Solent University

Coursework Assessment Submission

Module Name:    UX Strategy

Module Code:    COM621

Module Leader:

Assessment Submission Date:

Student Number:

UX Strategy

Contents

Part 1 – Introduction to System (1K words) 2

1.0 Introduction. 2

1.1       Current SUAA UX Design and Business Model 2

1.2       Academic and Market Research. 3

1.3       Analysis. 3

1.4       Summary. 3

2.0 Essay 2 (1K words) 3

2.1 User research. 3

2.2 User Journey. 3

2.3 Summary. 3

Add web link to (max 5 min) video of User Journey analysis. 3

3.0 Essay 3 (1K words) 3

3.1 Prototype  – Add web link to prototype sample. 3

3.2 Usability Testing. 3

3.3 Summary. 3

4.0 Conclusions and Recommendations. 3

5.0 References. 3

Assessment Appendix. 5

Learning Outcomes: Self-Assessment (LOs – mapped for each of the 3 sections. Evidence all 5 are addressed.) 10

Ethics Policy. 11

Part 1 – Introduction to System (1K words)

1.0 Introduction

[ Add LO Number(s) for each section they are addressed ]
What is the context?

Who are the users?

What is the system?

What is the problem?

Why is it important?

Who should benefit from it?

What impact does technology have on that context?

What is the feature list comparison of existing systems?

1.1         Current SUAA UX Design and Business Model

[ Add ]

1.2         Academic and Market Research

[ Add ]

1.3         Analysis

[ Add ]

 

1.4         Summary

[ Add ]

2.0 Essay 2 (1K words)

2.1 User research

2.2 User Journey

2.3 Summary

Add web link to (max 5 min) video of User Journey analysis.

3.0 Essay 3 (1K words)

3.1 Prototype  – Add web link to prototype sample.

3.2 Usability Testing

3.3 Summary

4.0 Conclusions and Recommendations

5.0 References

Harvard Style (Surname, 1st Initial. (Date), ‘Title’ – Publication / Web address <visit date>

 

Assessment Appendix

Assessment Details

Module Title:	UX Strategies
Module Code:	COM621
Module Leader:
Level:	6
Assessment Title:	Solent Alumni Programme System
Assessment Number:	AE1
Assessment Type:	Report + Prototype
Restrictions on Time/Word Count:	3000 words
Consequence of not meeting time/word count limit:	It is essential that assignments keep within the time/word count limit stated above. Any work beyond the maximum time/word length permitted will be disregarded and not accounted for in the final grade. *
Individual/Group:	Individual
Assessment Weighting:	100%
Issue Date:	30 Sept. 2021
Hand In Date:	21/1/2022
Planned Feedback Date:	04/02/2022
Mode of Submission:	on-line via SOL
Number of copies to be submitted:	1 Copy per student including all parts of assignment
Anonymous Marking	This assessment is exempt from anonymous marking.

Assessment Task

DESIGN BRIEF AND TERMS OF REFERENCE

This project aims to research and analyse the UX Strategy for the Solent University Alumni Association (SUAA). A project Gantt chart will be needed to produce a work plan for the 3 K word final report. Weekly progress will be shared in each class session and online. Students will do a case study analysis of the Solent University Alumni Association current website and related services / resources. The main university contacts are Mike Toy (SUAA manager) and Mark Humphrys (Marketing Manager). Please coordinate your communication with these staff members so we don’t send too many individual emails. Their support time is limited as our ‘clients’.

This is a summary of the overall assessment tasks:

1. A market research study will be done with at least 1 other university similar to SU.

1. Conduct a review of the Solent University mission, vision, value etc.

statements in light of corporate social responsibility to identify any gaps.

2. Critically compare this to at least 1 comparable UK university.

3. Critically compare this website to at least 1 other UK university alumni

website. NOTE: figures and tables can be put in the report appendix to save

on word count.

2. Review the SUAA website for UX strategy

including the services and resources offered.

3. The data collected and analysed will help inform some recommended changes to

the resources e.g. UX designs.

4. All ethical guidelines for research and NDA (non-disclosure agreements) or data

protection policies will be followed. e.g. consent forms for current Computing

students will be used to get primary data on the current website and resources,

compared to the student’s recommendations.

5. COM621 students will compile short interview questions for Mike and Mark as part of the business and website review process to submit as a group (not individuals).

6. Any surveys or interviews will done with current students (prospective alumni), not

with SO graduates due to data privacy regulations.

7. A 3K word summary report will be provided based on last year’s assessment to

provide consistency as detailed below.

NB: Recommendations will not be implemented. A summary presentation video will

be made from student submissions.

The project will be broken into four distinctive parts, which are explained below.

The project will be broken into four distinctive parts, which are explained below.

