April 15th: Status update
A status update for our application will be posted on our blog. This update will also include a list of questions we will ask our test users after the paper prototyping session of iteration 2 and a list of test users we’ve contacted for the evaluation of iteration 2.
April 22nd: Iteration 2 paper prototype
WHAT: The improvements following from iteration 1 will we be applied and and the whole application will be evaluated again. The focus will change from possibility to execute certain tasks to the efficiency of our application.
HOW: The evaluation will be done using paper prototyping, combined with some questions concerning usability of the application. These questions will be posted on our status update on April 15th.
WHY: Because we do not have enough solid ground yet to construct a digital prototype, it’s much easier to execute usability interviews using paper prototyping.
WHO: We will try to find people with difficulties handling their information flows.
April 29th: Implementation digital prototype
After we’ve gained enough solid ground for our application, the paper prototype will be converted in a digital prototype, which allows us to let test users performs certain specified tasks in a simulated environment. Although we plan to extend our prototype after the first iteration, the base line is that it should support enough functionality to allow the user to carry out the tasks we used for the paper prototype evaluation. One such possible extension could be a mock-up search function.
We're currently looking into several digital prototype development tools.
May 5th: Iteration 1 digital prototype
WHAT: The digital prototype will be evaluated. Because we are now able to let people use a simulated application on a computer screen, some things we weren’t able to evaluate using paper prototyping can be handled now, such as mouse movements.
HOW: The evaluation will be done using usability engineering with the same tasks as with the second paper prototyping iteration.
WHY: Because we are not evaluating a widespread application but just a digital prototype, we will need to face our test users to guide them during the test, so a think-aloud interview will be the most practical.
WHO: We will try to find test users comparable to the test users from our previous iterations.
May 9th: Iteration 2 digital prototype
WHAT: The changes after the first iteration of the digital prototype will be evaluated and adapted if necessary. Possibly the functionality of the digital prototype will have been extended.
HOW: This will again be done using usability engineering.
WHY: The same reason as before.
WHO: The same kind of test users as before.
Eventually we hope our prototype will have all the functionality we described in our user scenario, since this is the core of our application. We won't be able to deal with live feed-streams.
May 15th: Final presentation
June 1st: Final report
Below you can find our Gantt chart for the remainder of the course. An X indicates the person responsible for that task.
Good planning.
ReplyDeleteHow do you see this digital prototype? PowerPoint or are you going to use another application?
Seems like you have less than 2 hours left to meet your first deadline ;-)
ReplyDeleteFrom your planning, it is not clear to me how 'functional' you plan the prototype to be eventually.
Like with other groups, it would be good to know a bit more about who exactly will work on what exactly and how many hours you estimate that the tasks will take you: a Gantt chart would be one simple way to clarify this...
We've updated our planning taking your remarks into account.
DeleteSo, only Yasin will work on the implementation?
ReplyDeleteIt is still not clear to me how many hours you expect each of these efforts to take?
And it is still not clear to me what the implementation will support exactly?
Please?
I'll try to clarify what we mentioned in our post.
DeleteYasin will not be the only one working on the implementation. An X in the chart indicates someone as the main responsible for a task. The grey bar indicates who's working on what task at what time.
Indeed, we didn't exactly mention the hours. We thought that could be derived from Toggl. We'll have a look at it.
As for the functionality, as mentioned above, we want it to cover all the tasks we asked our users to perform, including drag and drop. Some technical details might differ (depending on our tool), but these should be minimal. Thus, the system will have its core abilities, described in the user story and the task for the users as presented in one of the previous posts.