Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines
Human Computer Interaction (HCI)
HCI in-depth evaluation for websites
Purpose of the Students will be able to:
assessment (with ULO Mapping)
a. Understand basic concepts and theories relating to Human-Computer interaction (HCI) and user interfaces
b. Demonstrate an understanding and appreciation of user interface design, evaluation and technologies
c. Demonstrate skills in designing and evaluating interactive systems and web- based applications
15% of the total assessments
100% scaled to 15%
Submission • All work must be submitted on Blackboard by the due date along with a completed
Assignment Cover Page.
• The assignment must be in MS Word format, 1.5 spacing, 11-pt Calibri (Body) font and 2 cm margins on all four sides of your page with appropriate section headings.
• Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list using Harvard referencing style.
Assignment 1 Specification
The purpose of the report is to provide a critical evaluation of the nominated websites and to support your observations and recommendation convincingly. By performing an in-depth evaluation of the following websites:
Website 1: https://www.priceline.com.au/
Website 2: https://truelinkswear.com/
Upon the completion of the task, you are to provide a formal report documenting your critical evaluation of the two websites. The report should draw particular attention to the interactive aspects and user interface design of the website. Support your critique with appropriate HCI design and evaluation principles as described in Chapter text book. 1, 2, and 4 of your textbook (Shneiderman & Plaisant, 2010).
1. Introduction – State the purpose and objectives of the report.
2. Discussion – Build your arguments into a cohesive thread, presenting your observations and
findings that you have collated from section (1) to (3) from ‘WHAT TO INCLUDE’ section.
3. Recommendation – This is the section where you present your recommendations —Item (4)
from the ‘What to include’ section.
4. Conclusion – Summarise your findings, consolidating and drawing attention to the main
points of the report.
5. References. (a minimum of 4 references)
WHAT TO INCLUDE:
1. Provide an overview and description of the nominated websites.
2. Identify and elaborate the main features of the websites, drawing on your first impression of
the websites, accessibility, navigation, homepage, etc. (Refer to lecture slides and textbook)
3. Compare and contrast the two websites against the:
• HCI design principles (Eight Golden Rules of Interface Design)
• Usability principles (5 human factors of usability measures)
4. Based on your critique and analysis in items (1) to (3) above, provide a recommendation on how the websites should be improved. Conversely, if further improvement is not required, then provide the reasons why that this is the case.
• Except for item (4) of the above, all assertions relating to user interface design principles (e.g. statements like ‘blue text on red background is a poor colour combination’) must be supported by references or critical observation. You can cite additional scholarly references other than the textbook. (Note: Do not use Wikipedia
as a source of reference).
• You can also snapshot the parts you evaluate from the site and show it in your report for more clarity evidence. And Figures Tables and or diagrams can be added as
• All assignments must be submitted electronically ONLY, uploaded to Blackboard and Submission of SafeAssign. Submission deadlines are strictly enforced and a late
submission incurs penalties.
• DO NOT SHARE YOUR ASSIGNMENT WITH OTHER STUDENTS under no circumstances even after the deadline and after you submitted it in the Blackboard. If there will be any similarity detected by SafeAssign or the marker, it is an academic misconduct case and BOTH of the students will get ZERO and will be reported to the Dean academic.
Presentation (Report structure, Layout, Grammar and spelling, Written style and expression)
Relevance to HCI principles
Quality of evaluation
Recommendations and justification
TOTAL Weight for this assignment marking: 100 (Total of 100 marks to be scaled to 15% of actual marks for this unit)
Introduction Demonstrated Demonstrated Demonstrate Demonstrated Did not
/20 excellent very good d good satisfactory demonstrate
ability to think ability to think ability to think ability to think ability to think
critically and critically but did critically and critically and critically and did
sourced not source sourced did not source not source
reference reference reference reference reference material
material material material material appropriately
Discussion Demonstrated Demonstrated Demonstrate Demonstrated Did not
/40 excellent excellent d ability to ability to think demonstrate
ability to think ability to think think critically critically and ability to think
critically and critically but and sourced did not source critically and did
sourced did not source reference reference not source
reference reference material material reference material
material material appropriately appropriately appropriately
Recommendation Logic is clear Consistency Mostly Adequate Argument is
/20 and easy to logical and consistent cohesion and confused and
follow with convincing logical and conviction disjointed
Conclusion All elements Components Components Most Proposal lacks
/10 are present present with present and components structure.
and very well good cohesive mostly well present
Harvard or IEEE Clear styles Clear Generally Sometimes Lacks consistency
Reference style with excellent referencing good clear with many errors
/10 source of style referencing referencing