Quality and thoroughness of human-use experience analysis and improvement suggestions
Reviewer 1:
 |
|
The overall assessment was very good in that it provided direct video evidence of a user's experience. It also provided multiple ways of presenting information - for instance, in story format for direct quotations from users, but then also in list format for pros and cons. Because of technical website issues explained below, I cannot comment on the complete thoroughness of the analysis, but it appears to be quite thorough from what I can see.
|
|
return to top of page |
Reviewer 2:
 |
|
Extremely thorough job outlining the classroom, the user experience, and documenting the experience with video. I would have given this an "oustanding" rating hands down, but one key problem--I thought the proposed solution could have been significantly better. You have pictures throughout your website documenting the layout and problems of the classroom, but there is no drawing or picture at all for the solution. It's very hard to understand a classroom redesign without a visual. Overall, you did an excellent job, though.
|
|
return to top of page |
| Reviewer 3:
|
|
The use analysis was very thorough. Additionally, the inclusion of a test subject was a good way to demonstrate the problems with the system, especially since this particular situation is one which may be alien to many people. It may have been helpful to run time studies on getting the computer to project, and understand the experience curve, time allowing. Interviews represented good data. All in all, a top-notch analysis was performed. Improvement suggestions, however, seemed like a bit more of an afterthought. It would have been useful to apply the same level of multimedia engagement for outlining problems and solutions as was applied in the use analysis.
|
|
return to top of page |
Reviewer 4:
 |
|
The incorporation of a thorough analysis of the room and its features, in addition to a video documenting a first time user trying to figure the room out and interviews from fellow students made this analysis very detailed, and allowed for problems of the room to be revealed from different points of view. All of the content was very descriptive and informative. Overall, a great in-depth analysis.
|
|
return to top of page |
Clarity and presentation of human-use experience analysis
Reviewer 1:
 |
|
I had technical issues when accessing this Human Use Analysis. On each page, not all of the content was displayed, but there was no scroll bar anywhere to allow me to scroll down to see the remaining content. I knew there was additional content because I could see the tops of some pictures and text at the bottom of the screen. I used both Google Chrome and Firefox to access this site and encountered the same problem both times. Other than that, I found the site at times easy to use, and other times less so. Some screens followed a storyboard-like format, with picture connected by lines, but it was not clear which direction I should proceed when reading in order. As a stylistic choice, I would have preferred the use of the first person for the experience analysis (i.e. "I" instead of "you").
|
|
return to top of page |
| Reviewer 2:
|
|
Excellent use of Flash, but a few issues--the picture on the main page was distorted and blurry, the user experience summary was hard to read (horizontal and vertical spacing was identical, meaning I didn't know which direction to read it in), the video was sliiightly too long for a user to watch all the way through, and most critically, there were no scrollbars on your embedded flash files, so I couldn't read the lower third of most of your pages (and page down didn't work). I tried opening the website in three different browsers with the same issue. Also, I felt that there was too much text in your analysis, making it difficult to read all the way through. On the plus side, progressing along your website was highly intuitive, and I was never on a page I didn't intend to be on.
|
|
return to top of page |
| Reviewer 3:
|
|
All aspects of the analysis were communicated clearly. Analysis was very thorough, which meant that there was a lot of content. It would have been helpful, at the end of each section, to summarize the key aspects. While reading through (and watching) the content was certainly interesting, by the end I was left trying to sift through it to draw my own conclusions. Guidance in this regard may have been helpful. Problems were very well communicated through the analysis and video, and summarized in bullet form, but improvement suggestions were simply listed. It would have been a useful clarifying exercise to build some sort of multimedia to communicate the improvement suggestions.
|
|
return to top of page |
| Reviewer 4:
|
|
The presentation was crisp, attractive, and easy to navigate. I thought the effects used with the images were a nice touch, and the video was great. The sub-menus that came up after clicking on the items on the main menu were also effectively used. One very tiny issue was when I clicked on the video and navigated to another part of the presentation before it loaded, I was still able to hear the music coming from the video for some reason. Other than that, an all in all excellent presentation.
|
|
return to top of page |
