Get Cheapest Assignment in Australia, UK, US, UAE, Canada and NZ Order Now

COS70004 User-Centred Design


UCD Assignment S1 2022
ILO Apply scholarly and evidence-based approaches to software requirements elicitation and
Analyse software context of use (i.e., users, tasks and system environment) using a variety of
models to identify user requirements.
Generic skills
■ analysis skills
■ communication skills
Purpose: In this assessment piece will give you the opportunity to develop the ability to find and make use
of evidence from scholarly sources (i.e., academic literature). You will also need to understand
and analyse an unfamiliar domain. This is an independent research project.
This assessment is worth 15% of the unit.
It is graded out 20 marks.
Submit via Canvas.
No resubmissions are allowed for this task. Late penalties will be applied for late
Resources: Swinburne Library Human-Computer Interaction Reference Guide (in particular Databases/ACM
Digital Library)
Monash Universities Learning Support website for more assistance with academic writing.
Swinburne Library guide on how to reference
Deliverables Report on topic as specified below
Marking Criteria Report must demonstrate:
■ an in-depth knowledge of the current semester’s Assignment Topic
■ the appropriate use of references to support an argument
■ evidence of reading one or more of the following:
• text book (e.g., Hartson & Pyla) and/or other related books,
• published journal articles, government publications, etc
■ in-text referencing and reference section according to Harvard style
See the end of this document for a comprehensive marking guide for this assessment.
Additional Criteria Professional visual presentation and English expression
Academic Integrity
Word Limit 1,500 (min) to 2,500 (max) words
Late Penalty 10% of achieved mark per working day late

Assignment Topic
This Semester’s UCD Project EnergyShifter is focused on developing an app to people understand
their energy use patterns and to help them schedule their energy use to save
money. Although we have access to some interview data , we do not have the
resources to do a large scale study our-selves. Therefore, we are turning to the academic
literature to help us find information that might help us design EnergyShifter.
Imagine your team wants to explore how they can get people to increase their energy savings.
One potential issue is people not understanding how energy shifting works. Your task
for this assignment is to review Brewer, Verdezoto, Holst and Rasmussen’s (2015) paper on
using gamification to help people understand and use energy shifting.
What can be learned from their research that might help us develop a user interface for EnergyShifter?
Brewer, R S, Verdezoto, N, Holst, T & Rasmussen, M K 2015, ’Tough shift: Exploring
the complexities of shifting residential electricity use through a casual mobile
game’. Proceedings of the 2015 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction
in Play, pp. 307-317.
You may also find these papers helpful:
Brewer, R S, Verdezoto, N, Rasmussen, M K., Entwistle, J M, Grønbæk, K, Blunck,
H & Holst, T 2015, ’Challenge: Getting residential users to shift their electricity usage
patterns’. Proceedings of the 2015 ACM Sixth International Conference on Future
Energy Systems, 83-88.
Sweeney, J C, Kresling, J, Webb, D, Soutar, G N & Mazzarol, T 2013, ’Energy saving
behaviours: Development of a practice-based model’. Energy Policy, 61, pp.
Make sure you conclude your report with a set of recommendations and/or requirements
based on the research reviewed.
To prepare for this report:
■ Review how to cite and reference research articles (see Swin Library guide to Harvard
style referencing)

Suggested Assignment Structure
Title page:
■ Unit code and name
■ Assignment title
■ Your name
■ Tutor’s name
■ Word count
Executive Summary
Overview of report and key recommendations (less than 200 words)
Table of Contents
Make sure you use heading styles and use your word processor to autogenerate your table
of contents.
1 Introduction
In this section include:
■ Background information including purpose of report, definition of any key terms or concepts.
2 Body (Note: Choose informative section headings depending on your topic – Do NOT use ‘Body’ as a heading)
In this section include:
■ Evidence from your literature research
■ Logically organised sub-sections
3 Conclusion and Recommendations
In this section:
■ summarise main ideas, key findings and recommendations

■ do not include any new information
A list of material cited in the text of the assessment.
Do not include references that you have not personally read.
See assessment criteria below…
Page 4

