Identify and elaborate the main features of the websites, drawing on your first impression of the websites, accessibility, navigation, homepage, etc. (Refer to lecture slides and textbook)

1. Provide an overview and description of the nominated websites.
2. Identify and elaborate the main features of the websites, drawing on your first impression of
the websites, accessibility, navigation, homepage, etc. (Refer to lecture slides and textbook)
3. Compare and contrast the two websites against the:
• HCI design principles (find more details below)
• Usability principles (find more details below)
4. Based on your critique and analysis in items (1) to (3) above, provide a recommendation on
how the websites should be improved. Conversely, if further improvement is not required, then
provide the reasons why that this is the case.

Attachments:HOLMES
INSTITUTE
FACULTY
OF HIGHER
EDUCATION
UNDERGRADUATE
PROGRAM
Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines
Trimester T1 2020
Unit Code HS2031
Unit Title Human Computer Interaction (HCI)
Assessment Type Individual Assignment
Assessment Title HCI in-depth evaluation for websites
Purpose of the
assessment (with
ULO Mapping)
Students will be able to:
a. Understand basic concepts and theories relating to Human-Computer
interaction (HCI) and user interfaces
b. Demonstrate an understanding and appreciation of user interface design,
evaluation and technologies
c. Demonstrate skills in designing and evaluating interactive systems and webbased applications
Weight 15% of the total assessments
Total Marks 100% scaled to 15%
Word limit 1000-1500 words
Due Date Week 08
Submission
Guidelines
• All work must be submitted on Blackboard by the due date along with a completed
Assignment Cover Page.
• The assignment must be in MS Word format, 1.5 spacing, 11-pt Calibri (Body)
font and 2 cm margins on all four sides of your page with appropriate section
headings.
• Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately
at the end in a reference list using Harvard referencing style.
Assignment 1 Specification
The purpose of the report is to provide a critical evaluation of the nominated websites and to support
your observations and recommendation convincingly. By performing an in-depth evaluation of the
following websites:
Website 1: https://www.chemistwarehouse.com.au/
Website 2: https://truelinkswear.com/
Upon the completion of the task, you are to provide a formal report documenting your critical
evaluation of the two websites. The report should draw particular attention to the interactive aspects
and user interface design of the website. Support your critique with appropriate HCI design and
evaluation principles as described inChapter text book. 1, 2, and 4 of your textbook (Shneiderman &
Plaisant, 2010).
REPORT STRUCTURE:
1. Introduction – State the purpose and objectives of the report.
2. Discussion – Build your arguments into a cohesive thread, presenting your observations and
findings that you have collated from section (1) to (3) from ‘WHAT TO INCLUDE’ section.
3. Recommendation – This is the section where you present your recommendations —Item (4)
from the ‘What to include’ section.
4. Conclusion – Summarise your findings, consolidating and drawing attention to the main points
of the report.
5. References. (a minimum of 4 references)
WHAT TO INCLUDE:
1. Provide an overview and description of the nominated websites.
2. Identify and elaborate the main features of the websites, drawing on your first impression of
the websites, accessibility, navigation, homepage, etc. (Refer to lecture slides and textbook)
3. Compare and contrast the two websites against the:
• HCI design principles (find more details below)
• Usability principles (find more details below)
4. Based on your critique and analysis in items (1) to (3) above, provide a recommendation on
how the websites should be improved. Conversely, if further improvement is not required, then
provide the reasons why that this is the case.
PLEASE NOTE:
• Except for item (4) of the above, all assertions relating to user interface design principles (e.g.
statements like ‘blue text on red background is a poor colour combination’) must be supported
by references or critical observation. You can cite additional scholarly references other than the
textbook. (Note: Do not use Wikipedia as a source of reference).
• You can also snapshot the parts you evaluate from the site and show it in your report for more
clarity evidence. And Figures Tables and or diagrams can be added as needed.
• All assignments must be submitted electronically ONLY, uploaded to Blackboard and
Submission of SafeAssign. Submission deadlines are strictly enforced and a late submission
incurs penalties.
• DO NOT SHARE YOUR ASSIGNMENT WITH OTHER STUDENTS under no
circumstances even after the deadline and after you submitted it in the Blackboard. If there will
be any similarity detected by SafeAssign or the marker, it is an academic misconduct case and
BOTH of the students will get ZERO and will be reported to the Dean academic.
