HCID 530 | Evaluation Studio
Week 8 & 9 — Synthesis & Evaluative Methods
Prior to class on Week 8, my observation team consist of Jackie and Donglu has already gotten together and analyzed on our observation notes we each gathered from Blink Interactive. We first discussed our common findings based on the 5 coding themes Smart Technologies provided. These coding themes were:
Remote use — how are remote users meeting?
Interruptions — what interrupts the flow?
Prompts — what prompts someone to come up with use WB?
Tools/Interaction Models — how tools are used?
Documentation — how content are documented after meeting?
We then came up with 2 additional themes that we found it would be appropriate for this analysis:
Physical aspects — how the physical form of WB affect the meeting?
Stages — what are the stages of meeting and how do they affect WB use?
What I found interesting in this exercise was some of our assumptions became facts when we combined our notes together. Because the fact that I was not able to jot down every single detail in the meeting, and the fact that we were multitasking in observing, note taking, and solving problems as it arise, some details automatically became assumptions. Having multiple observers taking notes helped “covered” each other’s back.
During class in Week 8, we first reflected on what we learned during our group analysis exercise for Smart Technologies. We first had a lecture about the difference between analysis and synthesis. In short, analysis finds patterns and observations of interest in the data, while synthesis connects the data analysis to the project goals to develop recommendations for design, prototyping, and development.
We then formed small groups and further discussed what we found in common across different companies we’ve all observed. We discussed our own analysis within the group, and identified the top themes shared.
Then, as a class, we put this all together on the whiteboard. Interestingly, most of us had very common themes.
On week 9, we started off the class with grading rubrics for past and upcoming assignments. I personally though this was a bit waste of class time, as these can be read individually on Canvas. Nevertheless, some students found it very useful. After a break, we went over evaluative research, and UX principles. I found this lecture to be quite interesting as it nicely summarizes what we learned over the year in this program. I hope there will be another lecture like this near the end of our capstone project.
Finally, for the rest of the class time, each capstone team presented their project to the class. I really enjoyed seeing what other teams have done and will be working on in their capstone project. I think we should do this more often. The feedbacks received was quite valuable and kind of reassurance me that my team is on the right track. We were also able to recruit several MHCI+D students as our contextual inquiry participants.
For next week, my 2-person capstone team (Rick is currently on leave) will need to complete the Research Plan. We will pilot test our contextual inquiry and pick up the hardwares we ordered for product evaluation. We will then write up a Research Summary as final deliverable. A lot of work to do for such as small team!
