Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

The checklist is organic and will continue to be refined as we learn from doing the hybrid inspections/evaluations.

Working Groups

Please feel free to add, delete and/or more your name around this list.  This list of names came from volunteers at the May 11th meeting.

...

Within the "application" teams:

  1. Agree on user profiles

Anchor
WorkingGroupCoordination
WorkingGroupCoordination
Working Group Coordination

There is one inspection team per project/application. Teams are expected to be self-organizing and to form their own plans on how to proceed, but to communicate actively with the other teams on their plans and decisions - primarily through the wiki. Much in our approach is experimental, and it will be valuable to record what works, and what does not.  Here is an outline for consideration by the team members and coordinators:

...

  1. Break application into "chunks" for evaluation (highest priority areas first)
  2. Create usage scenarios for cognitive walkthroughs
  3. Individual evaluation by 3 - 5 evaluators
  4. Synthesize and prioritize findings
  5. Brainstorm design session (identify conceptual solutions to high priority issues).  Are there good component candidates?
  6. Write and share out report
  7. Incorporate findings into community (some will drive component development - others can be used for general product development in the communities)
    1. Sakai - Integrate into requirements group.  Do we need to create jira tickets?  Are these really "design bugs" conceptually and thus have a different status than requirements?
    2. Moodle - how does this get fed back into the process?
    3. uPortal - how do we integrate into their requirements process?  Deliver findings to the community?
  8. Look for pain across applications? Are there issues a component(s) can address well?

Selecting a Target Instance of a Product for Inspection

With complex and flexible products such as uPortal, Sakai, and Moodle, which are highly configurable, customizable, extendable, and responsive to their local institutional environment, defining a test-bed environment for inspection presents some challenges. Some thoughts and suggestions are expressed in: Defining Inspection Targets.

Heuristic evaluation & Cognitive walkthrough reference material:

Jacob Nielsen'sdescription and overview

...