UCD Assignment Assessment Criteria (20 pts)
Criteria Needs Improvement Good Very Good
Presentation (3 pts)
Visual presentation is
an important part of
making your document
appear authoritative
and have people take
what you have to say
seriously. Make your
document usable by
using good visual
design principles (or a
template available with
most modern word
Poor visual presentation. For
example, inconsistent font
styles, font changes within
format styles.
Poorly formatted heading
styles that lack contrast.
No title page or title page
missing information.
No table of contents or table
of contents missing page
No page numbers.
Good visual presentation.
Consistent font styles.
Appropriate use of style to
indicate heading levels.
Title page with required
information including word
Page numbers.
Readable font and at least 1.3
line spacing.
Very professional visual
presentation. Appropriate use
of visual design principles to
indicate heading levels.
Title page with required
information including word
Page numbers. Table/Figures
numbered and captioned.
Readable font and at least 1.3
line spacing.
Depth of research and
analysis of domain (5
As a master’s student
you must aim to be
competent at
independent scholarly
research. Demonstrate
you can do this by
finding and picking out
the most relevant high
quality academic
references on the
assignment task,
examining them in
detail and putting
together the
information you have
gathered into a
coherent narrative/
argument. You will also
need to show a good
understanding of the
assignment domain
and the UCD approach
to software
One or more of the following:
Assignment does not show
evidence of reading beyond
assignment, lecture and/or
task notes.
References from nonrefereed/
sources (e.g., blog posts,
company websites, general
information websites, lecture
notes, wikipedia etc) are
Demonstrates poor
understanding of the
assignment task or does not
address the assignment task.
Appropriate reference
sources are used (e.g.,
authoritative books, academic
references, research
published in HCI, UCD,
psychology, computer
science, IT related journals,
Appropriate references are
used to define some core
terms and claims of fact. For
example, “Gorganzola (2009)
defines blue cheese as having
the following
characteristics….” and “Very
few people (i..e, 10%) like the
smell of blue cheese
(Gorganzola, 2009).”)
Uses references to support
Good understanding of UCD
approach to software
Evidence from previous
research is used critically and
convincingly to support
arguments (i.e., where
appropriate, explains context
of research and how it applies
to the current situation). For
example, “Gorganzola (2009)
surveyed 10 people from
Scotland and found that only 1
liked the smell of blue cheese.
However, given the limited
sampling of Gorganzola’s
Application of
Research Evidence (5
As an IT professional
you will not always
have the luxury of
being able to work on
software designed to
do tasks you are
familiar with. In this
part of the assessment
we will be looking at
how well you are able
apply your research to
the issues described in
the assignment topic.

Written Expression (5
No matter how good
your ideas, if you can
not communicate them
effectively they are
wasted on your
audience. In this part of
the assessment we are
looking at how well you
can communicate your
ideas and create a
piece of writing that
convinces your reader
that your conclusions
recommendations are
well founded.
One or more of the following:
Difficult to read or follow.
Ideas do not link up well
within and/or between
paragraphs (e.g., swaps
topics within or between
paragraphs without
transitional sentences to
guide the reader from one
idea to the next).
Poor English expression
(e.g., lacks proper sentence
and/or paragraph
construction). Difficult for
reader to determine meaning.
This level of writing would
not be acceptable at a
professional level.
Assignment is mostly well
organised generally
demonstrates a clear flow
from one idea to the next.
Transitional sentences are
used to connect major ideas
and guide reader through the
Follows basic report structure
(e.g., executive summary
introduction, body, conclusion
Language is mainly fluent.
May contain some
grammatical and/or spelling
This level of writing would be
acceptable at a professional
level but could do with some
Assignment is well organised,
ideas and arguments flow
naturally and logically.
Easy to read and follow.
Language is fluent. Grammar
and spelling accurate.
This level of writing would be
acceptable at a professional
Academic Integrity (2
Everyone likes to be
‘paid’ for work they do.
In academic and
environments, payment
is not just about
money, but also
acknowledgment of
ideas. If you use ideas
or words from other
writers or researchers
you must ‘pay’ them by
citing their original
work. Failing to cite
work from other
authors will earn you a
FAIL in this assignment.
You will also FAIL this
assignment if you use
the words of other
students in your
assignment, or you
give your words to
other students to use.
One or more of the following:
An effort is made to cite
scholarly ideas, but citation
style is poor and does not
follow appropriate style
guidelines (e.g., Harvard).
Work that Turnitin detects as
the same as other published
work or student work will not
be graded. Typically this
means an overall FAIL grade
will be given when Turnitin
Report indicates more than
20-30% similarity with:

  • other published work and/
  • work submitted by other
    You may also be found to
    have committed Academic
    Poor Practice or Misconduct.
    You can be excluded from
    the university for Academic
    Scholarly ideas are mostly
    cited correctly using
    appropriate style guide (e.g.
    Harvard) or, consistent style is
    used, but not requested style
    (i.e., Harvard).
    Work from other sources is
    appropriately acknowledged.
    Less than 20-30% similarity
    with other sources.
    Scholarly ideas are cited
    correctly using appropriate
    style guide (e.g. Harvard).
    Work from other sources is
    appropriately acknowledged.
    Less than 20-30% similarity
    with other sources.
    Note 1: Similarities with other students will not be detected and reported by Turnitin until AFTER due date. Do
    not share references, resources or text with other students. Protect your work with adequate computer
    security. If you provide work to another student you will be penalised the same as a student who uses
    your work. You are not being a good friend if you share your work with others. Both of you will FAIL
    and get an official penalty notice and face possible exclusion from the University.
    Note 2: Paying someone to do your assignment for you is considered one of the highest forms of Academic
    Misconduct. If you are found guilty of this you possible penalties include: exclusion for the the university,
    revocation of your degree. You will also have a black mark against your name for your entire professional
    career. Because of the severe consequences of this action is not unknown for paid assignment writers to
    black mail students in perpetuity.