Part 1 – Introduction to System

Deliverable 1000 Words

Part 1 will be the assimilation of relevant information about the functionality of the system and requirements for the interface based on the type of user and frequency of use and clearly defined business goals. This section aims at what stockholders/shareholders want?  An introduction should be provided to introduce your team idea, what solution it solves using context analysis or based on gain and pain model.

Introduction should provide answers to the following questions:

What is the context?

Who are the users?

What is the system?

What is the problem?

Why is it important?

Who should benefit from it?

What impact does technology have on that context?

What is the feature list comparison of existing systems?

Part 2 – User Research Analysis

Deliverable 1000 Words

In UX, it is important to understand who the users are and what are their needs. In order to do that you should utilise a variety of UX methods, minimum required:

• Contextual Interviews – Enable you to observe users in their natural environment, giving you a better understanding of the way users work.

• Surveys – A series of questions asked to multiple users of your idea.

You should produce a valid list of user groups (Demographics, Geographic, Psychographic and behavioural) attributes table. You must also produce a list of user needs in a form of a table.

Part 3 – User Journey

Deliverable Poster /Video

At this point, as per part 1 and part 2, you should have two essential UX outcomes available, User Research findings in a form user needs and objectives and a clearly defined business goal. In this section, you are required to produce a fully detailed user journey including all the following elements:

1. User Persona (Minimum 2 persona representing two typical user groups)

• User Scenario (Minimum 2)
• User Goals

• Flow of Tasks/Information/Screens/IXDs/Contents/Information Architecture

• Empathy Mapping
• Usability Metrics

Part 4 – Prototype

Deliverable prototype

Part 4 will be the production of a prototype. You are required to produce the prototype interface using an appropriate prototyping tool. Each team member is responsible for ensuring that their design area is prototyped. Populate your interface prototype with example data sufficient to demonstrate the prototypes functionality.

You will be required to demonstrate your software prototype in your normal Tutorial, times to be advised during class by the unit tutor. Please make sure that your prototype is accessible online. Make sure that when you chose the prototyping tool to consider whether it could be exported and extracted for SOL submission. Alternatively, a web link of the prototype needs to be valid for at least 90 days.

Part 5 – Usability Testing

Deliverable 1000 Words

Part five will be the usability testing. As part of your interface implementation process, you will have to test your interface. Your will be responsible for what UX or Usability testing you carrying out, and accordingly, design the test and have it approved by your tutor. You should recruit participants to test the project, with predefined demographical criteria, you will be responsible to bring them to the lab and test your interface. Data analysis of this part should inform the final design, and this should be documented in 1000 words report supported with heat maps and gaze plots.

Usability testing metrics:

• Layout: Inability to detect something users need to find; Aesthetic problems; Unnecessary Information.

• Terminology: Unable to understand the terminology.
• Feedback: User does not receive relevant feedback or it is inconsistent with what the user expects.
• Comprehension: Inability to understand the instructions given to users on the site.
• Data Entry: Problems with entering information.
• Navigation: Problems with finding users way around the test site/system/software.

