The final grades have been assigned. The mean is almost an A-. A's
and B's of some sort were awarded to 2/3 and 1/3 of the class
respectively. Excellent performance, everyone, and best wishes in your
future endeavors.
The 5% overall grade for class participation will be awarded based on lecture
attendance in a twofold manner. Firstly, due to excellent attendance
during the first half of the semester, every student automatically receives
2%. The remaining 3% is computed based on attendance during the second
half of the semester, and is approximated by the fraction of the 6 lecture
quizzes submitted (i.e., we are taking quiz attendance, not quiz
scores).
The regular final exams have been graded. For the un-calibrated raw
scores, total: 120, highest: 115, mean: 100.3, and standard
deviation: 7.9. Excellent work!
The early final exams have been graded. For the un-calibrated raw scores,
total: 120, highest: 118, mean: 92.8, and standard
deviation: 15.1. Excellent work!
The final project reports have been graded according to these grading
guidelines. Total: 45, highest: 44, mean: 41.1, and standard
deviation: 1.6. Excellent work!
The final project presentations have been graded. Total: 40, highest:
38.5, mean: 35.3, and standard
deviation: 1.4. Excellent work!
The pilot usability study assignments have been graded according to these grading
guidelines. Total: 40, highest: 39, mean: 35.0, and standard
deviation: 2.3. Excellent work!
The heuristic evaluation assignments have been graded according to these grading
guidelines. Total: 20, highest: 20, mean: 19.4, and standard
deviation: 1.1. Excellent work!
The interaction prototype #1 presentations have been graded. Total: 40, highest:
38.5, mean: 35.5, and standard
deviation: 1.3. Excellent work!
The interactive prototype #1 assignment has been graded according to these grading
guidelines. Total: 50, highest: 44.5, mean: 41.9, and standard
deviation: 2.7. The mean is unusually high and the standard deviation is
unusually narrow. Good work, and keep it up!
For folks interested in finding out more about careers and workplace-related
issues in Human-Computer Interaction, the scribe
notes from the HCI Panel Discussion at SIMS on February 5, 2003 have been
posted online. Happy browsing.
>
Outdated announcements
Week
1
Jan 20, 2003 |
Holiday
(Martin Luther King day), No Sections |
Week
2
Jan 27, 2003
|
Personas (PPT
slides, 6-slides-per-page PDF)
In which I discussed my goals as a teaching assistant, the
characteristics and interaction techniques associated with smart phones
and personal digital assistants, the importance of personas, the hallmarks
of good personas, examples of personas, ubiquitous computing,
context-/location- awareness, and project tips based on personal
experiences.
Optional
readings:
Alan
Cooper and Paul Saffo. The Inmates are Running the Asylum.
Simon and Schuster. April 6, 1999. Chapter 9: Designing
for Pleasure and Chapter 10: Designing for Power.
Mark Weiser. The Computer for the 21st Century. In Scientific
American, September 1991. (Available at: http://www.ubiq.com/hypertext/weiser/SciAmDraft3.html).
Gregory D. Abowd and Elizabeth D. Mynatt. Charting Past,
Present, and Future Research in Ubiquitous Computing. In ACM
Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, Vol. 7, No. 1, March
2000. (Available at: http://www.cc.gatech.edu/fce/ecl/publications/millenium-tochi2000.pdf
;just read sections 1 and 3.)
|
Week
3
Feb 3, 2003
|
Human-Centered
and Value-Sensitive Design (PPT
slides, 6-slides-per-page PDF)
In which I covered last week's survey on the teaching assistant's
functions, ways to account for imperfect user study results, Microsoft's
Smart Personal Objects Technology as an example of ubiquitous computing
converging onto context-aware computing, highlights of the human-centered
design readings, a review of personas and value-sensitive design.
Optional
readings:
Microsoft
Corporation. Q&A: Microsoft and Watch-making Partners
Announce First Smart Personal Objects Technology Wristwatches.
January 9, 2003. (Available at: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2003/jan03/01-09SPOTWatches.asp).
Batya Friedman. Value-Sensitive Design. In ACM
Interactions, Vol. 3, Issue 6, December 1996. (Available at: http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=242493&coll=portal&dl=ACM&CFID=7434905&CFTOKEN=7615001).
|
Week
4
Feb 10, 2003
|
Contextual
Inquiry, Task Analysis, Scenarios and Storyboards (PPT
slides, 6-slides-per-page PDF)
In which I covered and provided project tips on contextual inquiry,
task analysis, scenarios and storyboards. There is enough
substantial lecture material from last week onwards for me to conduct
discussion sections, beginning from this week's, in a more interactive and
Q&A style. In the first section, I clarified misconceptions
about contextual inquiry and task analysis. In the second section, I
demonstrated how scenarios and storyboards can be constructed. I am
still evolving this interactive Q&A style, and would greatly
appreciate feedback!
