1 / 11

Professorial Paradox

Professorial Paradox. Matt Fritz Denise Ma Donald Stern Michael Tang Evan White. Usability Problems. - System-as-is does not exist.     - Currently using a Spreadsheet             - Hard to manipulate/revise:                 - Time consuming

agodsey
Download Presentation

Professorial Paradox

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Professorial Paradox Matt Fritz Denise Ma Donald Stern Michael Tang Evan White

  2. Usability Problems - System-as-is does not exist.     - Currently using a Spreadsheet             - Hard to manipulate/revise:                 - Time consuming                 - Complicated task that leads to errors                 - Requests must be interpreted before being input

  3. Usability Problems (cont.) - Constraints/Requirements of the system include:         - Instructor preferences for courses         - Teaching loads (How much a professor may take on)         - Course release (What a professor can get out of teaching)         - Going on leave          - Required vs. non-required courses         - Multiple users (Admin, and professors)         - Only Admin may commit a version of the schedule         - Pointer-based interface (Due to drag and drop functionality)

  4. Methods 1. Elicitation         - Interviews with Admin and professors (the user population)                 - Small user population makes this more useful than                  surveys 2. Implementation         - Brainstorming         - Prototyping         - Revision 3. Evaluation         - Heuristic Evaluation         - Cognitive Walk-Through          - User Tasks

  5. Sample User Tasks • Login as a faculty member • Login as an administrator • Register a new faculty member • Assign a professor to a single class • Assign team-teaching professors to a single class • Check required courses for a faculty member • Request courses (faculty member) • Create a schedule in the system based on a provided spreadsheet

  6. Professor Specific:     - What specific terminology currently exists for tasks/processes?     - What does the course request process entail?     - What kinds of tasks are generally carried out by professors?     - Should the system prompt to save before quitting?     - What tools might help make tasks and processes easier and      more transparent? Summer Specific:     - Does the request process change for summer sessions and if so      what does the process entail? Sample Interview Questions

  7. Sample Interview Questions Administrative Specific:     - What does the approval process for requests entail?     - What does the commitment process for schedules entail?     - What specific terminology currently exists for tasks/processes?     - What kinds of tasks are generally carried out by administrators?     - What information does the registrar need to know and in what      format?     - Should the system prompt to save before quitting?     - What kinds of users does the system have and what do they have      access to?     - What tools might help make tasks and processes easier and more      transparent? Summer Specific:      - Is there a different approval process for summer sessions and if so      what does the process entail?     - How many courses may professors teach?     - Do any other processes change for summer sessions?

  8. The Time Plan/Task Allotment: 1. Elicitation                 - Interviews (by 4th week)                         - Questions prepared as a group (4/15)                         - Interview given by: Matt and Mike  2. Implementation (by 4th week)                 - Brainstorming done as a group                 - First prototype put together by Donald, Matt and                  Denise 3. Primary Evaluations (by 6th week)                 - Heuristic Evaluation                          - Prepared by group and deployed by Evan, Mike                 - Cognitive Walk-Through                         - Prepared by group and deployed by Evan, Mike                 - Use-Case                         - Prepared and deployed by group Schedule Breakdown

  9. Schedule Breakdown (cont.) 4. Revision (6th-8th week)*                 - Editing of interface based on findings from evaluations 5. Secondary Evaluations (6th-8th week)*                 - Cognitive Walk-Through                         - Prepared by group and deployed by Evan, Mike 6. Finalize Interface (9th week)                 - Final implementation by Donald, Matt and Denise                 - Final Paper Draft by Donald, Matt and Denise *Phases 4 and 5 are iterative and may thus be repeated as necessary over the 2-3 weeks alloted to them

  10. Live Demo http://www.burbankparanormal.com/inf132

  11. Thank You! Questions?

More Related