1
COURSE GUIDE
FOR
MMIS 680 HUMAN-COMPUTER INTERACTION
ONLINE FORMAT
2017 Winter Term, January 9, 2017 – May 7, 2017
Laurie P. Dringus, Ph.D., Professor
College of Engineering and Computing
Nova Southeastern University
Carl DeSantis Building, 4
th Floor (room 4073)
3301 College Avenue
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33314
email: [email protected]
Contents:
Ø Course Overview and Getting Started
Ø Online Access to Course Materials and Activities
Ø About Discussion Forums and Participation
Ø Details on Course Assignments
Ø Detailed Course Schedule
2
Course Overview and Getting Started
Welcome to the HCI course! This document provides specific details you need to know
about the course. As this is an online course, most of the course activity will be completed using
NSU’s learning management system (Blackboard). You will learn about HCI (with a focus on
usability) through reading and reviewing various content and materials, by performing an
independent user experience (UX) inspection of a user interface (UI) of your choice, and by
conducting your own usability test/evaluation (with real participants other than yourself) on the
interface of your choice. We shall learn both theory and practice of HCI from completing the
course assignments, from engaging collaborative asynchronous discussions, and from sharing
practical
Do This! activities in Blackboard.
I’m very interested in your success in learning about HCI and in you staying on target in
the course. This
Course Guide serves to guide you through the major course activities. Being
organized is important because as this is a 16-week semester, we cover many areas and issues
quickly, and our assignments require attention and persistence in staying on target. For those
who may have taken a course with me before, the format of this course guide may be familiar to
you. Please read this guide carefully and regularly since each course has its own unique
objectives and activities. Please read the
Course Syllabus thoroughly before moving on to the
Course Guide. Based on the Detailed Course Schedule contained in this document, maintain
your own calendar to keep track of important course activities.
Online Access to Course Materials and Activities:
Most course activity is managed through Blackboard, except for email communication.
Blackboard is being used as the “central course location” to post the most essential electronic
course materials such as the course syllabus and course requirements (contained in detail in this
Course Guide.)
We will use Blackboard for our online asynchronous discussions, course announcements,
and for assignment submissions. We may be using Go-to-Meeting for one-to-one consultations
(see Syllabus) and as a group (if the need arises). With the use of Blackboard and online
resources I lead you to, consider this online environment to be the “classroom” where you go to
learn and communicate about this topic area.
Please note: Blackboard email WILL NOT be used for course correspondence. Students
are required to use their NSU SharkLink email accounts to communicate with me
([email protected]) outside of Blackboard.
Please note: Assignment submissions are received through Blackboard only. No
submissions will be accepted through email.

3
About Discussion Forums and Participation
Associated Learning Outcomes with online discussion activities:
Gain insight into the field of human-computer interaction and its role in the study of information
systems.
Understand major considerations of user experience (UX), including defining the user, user
experience levels, and various usability attributes (e.g., ease of use, user satisfaction, other).
Describe the major aspects of usability engineering and user testing.
Synthesize HCI and information systems research literature effectively.
Describe current issues related to HCI and the Internet and usable security.
Examine societal impacts of HCI and information systems, including accessibility and design for
special populations.
Blackboard’s asynchronous Discussion Board will be used to support scholarly
discussions throughout the course. Please follow the Detailed Course Schedule (in this
Course
Guide
) for the activity schedule. Please be sure to start with Weeks #1-2, as I have specific due
dates for you to post your short e-bio about yourself and for posting to the Practice Theme.
What is expected for class participation?
I use a constructivist approach to teaching and learning. We will learn about the topics
through sharing information and resources in the asynchronous Discussion Board (Forum). In
following the
Detailed Course Schedule, I will post all of the Forums thread topics for the
course. Current topic threads generally run one to two weeks, depending on the momentum of
class discussion and class size.
There are no scheduled synchronous sessions for this course.
Class participation points are earned by maintaining steady effort and meaningful
contribution to the asynchronous discussions, requiring active participation in current threads
(including Do This! exercises in the Course Schedule). In terms of length of responses, several
short responses are encouraged, but they should be responses that reflect thought and promote
further interest in the topic, not just responses for the sake of meeting the participation
requirement. The class participation grade will be based on quality and quantity of contributions,
including original contributions and responses to others that add value to the discussion topic,
postings that are made during the active period of the current thread(s) being discussed,
presentation and grammatical accuracy, postings that are well-written, well-organized, and
accurate, and postings that provide appropriate literature citations. A total of 25 points is
attributed to class participation, so timely and meaningful participation in the discussion forums
is important to earn full points. Your participation is important because we cannot have
meaningful discussions if students are absent for long periods or if students are only occasionally
present. As a general rule, timely participation means you are logging in to the forums regularly,
keeping up with the posts, and posting original and responses to postings. An average guide is to
maintain one or two posts per week, but I am not bean counting as much as identifying a marker
for active participation.

