| |
| |
BCS 228 Human-Machine Interaction
Spring Semester 2004
|
Instructor: |
Keith S. Karn, Ph.D. Adjunct Assistant Professor 110 Meliora Hall (Mail box on 3rd floor) Phone: 271-9047 or 226-3893 |
Teaching Assistant: |
Luke Guerrero Junior Computer Science Phone 274-4890 lg003k@mail.rochester.edu |
OfficeHours: |
By appointment |
By appointment |
|
|
Texts: |
The Design of Everyday Things Donald A. Norman 1990. New York, Doubleday. |
||
|
An Introduction to Human Factors Engineering, Second Edition. Christopher D. Wickens, John D. Lee, Yili Liu & Sallie E. Gordon Becker. 2004. Upper Saddle River, NJ. Pearson / Prentice Hall. |
|||
|
Meetings: |
Tuesdays and Thursdays 7:40-8:55 PM in room 269, Meliora Hall |
||
About the Course:
The theme of this course is human-centered design. We will explore human capabilities and limitations (emphasizing cognitive factors such as perception, information processing, memory, and motor control) that must be considered in order to design human-machine systems that are safe, comfortable, efficient, and fun to use. By applying knowledge of these human factors in the design of a product students will bridge the gap between theory and practice. Team projects will be used to experience an iterative design process that includes analysis of user needs and product goals, conceptual design, physical design, prototyping, usability testing, and refining of the design.
Before starting the course, students should have a basic understanding of behavior and sensory processes, such as that taught in BCS 151 [Perception & Action] and BCS 110 [Neural Foundations of Behavior] or BCS 111 [Foundations of Cognitive Science].
Course Requirements and Grading:
Course requirements include reading, class participation, exercises, exams, and hands-on project work. The following scheme determines the students' grades.
Class participation and exercises 22%
Design Project 50
Midterm Exam 14
Final Exam 14
____________________________________________________
Total 100%
Course Requirements in More Detail:
Class Participation & Exercises (22% of final grade).
The course is intended to involve significant participation by students focused on discussion of the readings, class exercises, and the design project. Students are expected to read assignments before class and come to class prepared to discuss thoughts, ideas, questions, and examples from life experiences that relate to the topic. Readings from the textbooks and additional sources are outlined in the schedule. Additional readings may be added. Missing class for other than a documented medical condition or a religious holiday will reflect negatively on your class participation score.
Hands-on exercises (both in and outside of class) will illustrate lecture and reading material and often relate to the design project. Exercises will be collected or reviewed in class from time to time so the instructor can assess student progress. Exercises may include:
|
· Teamwork role-playing |
· Project planning |
|
· Task analysis |
· Story-boards and scenarios |
|
· User profiles |
· Paper prototyping |
|
· User requirements analysis |
· Icon design |
Design Project (50% of final grade).
The design project will involve collaborative learning and problem solving in small teams assigned by the instructor. This will be an in-depth design project including:
|
· Benchmarking competitive products |
· Documenting design decisions & rationale |
|
· Defining requirements & product goals |
· Physical design & prototyping |
|
· Establishing user profiles |
· Usability testing |
|
· Task analysis |
· Re-design based on test results |
|
· Logical design |
· In-class design presentation |
Each group member will receive an individual grade that is weighted by the individual's level of involvement in the project (as determined by the instructor with input from team members as necessary). Here is how the various parts of the project will contribute toward the student's course grade.
|
Front-end planning(user profiles, user requirements, benchmarking, etc.) |
10% |
|
Conceptual & logical design (design notebook including scenarios, task analysis, storyboards, logical flow diagrams, etc.) |
16 |
|
Usability test (test plan, methods, results) |
12 |
|
Physical design (final design, prototype, presentation) |
12 |
|
Total design project contribution to final grade |
50% |
Exams (each of two exams contribute 14% for a total of 28% of the final grade).
There will be one midterm exam and a final exam. These may be a combination of short answer, multiple choice, and essay questions.
