Aims and Philosophy of Human Computer Interaction Design & Portfolio

Home> Aims & Philosophy

My overarching aim within this Human Computer Interaction Design (HCID) course module is to develop and extend students' understanding of human interaction with computer and product interfaces particularly in the area of design and construction of software which is usable, attractive, efficient and effective.  In a nutshell, I really wish to provide students with an understanding of usability which will in turn empower them within this field. This point is illustrated in this 'Declaritive Map of Teaching' which is discussed further in Instructional Design (click link here)'.

Declarative Map of Teaching HCID module

The module also supports a final year option module in human-computer interaction and other modules in the students' course programme which involve evaluation, design and development based on usability.

Within these broad aims, the module is primarily concerned with exposing students to areas such as cognitive factors, human factors (in particular task analysis), diagnostic and quantitative evaluation, the development of practical design skills and the overriding concept of usability. The extent to which software interacts with and fulfils the user’s needs is explored in this module.  Widely used industry development environments are discussed and used in order to develop a critical appreciation of various interaction styles currently available and to facilitate the production of a prototype. At the end of the module, students should be able to recognize,  evaluate  and build a usable product.  I have developed  these aims over a number of years and this is expanded upon in the Context & History section.

My broad aim in constructing this portfolio is to discuss how we have arrived at the present module status and how these module aims and the more specific objectives outlined below are achieved.  I have done this by examining and particularly reflecting upon the context, content, instructional design, assessment, evaluation and delivery of the module.  So the portfolio takes the form of part historical narrative, part ecological metaphor and part simple discussion/reflection as a means of describing the module; it also presents supporting example objects and artefacts in order to illustrate the journey made.

Specific Objectives of the Module
Although the module is defined mainly by the broad overriding aims outlined above, it has a specific set of objectives which more closely relate to the original University 'Unit Descriptor', a document required for all validated course modules at Southampton Solent University (SSU).   These specific objectives are defined in terms of a set of areas in which students should be accomplished.  These include knowledge and understanding; cognitive skills; transferable and practical skills; they could also be regarded as a set of learning outcomes.  I have reflected on these specific objectives below and in the Context section.  The specific objectives are as follows:

• Knowledge and Understanding
  1. Identify the application, issues, design and functionality of the human computer interface in the context of interaction with a software model
• Cognitive skills
  2. To analyse non-routine problems in the context of human computer interaction, assessing the suitability of proposed solutions
  3. Specify, design and evaluate elements of a prototype interface with functioning application.
• Practical and Professional skills
  4. Use appropriate visual environment to design, build, evaluate and test elements of a prototype interface with functioning application.
• Transferable Skills   5. Work co-operatively as a group or pair.

Philosophy

When reflecting on how my teaching of these students fits with the above aims, I have concluded that my main hopes are that students will emerge from the module with lifelong skills which will help them distinguish, evaluate and produce usable products which relate to real people.  I also hope that they will be able to work independently and creatively both within their course and throughout their working life.  Certainly they should recognise that there is always more to learn in terms of usability and evaluation; they should never state: 'there is nothing more to know'.

However, I believe that in order to do this, learners should engage with the subject matter and to become engaged, they should be motivated through a process of curiosity.  I have found that human-computer interaction and elements of cognitive perception are ideal for this because they can use unusual perceptual imagery which helps instigate intrinsic motivation  - the best kind of motivation.   If we become motivated through an intrinsic yearning to get or want to do something for its own sake, then this can provide a powerful impetus or incentive within a work or learning arena.   A further discussion of motivation is in the Content and Instructional Design sections. 

The specific objectives developed over a period of time and, in certain areas, they are not necessarily what I would choose now.  In order to engage and become  intrinsically motivated, I believe the concept of usability should cover all artefacts or interfaces and not just computer based ones so there would have to be some element of examining/evaluation of human-artefact interaction rather than specifically human-computer interaction.  This is further expanded in Context and History.

In order to make the above happen the module is based on the idea of a diverse range of stimuli  and this is described in the Instructional Design of the module.

The general philosophy is that these various sessions encourage students to work independently, become lifelong learners, to question and always look for something new in terms of evaluation and usability. In my view, engaging in these areas of usability is of paramount importance.