4
It is also important that you provide effective and meaningful responses to your peers.
This includes discussing and citing the appropriate literature into postings as often as possible.
An easy way to participate is to share something about what you are reading in the course
material and what you are finding on your own. It’s important that we share the research we are
reading and learning about. The most interesting exchange is a result of achieving a healthy
balance of scholarly discussion with personal insight.
On Engaging and Staying Organized
Please remember to respond to postings and change the subject line in the message even
slightly to identify a new angle you may be taking to a posting, or something that will help us
continue to produce an organic and threaded presentation of discussion. The Discussion Board
tool in Blackboard can be a bit difficult to follow the flow of discussion when postings are not
responded to in the appropriate place and when subject lines are unclear or too repetitive. We
shall do our best to maintain a top-down approach to presenting content and building discussion!
I use the “expanded view” of the discussion forum so that I can see how all of the
postings (messages) are forming across the topic forum. The threaded view shows indentations
when a response-to-response conversation develops. Messages in bold are unread messages and
can be remarked as unread (new messages); I use that system to help me follow new postings
and those I plan to respond to. Unfortunately, we are unable to reorganize or move postings, as
the tool has an erratic format for post placement and for following threaded discussions.
Scrolling is difficult as well, particularly when the number of postings (messages) build over
time with a large class.
As the facilitator and manager of the forums, I reserve the right to delete any student
postings that are considered inappropriate or irrelevant to the discussions. Remember always to
respond to peers with respect and kindness. You can “respectively disagree” on the issues, but
always be mindful about how you are presenting your thoughts to others.
In facilitating and managing the discussion forums, as an active participant myself, I will
respond to some postings and will attempt to keep the discussion manageable and on track (with
your help). Sometimes I will post content (pre-recorded audio and PowerPoint overviews) in the
forums because some material is better to integrate when we are focusing on specific topic areas.
There will be times where I step back and observe the progress of the discussions. As we get
started in the course, let’s take things in small steps; follow my lead. I look forward to our
engaging discussions!

5
DETAILS ON COURSE ASSIGNMENTS
ASSIGNMENTS:
Both assignments focus on the user experience (UX) but from different angles. Assignment #1 is
your independent assessment of inspecting a selected user interface (UI) as it applies to aspects
of user experience (UX). Assignment #2 is a usability evaluation involving your direct
observations of three participants of their user experience as they work through tasks that are part
or whole of a selected user interface. Both assignments must be based on known user
experience/usability//UI/HCI principles/concepts that pertain well to the selected interface. In
addition, Assignment #2 is a usability evaluation/test, which not only involves you directly
observing participants working through an interface, but requires you to write a report of the indepth approach and description of usability testing as a process.
BOTH papers require substantial HCI/usability literature synthesis to support your
discussion about content.
These assignments require outside literature research and activity beyond required texts
and readings:
Assignment #1: Due Sunday, February 26, 2017, midnight ET.
UX/UI Inspection Paper:
You will be the sole evaluator/inspector of a user interface of your
choice using the principles of good design and usability attributes/concepts presented in the texts
and readings. Consider yourself the expert reviewer and the usability expert who is inspecting
the interface. Your inspection paper will describe in detail what you find to be the essential
aspects of the user experience of working through the interface, by focusing on selected usability
principles, heuristics, and usability concepts that pertain to your choice of interface. You will
prepare an 8 to 10 page paper that discusses the good and poor design aspects you are finding
with the interface, not just focusing on functionality, but also aspects of the user experience.
Discuss your reactions to the interface based on the principles of good design and make
recommendations for improving the interface/product. Instructions for completing this
assignment are presented in this course guide.
Assignment #2: Due Sunday, April 23, 2017, midnight ET.
Usability Evaluation Paper Repor
t — Conduct a usability test (also known as a usability study
and also a usability evaluation) and write a usability evaluation report. The usability evaluation
involves you selecting an interface (it can be the same one you chose for the inspection
assignment) and observing three participants to complete tasks with parts or the whole of the
interface. If the evaluation is planned and executed effectively according to standard usability
testing procedures, the results of the usability evaluation can lead to valuable recommendations
for improving the quality of the interface under evaluation. You will prepare a detailed report
(paper) that will contain a presentation and discussion of the entire usability evaluation process
(from conceptualization to observing the participants to reporting results and making

