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 ]

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 StrategiesModule Code:COM621Module Leader:Level:6Assessment Title:Solent Alumni Programme SystemAssessment Number:AE1Assessment Type:Report + PrototypeRestrictions on Time/Word Count:3000 wordsConsequence 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:IndividualAssessment Weighting:100%Issue Date:30 Sept. 2021Hand In Date:21/1/2022Planned Feedback Date:04/02/2022Mode of Submission:on-line via SOLNumber 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.

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:

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

AB CDF Analysis of User experience requirements, usability planning & design (ref L.O. K1,C1,P1) Able to critically analyse UX Identification,problem and conduct a thoroughGood understanding of UXAble to recognise a UXCan identify some keyanalysis, planning ofanalysis, plan & design of aanalysis techniques andresearch issues and apply aelements of the HCIa poor standarddevelopment problem, selectmethodologies evidencedseries of stepsproblem and plan a set ofwhich does not meeteffectively between differentby set of UX analyticalin providing a solution to aactions to achieve that taskor address problemalternatives and provideartefacts. Able to apply ausability & interactionbased upon a given method.area. Does not reachjustification in the context ofsuitable,development problem.Although sufficient has flawsrequired threshold.problem and in the light oflogical series of stepsHowever, analysis orin elements and/or actions,Doesn’t include UXexisting HCI theory.effectively anddesign may be weak inand/or method. Analysis hasartefact.To include: User analysis, taskconsistently in providingparts or use of thethe minimum required analysis, screena solution to a usabilitymethodology inconsistent.elements that exceed the designs, windows hierarchy& interaction/softwareTo include: User analysis,threshold. diagrams etc. Moredevelopment problem. Totask analysis, screen complete designs will includeinclude: User analysis, taskdesigns, windows hierarchy establishment ofanalysis, screendiagrams. usability requirements fordesigns, windows hierarchy subsequent evaluation.diagrams. Implementation of Design and Evaluation (ref L.O. K1,C1) Able to produce a usable andCan implement a designCan implement an HCICan apply visualDoes not reachrobust interface with fullyspec. in full, within aproblem solution from aenvironment design toolsrequired threshold.functional components from avisual environmentdesign specificationand techniques in solving aImplementation &given specification fullywell-informed byinformed by evaluation.structured and/or userevaluationinformed by evaluation.evaluation whileThe specification may notrelated problem informed byinadequate.Demonstrates exceptional skillrespecting goodbe implemented in fullevaluation. However, the in the use of the visualprofessional HCIand/or the system may notsolution may be partial or development environment.principles and practice.be sufficiently robust.may employ only a subset of Comprehensive and thoroughSome robust usabilitySome evaluation / testingthe 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 aAble to define andAble to define and reflectAble to describe and partlyDoes not reachrigorous critique of key areas inreflect upon key areas inon key areas in the contextreflect on some keyrequired threshold.the context of very clearlythe context of well-of recognized HCI issues.elements within the HCIIdentification &defined HCI issues and todefined HCI issues andSome solid criticalarea. Definition and criticalappraisal of a poorevaluate the solution and theprovide a criticalevaluation against originalevaluation is superficial.standard which failssolution strategy with referenceassessment of actionsrequirements though this to reach requiredto existing theory. Able totaken. Able to identifycould be extended. threshold.assess the implications ofalternative solution adopting alternative solutionstrategies. strategies Knowledge and Understanding & Contribution (ref L.O. C1,T1) Demonstrates a detailedComprehensive overallDemonstrates familiaritySatisfactory understandingDoes not reachrecognition and knowledge ofunderstanding of issueswith issues and practice inand identification of HCIrequired threshold.theory & practice in the context& practice in the contextthe context of human-issues, design capabilities ,Inaccuracies /of human digital interaction andof human digitaldigital interaction with aevaluation issues andomissions in areas ofan in-depth identification andinteraction with asoftware model.functionally of the interfacetheory & practice mayunderstanding of concepts.software model. HasReasonable familiarity withand software model butbe substantial withHas the ability to synthesizeread around the subjectrecommended reading.lacking in depth andirrelevancies.and apply information in theand is able to integrateSome gaps in significantbreadth. Minor contributionStruggles or fails tosolution of a problem inand organiseareas. Contribution toto group. Poor writtenengage withconjunction with team. Makes ainformation. Has clearlygroup is acceptablyreflection on workconcepts, issuesfull well managed & positiveworked with the teammanaged with some gapscontributed to group withwithin HCI. Verycontribution to work producedand made a significantin depth and breadth.little or no examplelittle or no reflectionby group. Is able to reflect fullycontribution toWritten reflection ofartefacts, poor referencing.on contribution withon how contribution is madegroup/team work. Ablecontribution is constructed no example artefacts.with fully referenced clearto reflect on howclearly with some gaps and example artefacts.contribution is made withfew example artefacts referenced examples.which may not be clearly referenced. Presentation & planning (ref L.O. C1,P1,T1) Comprehensive, detailed,Provides a coherentProvides a coherent styleMeets the basic guidelinesDoes not reachcoherent, & consistentclear well plannedand structure for thefor a given presentation andrequired threshold.throughout with no errors ofwhole. Consistent insubject in hand with somepresentational style.Aspects substantiallyrationale reasoning or fact,rationale, reasoning,structural and informationEvidence of planning.unclear, incoherent orVery 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 OutcomeEvidence (pg #) NotesPersonal Learning Outcome1. 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.

The Ethics Policy is contained within Section 2S of the Academic Handbook:

The British Education Research Association (BERA) research guidelines are useful for your surveys and interviews.

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!

The post COM621 UX Strategy appeared first on Universal Assignment.

Get Instant Help on WhatsApp

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

Ethics Policy

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