Schedule
|
Day Date |
Topic |
Facilitator |
Reading Due |
|
Thursday 1/15 |
Instructor |
·
Wickens |
|
|
Tuesday 1/20 |
The Design of Everyday Things (Usability Evaluation Exercise) |
Instructor |
· Norman Ch. 1-4 · Sinclair et al. An electoral butterfly effect. |
|
Thursday 1/22 |
The Design of Everyday Things (Interdisciplinary Design Team Exercise) |
Instructor |
· Norman Ch. 5-7 · Hopkins When designers ignore consumers… · Kessler Designs that made consumers, reviewers cringe |
|
Tuesday 1/27 |
Instructor |
·
Wickens |
|
|
Thursday 1/29 |
Guest: Prof. R. Niemi |
· Niemi & Herrnson Beyond the Butterfly ·
Public Law
107-252: Help |
|
|
Tuesday 2/3 |
Front End Planning: User Profiles (User Profile Exercise) |
Instructor |
· Wickens p.357-360, ·
Cooper The
Inmates Are Running the Asylum, |
|
Thursday 2/5 |
Instructor |
· Ulrich & Eppinger Product Design and Development Ch. 3 · Wickens p.37-48 |
|
|
Tuesday 2/10 |
Front End Planning: Benchmarking to Set Usability Goals and Gather Design Ideas (Project Planning Exercise) |
Instructor |
· Ulrich & Eppinger Product Design and Development Chs. 4 & 5 Focus on p. 61-64 & 88 |
|
Thursday 2/12 |
Human
Characteristics: Movement, Biomechanics & Work Physiology |
Guest: Mr. P. Hickey |
·
Wickens |
|
Tuesday 2/17 |
Instructor |
·
Wickens |
|
|
Thursday 2/19 |
Instructor |
·
Wickens |
|
|
Tuesday 2/24 |
Conceptual Design: Task Analysis (Task Analysis Exercise) |
Instructor |
· Wickens p. 61-63, 50-58 ·
Hackos
& Redish |
|
Thursday 2/26 |
Conceptual Design: Scenarios, Storyboards, Brainstorming (Storyboard Exercise) |
Guest: Ms. K. Goldstein |
· Wickens p. 50-53, 405 ·
Nielsen
Usability Engineering. |
|
Tuesday 3/2 |
Guest: Ms. D. Litwiller |
·
Wickens |
|
|
Thursday 3/4 |
MIDTERM EXAM |
Teaching Assistant |
· All of the above |
Spring Break (Schedule continued on next page)
| Day Date |
Topic |
Facilitator |
Reading Due |
| Tuesday 3/16 |
Logical Design for Kiosk-based Products |
Guest: Dr. M. Gerard |
·
TBD Wickens
· TBD |
| Thursday 3/18 |
Guest: Mr. G. Davis |
· "Controls" sections from: Apple. Aqua Human Interface Guidelines · Windows XP - Visual Guidelines |
|
| Tuesday 3/23 |
Physical Design: Low Fidelity Prototyping (Paper Prototyping Exercise) |
Instructor |
· Wickens p. 396-406, 488-490 |
| Thursday 3/25 |
Physical Design: High Fidelity Prototyping (Screen prototyping exercises) |
Teaching Assistant |
· TBD |
| Tuesday 3/30 |
Instructor |
• Wickens Ch. 2, p.42-44, 57-60, 66-71, 475-479 |
|
| Thursday 4/1 |
Instructor |
• Wickens
Ch. 13 |
|
| Tuesday 4/6 |
Usability Assessment (Field trip - Xerox Usability Lab) |
Guest: Mr. M. Meetze |
· Louderback Hail to the Usability Test |
| Thursday 4/8 |
Safety, accidents, and human error |
Instructor |
·
Wickens · Casey Set Phasers on Stun (Salyut chapter) |
| Tuesday 4/13 |
Usability Test: Pilot |
Instructor |
• TBD
|
| Thursday 4/15 |
Guest: M. Krolczyk |
• TBD |
|
| Tuesday 4/20 |
Revising the Design Based on User Input / Current Topic in Design: Revolution vs. Evolution |
Instructor |
· Wickens p. 72-73, 380-382. ·
Levy Insanely
Great |
| Thursday 4/22 |
Instructor |
· Wickens p. 473-476 · Baecker et al. excerpts |
|
| Tuesday 4/27 |
Design Presentations: |
|
· |
| Thursday 4/29 |
Design Preentations |
· |
|
| Sunday, 5/9 @ 12:30 |
Final Exam (Date determined by registrar) |
Teaching Assistant |
· All of the above. |
Academic Honesty Relating to Group Project Work.
The University’s Academic Honesty Policy has been made clear to all students. This policy also pertains to the extensive group project work in this course. Each group member is expected to contribute equally. Any attempt to exaggerate your contributions to the group will be considered academically dishonest. All group members are accountable for reporting group deficiencies.
| Last modified:
1/21/2004 questions and comments about this site |