6
recommendations). This exercise will give you direct experience of assessing user interface
design by performing systematic observation of user participants. Instructions for completing this
assignment are presented in this course guide. The usability evaluation (Assignment #2) can be
based on the preliminary findings from the previous independent UX/UI inspection you perform
for Assignment #1.
Reminders:
All work will be submitted online through the assignment submission system in Blackboard.
Assignments must be submitted according to the specified due dates. Late assignments will result
in point reductions. (Please read the course syllabus carefully about these and other courserelated expectations and also school policies.)
BASIC REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL ASSIGNMENTS
These assignments require outside literature research and activity.
All assignments must be prepared in double-space format, 12 pt. type (preferably Times
Roman), and should include a title page, table of contents, and reference list. All
submitted work should contain student name and course number and term.
APA 6th edition format is used for form and style. Consult the APA Guide for how to
prepare papers, and for specific directions on how to properly cite work and references in
your papers.
Use third person narrative consistently throughout your papers. Take a formal approach
to presenting your discussion and arguments. Avoid “I, me, we” statements. Instead of,
for example, ‘We think this is important…”, present it in this way, “This is important
because…”
All assignment submissions have to be scholarly and well presented. You are to
demonstrate scholarly knowledge of the subject area. Refrain from stating the obvious
and generic things, but be clear. Approach your work from a high level of thinking—
what are the underlying issues and how can we approach HCI and usability differently?
Synthesizing the literature is very important in this course. Do not simply direct quote
authors. Instead, paraphrase and cite important sources that describe the essential aspects
of the issues. Compare and contrast what authors are saying about a particular issue.
When submitting each assignment through Blackboard, submit ONE file for all work
contained in the assignment. Word documents are the preferred format.

7
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING ASSIGNMENT #1 UX/UI Inspection
Associated Learning Outcomes with Assignment #1:
Understand major considerations of user experience (UX), including defining the user, user
experience levels, and various usability attributes (e.g., ease of use, user satisfaction, other).
Apply usability and design principles to the evaluation of current interfaces.
Synthesize HCI and information systems research literature effectively.
Integrate effectively the current and recognized HCI literature, including papers from SIGCHI
conference proceedings and from various HCI peer-reviewed publications.
Overview:
A usability inspection is one type of usability evaluation method that is performed at
different formative and summative stages of UX/UI design. In this assignment, you are the sole
inspector of an interface (part or whole) that you select to assess how the UI design meets or fails
to match up with selected user interface strategies, usability design principles, heuristics, and
concepts. In this case, your inspection is summative, meaning that you are inspecting a user
interface that is already “on the market” or is being used by a general or specific population of
users. You are selecting an “everyday” interface — something users are familiar with and
certainly something that you use whether frequently or infrequently.
Overall task: After becoming familiar with user interface design strategies, usability
principles, heuristics, and concepts, you will evaluate on your own a user interface using the
principles of good design and usability presented in the texts and as directed from the professor’s
lecture notes. You are the sole evaluator/inspector of one specific interface that you choose to
assess the user experience of. You may evaluate any software or hardware interface (e.g., a Web
site, or a word processor or spreadsheet software, or mobile device, or a favorite app, or…..) in
part or whole. The interface selected should be complex enough to support detailed analysis of
the design and usability of the interface. (Do not use other users as evaluators for this
assignment! That is Assignment #2!)
The evaluation will involve the preparation of a descriptive paper (8 to ten pages) that
describes the good and poor design and usability aspects of the interface. The usability
principles and attributes discussed in the texts will be used as a basis for your subjective
inspection of the interface. The paper is a critique of your inspection of the interface focusing on
the user experience from many angles. The paper is also a scholarly synthesis of the HCI
principles, strategies, and guidelines that pertain to the design and usability of user interface you
have selected to review on your own. Additionally, you should discuss your recommendations
for improving the design and usability of the user interface. Your paper must include
HCI/usability literature in the narrative as well as a complete and accurate Reference List. Even
though you are the sole inspector/evaluator, in focusing on concepts and principles/heuristics,
you must rely on the literature to substantiate and synthesize your critique.
Focus on concepts and principles/heuristics: For example, if you are finding a problem
with “consistency” with the chosen interface, describe that problem from the user experience

