made me smile, but I think it didn't quite read the way it should. Maybe because they were the same exact door, rather than different doors that look like they should be opened the same way.

I like that all the pictures have arrows on them to point out what is important. That was really helpful in efficiency and quickly relating the text to the pictures. Even the curved arrows were nice, which helped visualize the opening and closing of doors.

The video at the end could have been put at the beginning to help contextualize the problem, rather than at the end, but I did find it entertaining!

return to top of page


Reviewer 2:

The door selection at the begining does a good job framing the issue for the user. Since they are intentionally confusing doors, some text may help direct the user. The "Examples in the Real World" section would benefit from brief captions or descriptions about the issues presented by the designs you portrayed. The reader needs to spend time finding the design flaws. A counter example of a well designed door would also be helpful. You did a good job highlighting the flaws in the Observation section. Linking the text with the appropriate pictures(s) would help the presentation and clarity on the Observations page, this could be accomplished through a numbering scheme or with a table format. The illustrative arrows and text on the Solutions page pictures is clear and easily interpenetrate.

return to top of page


Reviewer 3:

I really liked the intro of the doors, but I think that it could have been more effective if instead one door was obviously a push and one was obviously a pull, because you could have used that to demonstrate that there are certain design features that clearly denote how one should open a door.

Other than that, small things like putting borders around your pictures might help them stand out more/separate them from the background better.

return to top of page


Reviewer 4:

There seems to be some formatting error on the "observations" page which made the images a long column compared to the small height of the textbox. Perhaps distribute the text appropriately throughout the whole page.

I really love the introduction at the start where Travis presents you with two doors. The ambiguity behind either pushing or pulling the door immediately exposes the reader to the main problem at hand.

return to top of page