USEFUL INFORMATION:
HCI design Principles: Shneiderman’s “Eight Golden Rules of Interface Design”
These rules were obtained from the text Designing the User Interface by Ben Shneiderman.
Shneiderman proposed this collection of principles that are derived heuristically from experience
and applicable in most interactive systems after being properly refined, extended, and interpreted
[9]. To improve the usability of an application it is important to have a well-designed interface.
Shneiderman’s “Eight Golden Rules of Interface Design” are a guide to good interaction design.
1. Strive for consistency:
Consistent sequences of actions should be required in similar situations; identical terminology
should be used in prompts, menus, and help screens; and consistent commands should be employed
throughout.
2. Enable frequent users to use shortcuts
As the frequency of use increases, so do the user’s desires to reduce the number of interactions and
to increase the pace of interaction. Abbreviations, function keys, hidden commands, and macro
facilities are very helpful to an expert user.
3. Offer informative feedback
For every operator action, there should be some system feedback. For frequent and minor actions,
the response can be modest, while for infrequent and major actions, the response should be more
substantial.
4. Design dialog to yield closure
Sequences of actions should be organized into groups with a beginning, middle, and end. The
informative feedback at the completion of a group of actions gives the operators the satisfaction of
accomplishment, a sense of relief, the signal to drop contingency plans and options from their minds,
and an indication that the way is clear to prepare for the next group of actions.
5. Offer simple error handling
As much as possible, design the system so the user cannot make a serious error. If an error is made,
the system should be able to detect the error and offer simple, comprehensible mechanisms for
handling the error.
6. Permit easy reversal of actions
This feature relieves anxiety, since the user knows that errors can be undone; it thus encourages
exploration of unfamiliar options. The units of reversibility may be a single action, a data entry, or
a complete group of actions.
7. Support internal locus of control
Experienced operators strongly desire the sense that they are in charge of the system and that the
system responds to their actions. Design the system to make users the initiators of actions rather
than the responders.
8. Reduce short-term memory load
The limitation of human information processing in short-term memory requires that displays be kept
simple, multiple page displays be consolidated, window-motion frequency be reduced, and
sufficient training time be allotted for codes, mnemonics, and sequences of actions.
From http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/almstrum/cs370/elvisino/rules.html
5 Usability Measures:
– Time to learn
How long does it take for typical members of the community to learn relevant task?
– Speed of performance
How long does it take to perform relevant benchmarks?
– Rate of errors by users
How many and what kinds of errors are made during benchmark tasks?
– Retention over time
Frequency of use and ease of learning help make for better user retention
– Subjective satisfaction
Allow for user feedback via interviews, free-form comments and satisfaction scales
Marking criteria
Marking
criteria
Weighting
Presentation (Report structure, Layout, Grammar and spelling, Written style
and expression)
10%
Referencing 10%
Relevance to HCI principles 30%
Quality of evaluation 30%
Recommendations and justification 20%
TOTAL Weight for this assignment marking: 100 (Total of 100 marks to be
scaled to 15% of actual marks for this unit)
100%
Marking Rubrics
Grades Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory
Introduction Demonstrated Demonstrated Demonstrate Demonstrated Did not
/20 excellent very good d good satisfactory demonstrate
ability to think ability to think ability to think ability to think ability to think
critically and
sourced
critically but did
not source
critically and
sourced
critically and
did not source
critically and did
not source
reference reference reference reference reference material
material material material material appropriately
appropriately appropriately appropriately appropriately
Discussion Demonstrated Demonstrated Demonstrate Demonstrated Did not
/40 excellent excellent d ability to ability to think demonstrate
ability to think ability to think think critically critically and ability to think
critically and critically but and sourced did not source critically and did
sourced did not source reference reference not source
reference reference material material reference material
material
appropriately
material
appropriately
appropriately appropriately appropriately
Recommendation Logic is clear Consistency Mostly Adequate Argument is
/20 and easy to logical and consistent cohesion and confused and
follow with convincing logical and conviction disjointed
strong
arguments
convincing
Conclusion All elements Components Components Most Proposal lacks
/10 are present present with present and components structure.
and very well
integrated.
good cohesive mostly well
integrated
present
Harvard or IEEE Clear styles Clear Generally Sometimes Lacks consistency
Reference style with excellent referencing good clear with many errors
/10 source of style referencing referencing
references. style style