8
viewpoint and then describe what the HCI/usability literature defines or describes as the concept
of “consistency”. Match your observed problems to something conceptual to HCI or usability.
Think about the usability problems you are finding yourself with a particular interface. Do you
find there are problems pertaining to safety, consistency, visibility, or any other usability concept
or principle or heuristic? Focus on what design aspects are good and those that need work to
improve the user experience. Select a few of the various usability concepts, principles, heuristics
or areas that you are learning from the course material that you can discuss in relation to the
design aspect you are finding that are both good and those design aspects that need improvement
(for the user). The paper should NOT focus solely on functionality or non-functional user
requirements! Some brief integration on functionality is ok, but the main focus should also
weave in common ground with our understanding of the user experience — what the user enjoys,
finds frustrating, cannot figure out, the app “quits unexpectedly” — the everyday feelings and
experiences we all have when we use a technology that needs some improvement!
.
In sum, the independent UX/UI inspection should be based on a goal or a set of metrics
or attributes, such as evaluating for ease of use, ease of learning, consistency, etc. Some
“example” usability attributes mentioned in the texts: learnability, efficiency, memorability,
recovery from errors, user satisfaction, ease of use, etc. (We will also discuss these concepts in
our asynchronous discussions.) You may select any one or a combination of usability concepts
and attributes and/or principles and heuristics to base your inspection of the chosen interface.
Pick the ones that best fit what you are finding in your inspection.
Keep the UX/UI choice manageable! Many programs or interfaces are quite large, so
you may have to decide to limit your UX/UI Inspection to certain aspects of the program, e.g.,
the help system, some overall functions and features of an application, or special options for
expert or novice users
A note about your recommendations and substantiation of literature – you are analyzing
an interface of your choice. Here you have an opportunity to integrate into your paper pertinent
information that you have gained from the required readings and from your own literature
search. The literature integration is a conceptual bridge between what you believe should be
improved with the interface and what the experts say. Guidelines: at least 6-10 current academic
references from those listed in this Course Guide. Do not use industry websites. Follow strict
APA style guidelines for making proper literature citations in the body of the paper.
Rough Outline on Assignment #1 Format (See above for Basic Requirements for All
Assignments):
Title page – your full name, course #, title of your inspection — “A UX/UI Inspection of……”
(what interface you are inspecting)
Table of Contents
Introduction –about the interface being inspected/evaluated and why you are inspecting that
interface.
HCI issues or Usability Attributes/Principles Used to Inspect/Evaluate the Interface (You have to
be creative as to how you want to organize the issues or categories of the evaluation).
In depth discussion of the above relative to the interface with extensive literature synthesis on the

9
HCI/usability concepts applied
Recommendations for Improving the Interface Design
Conclusions
References (please use strict APA 6th)

10
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING ASSIGNMENT #2: Usability Evaluation
Associated Learning Outcomes with Assignment #2:
Understand major considerations of user experience (UX), including defining the user, user
experience levels, and various usability attributes (e.g., ease of use, user satisfaction, other).
Describe the major aspects of usability engineering and user testing.
Apply usability and design principles to the evaluation of current interfaces.
Apply suitable methods for collecting users’ requirements and analyzing users’ tasks.
Perform usability analyses and evaluate technology design.
Synthesize HCI and information systems research literature effectively.
Integrate effectively the current and recognized HCI literature, including papers from SIGCHI
conference proceedings and from various HCI peer-reviewed publications.
General Directives: (1) Review recommended texts or articles for background on
usability evaluation, (2) Review professor’s notes on usability evaluation, (3) Review NSU IRB
policy on Student Research (below), and (4) Locate your own usability articles or sources to
integrate into the paper.
Overall Task: You will conduct a usability evaluation, commonly known as a usability
test or a user test or a user study. The results of the usability evaluation can lead to valuable
recommendations for improving the quality of the interface under evaluation. This exercise will
also give you, the novice researcher, direct experience in assessing user interface design, through
systematic and direct observation of other users (participants) working through the interface.
Note: these instructions are a
general guide to setting up a usability evaluation. Your usability
evaluation will have to expand this general method. I recommend Rubin and Chisnell’s text for
details on conducting usability testing. Some of these issues presented here as examples may or
may not be applicable to how you will plan and conduct your particular usability test.
General Guide to the Usability Evaluation
General Method
You will need a minimum of three human subjects (participants) for this exercise.
Choose an interface (e.g., anything — some specific technology device, hardware or software or
website, or smart device app, other) that is manageable, an interface that you can arrange for
your participants to work through independently (while you observe them in person) the major
features of the user interface you have chosen to evaluate.
The goal of the usability evaluation is to locate usability problems and to recommend
improvements to the interface. To do this you need to devise a usability task list for participants
to work through independently to help you discover usability problems (and/or good design
achievements) with the interface. You will prepare a list of tasks that each participant will
perform. The task list includes a brief description of each task to be performed with the interface
as the focus of the evaluation. You may (if appropriate) prepare a flowchart showing the order
tasks are to be performed and other important events and sequences. Your job, as the student
researcher, is to give each participant appropriate written and/or verbal directions on how to

