(1) Improving our high-fidelity prototype
Our prototype is improved with some tiny updates so that the test users can have a more near to reality feel by heuristic evaluation and usability testing. We aim to create an easily usable interface for our potential users with corresponsing changes to user tasks.
(2) heuristic evaluation (Phase 1 and 2)
Phase 1 Prepare
Use case:
You have finished a long day of work and would like to have a game night with your friends. After consultation, you decided to organize a game night together online on Social Play. You already have an account on Social Play and you would like to invite your friends join your group. You have sent a link via Social Play to your friend by email. After your friend has logged in, you have started to play together in a meeting.
Tasks for evaluators:
1.register/log-in on Social Play
2.meet with your friends in your group
3.search a game you want to play
4.enjoy your Gaming Night with your friends with Games together with chat
Online form for evaluation collection:
we use google form to collect our feedbacks. The google form is designed using the template given by the lecturer.
Phase 2 Evaluation
We evaluate the protype of JuurMate under the scenario:
Anwendungsfall:
Du musst als Hausaufgabe einen Rechtsfall prüfen. Aktuell bist du auf dem Weg nach Hause und möchtest schon mal damit beginnen. Also öffnest du die JuurMate Anwendung auf deinem Notebook. Nach dem öffnen erscheint ein Auswahlbildschirm, bei dem du dich entscheiden kannst, ob du die geleitete Variante der Anwendung oder die ungeleitete Variante benutzen möchtest. Mit der geleiteten Variante kannst du nun ganz einfach in der Bahn auf dem Nachhauseweg ein einziges Schema dynamisch generieren lassen, dass dir dabei hilft deine Hausaufgabe zu Hause schneller zu beenden.
Aufgaben:
1.Fertige mithilfe der Anwendung ein Prüfungsschema zum Prüfen einer Rechtsfrage zu Mord an.
2. Öffne ein altes Schema, das im Vorhinein abgespeichert wurde.
3. Suche nach einem Tatbestand.
Documentation and Reflection
The individual evaluation was done separately. Ina and Brendan filled in the online form with their observations, Xin has problem filling in the form, therefore documented on a document with screenshots.
Summary of Evaluation
Based on our evaluations, we found out that (3) user control and freedom and (8) Aesthetic and Minimalist Design are the most violated guidelines. We have found out some critics in common, for example once we entered in a case, there is no „back“ button to go back to previous page. The only choice we could do is to click on the „JuurMate“ and begin with the main page.
We also encountered some problems here, there are some problems we are not so sure to which guideline they belong to. Some heuristics are hard to be evaluated, since we don’t really find any error message in the prototype (we also don’t include them in our prototype). (7) Flexibility and Efficiency of Use is also a hard to be evaluated guideline.
Reflection
Who did what?
Ina improved prototype ready for evaluation. Ina and Brendan prepared the template in google form and described the test case of JuurMate. Xin described the test case of Social Play prototype. The heuristic evaluation regarding JuurMate was done individually. Xin then summarized the evaluation while creating the blogpost.
What have we learned?
We learned how to prepare a prototype for evaluation as well as the heuristic evaluation methods. My only concern was that since our prototyp is really simple at the moment but the evaluation guidelines seem to be well-rounded, is it the good timing to do the heuristic evaluation on such a simple prototype?
What went well?
The individuell evaluation went well (not without problems) even though with difficulties by problem categorization. We were happy that the templated are provided so only minor changes need to be done by us.
What do we want to improve?
The 1st task was some how confused since it is not so clear which preparation is for us and which step is for classmates. The evaluation form is not well established, it is really hard to summarize the severity of each guideline violation and to see the screenshots indicating the problems.
