GUIDELINES FOR SOFTWARE EVALUATION PORTFOLIO

In the portfolio, I will be looking for evidence of your grappling with interface evaluation. You are not expert interface designers or evaluators (yet). What you did in this three week exercise was to use what you already know, to harness the skills you already have to approximate a set of techniques for evaluation. The portfolio serves as a narrative of your wrestling with what counts as an evaluation.

Evidence for me means:

• All the work that you have done so far---the three iterations. Include everything, no matter how rough or crude it might be.
• Various representations of the evaluation space. A presentation is an externalization of thought processes. It can be a challenge to represent in two dimensional space thought processes. It is also a challenge to represent those processes in a form that communicate effectively to others. I'll be looking for your attempts to experiment with different ways of externally characterizing your evaluation activities.
• A written account/reflection back on the three week process chronicling the evolution of the portfolio. Questions you might use as guidelines include: How did you first interpret this task? How did your understanding of the task change as you moved through it? What accounts for the differences in iterations? What resources did you use and where did these come from? Did the evaluations of other students influence your activities? If so, how? (2 pages or more)

The design of your portfolio is important. Do your best to think of Michael and me as users. The packaging, layout etc. are the interface to the materials you are presenting as evidence of your evaluation activities. In a very real sense you are designing this interface for ease of use.

Grading:

A - Portfolio design that unambiguously communicates the functions and parts of the contents. Multiple representations of evaluation activity. Clear evidence of sustained engagement with the evaluation process. Reflective essay that demonstrates thoughtful analysis of the evolution of the portfolio and the rationale for that evolution.
B - Portfolio design that requires some work by the user to make sense of the functions and parts. A small selection of representations. A reflective essay that chronicles evaluation journey, but fails to really analyze the steps or rational for the steps.
C - Portfolio design that fails to direct user to its use. Minimal variety in representations. Clear indication of lack of engagement in the evaluation process. Canned, superficial account of evaluation journey.
D - Sloppy work in all of the above.

---

CS 4750 Home