11
complete the task list; observe the participant working through each task and record (on paper)
the sequence of events and data observed.
Upon collecting data from all invited participants, prepare a usability evaluation report
(paper) describing the details of the entire evaluation process (from planning to
recommendations), including the results of the usability evaluation. This paper must have
substantial literature integration throughout to support your process.
Important Policy on Human Subjects Research — NSU Institutional Research Board (IRB)
Policy on Course-related Research Activities
According to NSU IRB policy, research conducted by students as part of classroom
assignments does not usually fall under the federal regulation of research because it is not
intended or likely to lead to generalizable results. Rather, the activities are resources of teaching,
which facilitate learning of concepts and the opportunity to practice various procedures,
including research methods (interviewing, observation and survey techniques, as well as data
analysis).
While most assignments for class do not require IRB review, some do as a result of the
vulnerability of subjects or the potential risk to subjects including:
Studies in which children will be interviewed or surveyed.
Studies in which children are being observed, and data collected, where the investigator
is also a part of the activities being observed.
Studies involving prisoners, the mentally disabled, or pregnant women.
Studies that ask subjects about illegal activities and which place the data at risk for
subpoena and/or the subject at risk for loss of civil liberties.
Studies in which subjects are at risk of breach of confidentiality, such as ones that ask
sensitive or intrusive questions about behaviors.
Studies that place students at risk due to emotionally charged subject matter.
Studies which will be published by the researcher (including theses and dissertations).
In conducting responsible usability evaluation, the student researcher must ensure that
minimal risk in working with human subjects (e.g., our usability test participants) is achieved.
Students must NOT conduct their usability evaluations that would fall into one or more of the
seven exceptions (listed above) to IRB exemption on course-related activities. It is required that
invited participants are of adult age (18 years or older). A Participant Informed Consent Form
should be signed by all participants and included in the Appendices of the UE paper. (Example
consent forms that are appropriate for usability tests/evaluations are available in most usability
evaluation texts.)
Students should review the NSU IRB policies as stated in full. These are posted on a link
from the CEC IRB website. In addition, if the student wishes to publish or share results of the
evaluation, in any form, outside of the course assignment and environment protocols established
for this class, then IRB approval, prior to conducting the usability research, may be necessary.
According to NSU IRB policy, IRB approval must be secured prior to conducting the research
activities. (Given the short duration of this course and the involved process of seeking IRB