Optional
readings:
Karen Holtzblatt and Sandra Jones.
Conducting and Analyzing a Contextual Interview. In Schuler and
Namioka (Eds.), Participatory Design: Principles and Practices, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1993, pp. 177, 181-188, 192-204, 207-210.
Alan
Cooper and Paul Saffo. The Inmates are Running the Asylum.
Simon and Schuster. April 6, 1999. Chapter 11: Designing
for People. (Note difference from week 2).
Clayton Lewis and John Rieman. Task-Centered User Interface
Design. (Available
at: http://home.att.net/~jrieman/jrtcdbk.html).
Chapter 2: Getting to Know Users and Their Tasks. (Note
that this material was covered in lecture on Feb 3, 2003, but was not
assigned readings.)
The Balanced Scorecard Institute. Basic Tools for Process
Innovation. (Available at: http://www.balancedscorecard.org/files/affinity.pdf).
Module 4: Affinity Diagram.
|
Week
5
Feb 17, 2003
|
Holiday
(President's day), No Sections
|
Week
6
Feb 24, 2003
|
Low-Fidelity
Prototyping and Severity Ratings (PPT
slides, 6-slides-per-page PDF, Lo-Fi
Demo Script)
In which I facilitated a class activity on severity ratings, showed how
a low-fidelity prototype looks like, demonstrated how a low-fidelity
usability test is conducted, provided samples of how the low-fidelity
prototyping assignment report could be written, and highlighted how these
samples addressed the weak areas in some groups' contextual inquiry
assignment report.
|
Week
7
Mar 3, 2003
|
Midterm
Exam Review
(PPT
slides, 6-slides-per-page PDF, Practice Midterm Solution)
In which I reviewed the major concepts covered in lecture from the start of the semester until the previous week.
|
Week
8
Mar 10, 2003
|
Interactive
Prototypes (PDF Script)
In which I discussed how the interactive prototype assignment report could be
written.
|
Week
9
Mar 17, 2003
|
Interactive
Prototypes (PPT
slides, 6-slides-per-page PDF)
In which I clarified how the interactive prototype assignment report
could be written, provided suggestions on how to perform Wizard of Oz in
hi-fi prototyping, and covered some platform-specific details for the
various toolkits.
|
Week
10
Mar 24, 2003
|
Spring
Break, No Sections
But I
will be holding office hours by appointment, especially for groups that
are presenting their interactive prototypes on March 31, 2003.
Presentation
Skills PPT, prepared by Wai-ling Ho-Ching for Spring 2002 CS160,
available at:
http://guir.berkeley.edu/courses/cs160/spring2002/lectures_files/PresentationSkills.ppt
|
Week
11
Mar 31, 2003
|
Interactive
Prototype Presentations (PPT
slides, 6-slides-per-page PDF)
In which I reviewed a set of presentation slides
from the Fall 2001 CS160 class, and highlighted its strengths and
weaknesses.
|
Week
12
Apr 7, 2003
|
Design
Patterns (PPT
slides, 6-slides-per-page PDF)
In which I motivated the need for design patterns, reviewed the
Model-View-Controller pattern in software engineering, and clarified how
the heuristic evaluation assignment could be done. I also
highlighted the importance of ethics involving
human subjects.
|
Week
13
Apr 14, 2003
|
Experimental
Design (PPT
slides, 6-slides-per-page PDF)
In which I demonstrated how to design field experiments to evaluate the
usefulness of groups three's and six's class projects. Please note
that these demonstrations are purely to improve your conceptual
understanding in preparation for the final exam, and that you are not
expected to turn in pilot usability study assignments of this quality.
|
Week
14
Apr 21, 2003
|
Website
Design and Patterns (PPT
slides, 6-slides-per-page PDF)
In which I reviewed practice final #1
related to website design and patterns, and showed how to connect these
questions with the material in lectures 14
and 15.
|
Week
15
Apr 28, 2003
|
Social
Psychology and Groupware (PPT
slides, 6-slides-per-page PDF)
In which I reviewed practice final #2
related to social psychology and computer-supported cooperative work (CSCW), and showed how to connect these
questions with the material in lectures 18
and 19.
|
Week
16
May 5, 2003
|
Error
Handling and Help (PPT
slides, 6-slides-per-page PDF)
In which I reviewed practice final #3
related to error handling and help, and showed how to connect these
questions with the material in lectures 21
and 22.
I also gave out a handout on CS160
Final Exam Preparation Tips.
|
Week
17
May 12, 2003
|
Final
Exam Review (PPT
slides, 6-slides-per-page PDF)
In which I reviewed the major post-midterm concepts covered in lecture.
|
Week
17
May 15, 2003
3-5 PM
380 Soda Hall
|
Practice
Final Exam Review (Practice Final
Solution)
In which I covered the previous final exam and demonstrated how to
approach the difficult questions.
|
MS Visual Studio .NET (see us for licensed copies)