Assessment criteria

A	B		C		D	F
Analysis of User experience requirements, usability planning & design (ref L.O. K1,C1,P1)
Able to critically analyse UX						Identification,
problem and conduct a thorough	Good understanding of UX	Able to recognise a UX			Can identify some key	analysis, planning of
analysis, plan & design of a	analysis techniques and	research issues and apply a			elements of the HCI	a poor standard
development problem, select	methodologies evidenced	series of steps			problem and plan a set of	which does not meet
effectively between different	by set of UX analytical	in providing a solution to a			actions to achieve that task	or address problem
alternatives and provide	artefacts. Able to apply a	usability & interaction			based upon a given method.	area. Does not reach
justification in the context of	suitable,	development problem.			Although sufficient has flaws	required threshold.
problem and in the light of	logical series of steps	However, analysis or			in elements and/or actions,	Doesn’t include UX
existing HCI theory.	effectively and	design may be weak in			and/or method. Analysis has	artefact.
To include: User analysis, task	consistently in providing	parts or use of the			the minimum required
analysis, screen	a solution to a usability	methodology inconsistent.			elements that exceed the
designs, windows hierarchy	& interaction/software	To include: User analysis,			threshold.
diagrams etc. More	development problem. To	task analysis, screen
complete designs will include	include: User analysis, task	designs, windows hierarchy
establishment of	analysis, screen	diagrams.
usability requirements for	designs, windows hierarchy
subsequent evaluation.	diagrams.
Implementation of Design and Evaluation (ref L.O. K1,C1)
Able to produce a usable and	Can implement a design	Can implement an HCI			Can apply visual	Does not reach
robust interface with fully	spec. in full, within a	problem solution from a			environment design tools	required threshold.
functional components from a	visual environment	design specification			and techniques in solving a	Implementation &
given specification fully	well-informed by	informed by evaluation.			structured and/or user	evaluation
informed by evaluation.	evaluation while	The specification may not			related problem informed by	inadequate.
Demonstrates exceptional skill	respecting good	be implemented in full			evaluation. However, the
in the use of the visual	professional HCI	and/or the system may not			solution may be partial or
development environment.	principles and practice.	be sufficiently robust.			may employ only a subset of
Comprehensive and thorough	Some robust usability	Some evaluation / testing			the appropriate techniques.
evaluation and usability testing.	evaluation / testing.	will have been carried out.			Evaluation superficial,
					marginal testing.
Identification and appraisal of key areas of work (ref L.O. C1,P1)
Able to define and conduct a	Able to define and	Able to define and reflect			Able to describe and partly	Does not reach
rigorous critique of key areas in	reflect upon key areas in	on key areas in the context			reflect on some key	required threshold.
the context of very clearly	the context of well-	of recognized HCI issues.			elements within the HCI	Identification &
defined HCI issues and to	defined HCI issues and	Some solid critical			area. Definition and critical	appraisal of a poor
evaluate the solution and the	provide a critical	evaluation against original			evaluation is superficial.	standard which fails
solution strategy with reference	assessment of actions	requirements though this				to reach required
to existing theory. Able to	taken. Able to identify	could be extended.				threshold.
assess the implications of	alternative solution
adopting alternative solution	strategies.
strategies
Knowledge and Understanding & Contribution (ref L.O. C1,T1)
Demonstrates a detailed	Comprehensive overall	Demonstrates familiarity			Satisfactory understanding	Does not reach
recognition and knowledge of	understanding of issues	with issues and practice in			and identification of HCI	required threshold.
theory & practice in the context	& practice in the context	the context of human-			issues, design capabilities ,	Inaccuracies /
of human digital interaction and	of human digital	digital interaction with a			evaluation issues and	omissions in areas of
an in-depth identification and	interaction with a	software model.			functionally of the interface	theory & practice may
understanding of concepts.	software model. Has	Reasonable familiarity with			and software model but	be substantial with
Has the ability to synthesize	read around the subject	recommended reading.			lacking in depth and	irrelevancies.
and apply information in the	and is able to integrate	Some gaps in significant			breadth. Minor contribution	Struggles or fails to
solution of a problem in	and organise	areas. Contribution to			to group. Poor written	engage with
conjunction with team. Makes a	information. Has clearly	group is acceptably			reflection on work	concepts, issues
full well managed & positive	worked with the team	managed with some gaps			contributed to group with	within HCI. Very
contribution to work produced	and made a significant	in depth and breadth.			little or no example	little or no reflection
by group. Is able to reflect fully	contribution to	Written reflection of			artefacts, poor referencing.	on contribution with
on how contribution is made	group/team work. Able	contribution is constructed				no example artefacts.
with fully referenced clear	to reflect on how	clearly with some gaps and
example artefacts.	contribution is made with	few example artefacts
	referenced examples.	which may not be clearly
		referenced.
Presentation & planning (ref L.O. C1,P1,T1)
Comprehensive, detailed,	Provides a coherent	Provides a coherent style			Meets the basic guidelines	Does not reach
coherent, & consistent	clear well planned	and structure for the			for a given presentation and	required threshold.
throughout with no errors of	whole. Consistent in	subject in hand with some			presentational style.	Aspects substantially
rationale reasoning or fact,	rationale, reasoning,	structural and information			Evidence of planning.	unclear, incoherent or
Very well planned.	Planning.	defects. Well planned.				missing

 

Learning Outcomes: Self-Assessment
(LOs – mapped for each of the 3 sections. Evidence all 5 are addressed.)

What you will be able to do after the module: Use the key words of the LOs.

Module Learning Outcome	Evidence (pg #) Notes	Personal Learning Outcome
1. Implement problem solving techniques into designing features and functionalities to produce industry level products.
2. Compare User Experience principles to accommodate different forms of interaction across multiple touchpoints (physical and/or digital), and to formulate and apply these principles in complex contexts.
3. Analyze proposed UX design solutions using a range of methodologies and techniques against goals, objectives and key performance indicators (KPIs).
4. Critically evaluate and validate solutions against goals, objectives and key performance indicators (KPIs) with a view to continuous improvement of the digital product or service.
5. Apply accessibility principles to digital product design.

 

Ethics Policy

The work being carried out by students must be in compliance with the Ethics Policy. Where there is an ethical issue, as specified within the Ethics Policy, then students will need an ethics release or an ethical approval prior to the start of the project.

1. The Ethics Policy is contained within Section 2S of the Academic Handbook:
2. The British Education Research Association (BERA) research guidelines are useful for your surveys and interviews.
3. For commercial research, you may want to use a free online NDA (Non-disclosure agreement) such as: I have read and applied the appropriate ethics guidelines for this assessment.

Get expert help for COM621 UX Strategy and many more. 24X7 help, plag free solution. Order online now!