12
approval, the professor does not recommend any outside publication or sharing of the results of
this exercise with any third party.)
A reminder to student researchers in HCI: It is the product/interface that is being evaluated,
not the participants! It is important that your invited participants are informed that they are not
being tested or evaluated, but rather the interface is being evaluated to help you locate potential
usability problems!
Guidelines for conducting the usability evaluation
The following general guidelines have been adapted from several resources on usability
evaluation and testing to give you a general scope and initial ideas for organizing your usability
evaluation. Some guidelines will be applicable to your evaluation; some will not. Conversely,
you may have other ideas not mentioned here that would appropriately fit your interface choice
and evaluation objective.
As you plan, conduct, analyze, and report your usability evaluation or test, follow this format
as appropriate:
Planning Stage
1. Identify the test goals.
2. Describe what test method(s) you will use to reach your test goals.
3. Identify participants to perform the usability evaluation. (See IRB Policy stated above.)
This process should give attention to prescreening:
* a. user experience level/skills/capabilities
* b. education
* c. attitudes/willingness
* d. demographics (age, gender, language, etc.). Invite those only of adult-age (18 years
or older). Do not ask any intrusive information about the individual.
* e. user satisfaction of the product
*Note: This information is normally generated through a questionnaire. Use a paper
questionnaire or a list of interview questions to help you collect this information from your
participants. (Usability texts will often include examples so that you have something to work
with.
In planning your UE, you may also need to determine the requirements of users that fit the
objective of evaluating the interface, in regard to:
speed required of user
skill required of user
physical capability of user
responsibility required of user
ease of use considered for the user
the user’s potential for misuse or error
13
4. Create a task list. Create workable tasks that help the user evaluate the usability of the product
design. (This will vary in number and complexity depending on the interface you choose to
evaluate.)
5. Order and prioritize the tasks.
6. Determine which user performance and usability measures will be taken.
7. Create the scenario (test lab) needed to conduct the evaluation (The “test lab” can be your
office, home, or wherever you can set up the hardware and software.)
Remember to establish and detail the following:
a. workstation arrangement
b. comfort/space of the testing lab
c. modifiability of the testing environment
d. room details (lighting/heat/air/cleanliness/noise/distractions)
8. In regard to tasks and task lists, be sure to:
a. Provide a general description of each task to be performed.
b. Describe what steps are in each task.
c. Distinguish interaction with other tasks.
d. Identify if it is an independent or group task (as applicable).
Conducting the Test/Collecting Data
There are different strategies for structuring the evaluation for your participants. You can
arrange for all participants work together at one time (if you have access to multiple workstations
or devices), co-pair the participants at one time (if you have at least two workstations or devices),
or observe one participant at a time. Whichever option is workable for you, your main role will
be to observe each participant and take notes during the evaluation process. (If you decide to
video or audio to record the participants, you MUST get their written permission to do so and
you must maintain confidentiality by not sharing the recordings with anyone or by posting them
anywhere for public view.) However, I highly suggest that you take notes during the
observations and not rely on recordings. (Recordings take a long time for you to review.) This
means you will need to write down their actions on paper. It is recommended that you do not
offer assistance to participants during the evaluation, though you will prompt them to describe
verbally what they are doing through the Think Aloud protocol.
Try the Think Aloud protocol. “Think aloud” is useful to ask participants to verbalize their
experience through the evaluation process. Ask them to tell you what they are doing and thinking
as they work through the task list. Write down what they tell you because this will become
important data to present in the usability evaluation paper.
1. Explain and describe the procedures to the participant.
2. Write down on paper the participant’s actions during the usability evaluation. You need to
identify appropriate usability measures that match to your specific interface and usability
evaluation goals. Sample measures that may be useful could include, but are not limited to:
the participant’s comments (“Think Aloud” Method)
time spent on single tasks and in overall testing time period
time of day and the date participant completed the evaluation
14
the number of errors the participant made
the number of successes the participant gained
how the user was able to recover from errors
how often the user could not recover from errors
the number of times the participant sought assistance from you
the nature of the usability problem encountered
the number of usability problems located during the evaluation period.
A reminder about ethical practices at this point. Be sure to follow good ethical practices
when working with your participants. Treat them with respect; explain you are evaluating the
system, not them; explain they can stop the evaluation at any time, if they are uncomfortable;
explain their results will be reported without identifying information about them; express
appreciation and thank them for their participation. In following the rules of IRB, it is expected
that any data collected as a class project will be destroyed after the grading of the project has
been completed.
Reporting the Data
Prepare a usability evaluation paper (report) that describes what you did and what you
found. Include the entire process (planning stage through collecting data) and the results of the
usability evaluation. Try to maintain a third person narrative tone in the paper, though you may
occasionally use first person narrative in moments when you are self-reflecting (mainly
qualitatively) on your process. You should highlight unique events that occurred on the basis of
the participant’s performance and your systematic observation. Identify the major variables
associated with the usability of the product you have chosen (e.g. discuss learning factors,
performance factors, error recovery factors, effort to complete a task or set of tasks, user’s
attitude toward program, etc.). Give specific recommendations for improving the user interface
or the product in general. Discuss your results in relation to concepts presented in the HCI
literature. Note: The assignment requires extensive discussion of detail
about process.
Statistical outcomes are secondary to demonstrating an understanding of process. Synthesize the
literature to support your notions or decisions regarding process.
Also, throughout the entire usability evaluation report, you should provide a substantial
synthesis of current HCI literature sources that support or contradict findings relative to your
usability evaluation. The report (paper) should be about 20 pages of content, but may be longer
depending on items that are included in the Appendices.
Format for the Usability Evaluation Paper
1. Follow all standard format procedures (title page, line spacing, margins, proper citation
format, etc.).
2. Provide an introduction section to describe what interface or product is being evaluated
and the general scope of the report.
3. The body of the report should contain an examination of the “process” of usability
evaluation. The author should reflect on the process and integrate literature throughout
the entire report to provide support for the discussion.
4. Provide list of References using strict APA format.
5. If appropriate, provide Appendices – can include surveys, task list, forms to organize
observation and think aloud, other information gathering forms.

