Schedule

Week 1:	1/8	Introduction: What is HCI? slides: 20180108-intro.pptx
	1/10	Introduction: What is design? … and usability? slides: 20180110-design-overview.pptx
	1/12	Design vs. Science Designerly Ways of Knowing: Design Discipline Versus Design Science
Week 2:	1/17	Capabilities: Model Human Processor The model human processor: a model for making engineering calculations on human performance
	1/19	HCI research source CHI Contribution Types
Week 3:	1/22	Capabilities
	1/24	Capabilities slides: 20180124-laws.pptx Information Theoretic Models of HCI: A Comparison of the Hick-Hyman Law and Fitts’ Law *** Read part 5 only ***
	1/26	Design » methods » Contextual design Contextual Design
Week 4:	1/29	Design » methods » Paper prototyping Paper prototyping	declare groups, due 2/2 (Fri)
	1/31	Design » methods » Mockups/Wireframes/Prototypes Mockups vs. Wireframes vs. Prototype. Which one to use when?
	2/2	Design » foundations » affordances, mental models Read chapter 1: Psychopathology of everyday things Video: Don Norman TED talk The Design of Everyday Things
Week 5:	2/5	Design » methods » Paper prototyping » Demos	HW01: Prototype, due 2/4 (Sun) synopsis, due 2/9 (Fri)
	2/7	"
	2/9	Design » foundations » goals, actions Read chapter 4: Knowing what to do The Design of Everyday Things
Week 6:	2/12	Design » foundations » direct manipulation Direct manipulation: a step beyond programming languages
	2/14	Design » problem solving » Brainstorming A Reexamination of Brainstorming Research: Implications for Research and Practice
	2/16	"
Week 7:	2/19	Design » formalisms » QOC notation for design rationales Questions, options, and criteria: Elements of design space analysis	proposal, due 2/23 (Fri)
	2/21	Design » formalisms » cognitive dimensions of notations Notational Systems – the Cognitive Dimensions of Notations framework
	2/23	" No reading today
Week 8:	2/26	Web development: HTML	v0.1, due 3/2 (Fri)
	2/28	Web development: JavaScript
	3/2	Web development: JavaScript
Week 9:	3/5	Human Error? No, Bad Design Ch 5 of DoET	HW02: Undo, due 3/7 (Wed)
	3/7	"
	3/9	Web development: Frameworks
Week 10:	3/19	Usable security: problems slides: 20180319-security_problems.pptx	v0.5, due 3/23 (Fri)
	3/21	Usable security: solutions
	3/23	NO CLASS
Week 11:	3/26	"
	3/28	React (MVC) walk-through
	3/30	Usability testing ES6 and Beyond Cheat Sheet Heuristic evaluation form, from Meg Kurdziolek Heuristic evaluation reading at MIT course Jakob Nielsen: “10 Usability Heuristics for User Interace Design” Jakob Nielsen: “How to conduct a heuristic evaluation” Ben Shneiderman: “Eight Golden Rules of Interface Design” slides: 20180330-evaluation.pptx
Week 12:	4/2	Experimental methods » questions, hypotheses Read pp. 191-200 (through “Evaluating Your Hypothesis” In lieu of response: Propose 5 HCI-related experiments, in terms of the hypothesis you would test. You don't need to explain further (unless necessary for understanding). This can be a total of 5 sentences. Experimental Research in HCI	HW03: MVC, due 4/6 (Fri) video storyboard, due 4/6 (Fri)
	4/4	Experimental methods » variables, designs Read pp. 200-214 (stop just before “Statistical Analysis” In lieu of response: Copy-paste your hypotheses from Monday. Then, for each one, give a brief outline of an experiment, including the design type (within/between), IVs, DVs, covariates, and randomization/counter-balancing strategy. You do not need to write paragraphs; keep it brief. Experimental Research in HCI
	4/6	Experimental methods » analysis, framing Read pp. 214-222 (stop just before “References for Becoming …” In lieu of response: Evaluate each of your experiments with respect to the M.A.G.I.C. criteria. Experimental Research in HCI
Week 13:	4/9	" We will have one more reading about evaluation.
	4/11	Hands: skin Fingerio: Using active sonar for fine-grained finger tracking
	4/13	Guest lecture: Prof. Hong Tan
Week 14:	4/16	Survey research: planning Read pp. 229-240. Stop before “Questionnaire Design and Biases”. Survey Research in HCI
	4/18	Survey research: design Read pp. 240-250 + 254-259. Start at “Questionnaire Design and Biases”. Stop before “Review and Survey Pretesting”. Start at “Data analysis and reporting”. Stop before “Exercises”. In lieu of a response, there will be a short exercise. Survey Research in HCI
	4/20	Hands: augmentation Skinput: appropriating the body as an input surface
Week 15:	4/23	" No reading resource: legibility_notes.pdf slides: 20180423-visual_design.pptx	report, due 4/23 (Mon) video, due 4/26 (Thu)
	4/25	" No reading handout: course_summary.pdf
	4/27	Project videos

Readings

Responses

For each reading, write a response (≈150-300 words) and post it to Blackboard by 2:30pm on the day the reading is listed for. You may give a mini-review (i.e., what was strong and/or weak), a rebuttal, a detailed comparison to something you have worked on or read, or some combination of those. Your response should demonstrate that you read and understood it, without summarizing. You can also describe something you found surprising, but be clear about why it went against your expectations.

Responses should be readable and concise. Bullets and bold text are encouraged.

Responses are intended to spearhead discussion in class. We will frequently refer to individual responses.

Pitfalls

1. Do not summarize (e.g., “The paper says that __.”).
2. Be specific and/or give reasons (e.g., “__ seems good.”).
3. Avoid empty sentences (e.g., “I really like __.” or “__ is interesting.”)
4. Comment on the ideas in the reading, not the writing (e.g., “The introduction is not clear.”) or superficial aspects of the presentation (e.g., “Figure ___ is hard to read when printed in B&W.”). Those things are important, but that's not what this excercise is about.
5. Do not copy any text verbatim from anywhere, unless it is in quotation marks. If you quote from anything other than the reading you are writing about, be sure to site the source.

Scoring

Most responses will get 1 point. Those that are exceptionally insightful and clear will get 2 points. Those that are very vague, inaccurate, or merely paraphrase the abstract will get 0 points.

Starting in week 23, there will be a couple very short questions to answer about each reading, regarding the contribution type. This will be explained on 1/12/2018.

I am making the submission time (2:30pm) as late as possible, while still giving me time to read them before class. If that becomes a challenge, I might shift it earlier later on. Let's see how this goes.

How to read papers for this course

Many people find it easier to read papers if they have a purpose in mind.  As you read each paper, you might find it helpful to focus on a few questions:

1. What was the contribution type? (examples)
2. What do the authors claim as their key contributions?
3. What strategies, methods, and technologies were used?
4. What generalizable knowledge does the work contribute?  What research questions does it address?  How will this benefit other researchers?
5. Do you find the conclusions convincing?  Are the results well-supported by data obtained with sound methods?
6. What aspects of the work you find strongest? … and weakest?
7. What would be a natural next step for the work?

Note: These questions are included to help guide your reading. They won't apply to all of the readings.  Unless otherwise announced, you do not need to answer these questions in your response.