15
Acceptable Journals and Publications in Human-Computer Interaction Research
These are acceptable journals and publications for use in the course assignments. Go to the NSU
Alvin Sherman Online Library to access these publications. Seek my permission (via email) to
use other journals/publications not listed here.
ACM Interactions (the official publication of ACM SIGCHI)
ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing (TACCESS)
ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI)
ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility
ACM SIGCHI Special Interest Group in Computer-Human Interaction) Proceedings
ACM CSCW (Computer-Supported Cooperative Work) Proceedings
ACM DIS (Designing Interactive Systems) Proceedings
ACM UIST (User Software & Technology Symposium) Proceedings
ACM Group Proceedings (Group)
ACM UbiComp (Ubiquitous Computing) Proceedings
ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems (TMIS)
AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction (AIS)
AIS Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS)
Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS)
ASSETS Conference Proceedings (ACM)
Communications of the ACM (ACM)
Computer-Mediated Communication
Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (Springer)
Computers & Education (Elsevier)
Computers in Human Behavior (Elsevier)
Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) Proceedings
HCI International (Conference on Human-Computer Interaction) Proceedings
IEEE Computer or other peer reviewed IEEE journals and conference proceedings
Information Systems Research (INFORMS)
Interacting With Computers (Elsevier)
International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS)
International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (Springer)
International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates)
International Journal of Human-Computer Studies (Elsevier/Academic Press)
International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics (Elsevier)
Journal of Educational Computing Research
Journal of Organizational and End User Computing
Journal of Usability Studies (EBSCO open access)
MIS Quarterly
MobileHCI
Personal and Ubiquitous Computing
Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS) Proceedings

16
Winter Course Schedule for MMIS 680 Human-Computer Interaction
(Online)
At-a-glance Schedule Table (See detailed course schedule continuing below)

Week Topic Readings, Forums, and Assignment Due Dates
1-2 Introduction to Human-Computer
Interaction and Interaction Design
Review Syllabus, Course Guide, Detailed Course Schedule
Preece: Ch.1, 2, (chapter 6 optional)
Rubin: Ch. 1, 2
Read articles and review lecture notes
Discussion Forum: post your bio in
Class Bios thread;
Practice Theme (required post by Monday, January 16th)
3-4 Challenges of Serving Users: HCI
Concepts & Terms
Understanding Users; Human
Aspects of HCI
Preece: Ch. 3, 5, 9
Rubin: Ch. 14
Read articles and review lecture notes
Discussion Forum:
HCI Concepts and Terms thread,
UX/UI Inspection
thread
5-6 Usability Concepts; Measuring User
Experience
Working with Participants
Preece: Ch.13
Rubin: Ch. 3
Read articles and review lecture notes
Discussion Forum:
Usability Concepts and other threads
continue
7 Usability Evaluation Methods and
Techniques
Assignment #1 Due end of week
(Sunday)
Review lecture notes
no new readings; finish your assignment
Assignment #1 UX/UI Inspection Due in Blackboard
Sunday February 26, 2017
8 User Experience Observation:
Direct and Indirect Data
Usable Privacy & Security
Review lecture notes
Read article
Discussion Forum:
HCI and Usable Privacy & Security
thread
SPRING BREAK
NO ONLINE ACTIVITIES
COURSE RESUMES NEXT
WEEK (WEEK #9)
MARCH 6-12, 2017
NO ONLINE ACTIVITIES THIS WEEK
COURSE RESUMES MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2017
9 Usability Test Planning (General)
Develop the test plan
Set up the environment
Developing a task list
Preece: Ch. 7,10, 14
Rubin: Ch. 5-6
Read articles and review lecture notes
Discussion Forum:
Usability Evaluation thread, Usability
Task List
thread
10-
11
Usability Test Planning (Methods)
Participants
Preparing for Data Collection
Different testing options
Preece: Ch. 15
Rubin: Ch. 4, 7, 8
Review lecture notes
Discussion Forum:
Usability Evaluation thread continues;
Usability Task List thread continues

17

12-
13
Conducting the User Test
Debriefing; Reporting Results,
Discussion, and Recommendations
Preece: Ch. 8
Rubin: Ch. 9-12
Review lecture notes
Discussion Forum:
Usability Evaluation thread continues;
Usability Task List thread continues
14 Assignment #2 Due end of week
#14 (Sunday)
No new readings; finish your assignment.
Assignment #2 Usability Evaluation (UE) Due in
Blackboard Sunday April 23, 2017
15-
16
Impacts: the future of HCI Read articles (no lecture notes)
Discussion Forum:
Impacts: The Future of HCI

Instructions on Following the Course Schedule:
The weekly schedule (often arranged into two- or three-week segments) of course activity is
organized around recommended sequence of readings from the required texts and article
readings (below), as well as activities such as watching videos, reviewing lecture notes,
participating in asynchronous discussion forums, completing practical exercises (
Do This!),
and tracking assignment due dates.
The general pattern for asynchronous discussion forum threads is that I will post new forum
topics on certain weeks, but discussions will continue on all forums (as needed) through the
remainder of the term. Most forums cover at least a two-week period (sometimes a threeweek period). For example, forums like
Usability Evaluation and Usability Task List are
likely to sustain over several weeks because of the number of issues to be covered within
them. See the
Course Guide for About Discussion Forums and Participation as steady
participation is expected throughout the term, though the robustness of participation will also
depend on the number of students in the class.
On Do This! –You will find sprinkled throughout the schedule, an activity called Do This!
This is (hopefully) inspirational activity that gets us all to think more about HCI and/or helps
you apply something of added value from the readings to your own learning and professional
work process.
Do This! activities are designed to be done on your own (independently) and
then to discuss in the asynchronous discussion forum. The activity is often reflective in nature
as well – we can bring our experience or perspectives into the corresponding discussion
forum. I highly suggest that you try out
Do This! activities as doing them counts as partial
demonstration of steady participation in the asynchronous discussion forum.
On recommended sequence of readings from the required texts: For your convenience, I have
organized text chapter readings into manageable units, attempting to follow related topics as our
asynchronous discussion forum activities commence. This schedule is only a guide to help you
read the texts in an organized way. You may read ahead or read several chapters concurrently or
in different order.

18
On article readings: Follow the selected article readings (below) in conjunction with the texts.
The selected article readings extend breadth and depth on many issues and topics. Read the
articles and be prepared to discuss them in our asynchronous discussion forum threads as
appropriate and as applicable. Organize your time well according to the schedule and keep up
with these readings! Tip: You may use the readings as sources for your assignments!
On lecture notes: There will be several postings of various lecture notes corresponding to the
reading schedule and the discussion forum topics. Lecture notes contain important material to
follow to prepare the UE paper and steps to conduct the usability test. Some lecture notes have
pre-recorded voice-over. Lecture notes will be posted in the Course Content area.
Please follow the
Detailed Course Schedule below!
19
MMIS 680 HUMAN-COMPUTER INTERACTION (Online)
Detailed Course Schedule
REQUIRED READINGS, ACTIVITIES, AND ASSIGNMENT DUE DATES
Note: Articles from publications that are accessible from various databases available in NSU’s
Alvin Sherman Library (online)have been selected for reading during the term. Articles from this list
may be used as reference material for assignments.
IMPORTANT! READ ME! — While full citations are given below on all required articles to
read, you must first access the NSU Alvin Sherman Electronic Library and find the appropriate
online database to search the journal and the article. For example, several of the articles are
available in the ACM database, but there are other databases from which to different journals.
(If you are unsure of the database, use Journal Finder to search the journal title and the
associated database.) You could also search via Google Scholar, but be careful that you don’t
purchase any articles! The journals that require subscription must be accessed directly from the
NSU Alvin Sherman Electronic Library! Sorry, I can’t link the articles directly on the course site
(Blackboard) because copyright laws limit this.
To access the ACM database (and other databases) login to NSU’s Alvin Sherman Electronic
Library, go to our library through SharkLink or from
http://www.nova.edu/library/main/ .
Tips for searching in the ACM database — You can search by the publication. Locate ACM
SIGCHI
Interactions and Communications of the ACM under “Magazines”. The SIGCHI (CHI)
Proceedings can be found under “Proceedings”. Select the appropriate category and select the
appropriate publication. Once you see the publication view, type in the last name of the author
to search for the article title. From there you should be able to find the pdf full text file to access
the article.
In addition to current works published in the field, I’ve selected specifically some of the “early”
works so that you can discover how the field has advanced. Your assignment papers should have
more current works blended with the early works.
Weeks #1-2 Theme: Introduction to HCI and Interaction Design
The Course: Do the following as soon as possible to become familiar with the course:
Review the entire syllabus, course guide, and detailed course schedule carefully.
Blackboard: navigate the course using the left-side menu and the Course Content area to
become familiar with how the course is organized into folders.
Read this schedule often
and follow the Course Content area to access lecture notes, links to asynchronous
discussion forums, etc.
Course week: Because asynchronous courses don’t have a fixed meeting day, our week
will start on Monday and finish on Sunday.

20
Blackboard Announcements: Read the announcements from the link. (Always check
regularly for new announcements.)
Post your bio in Class Bios in the Forum.
Ongoing: It is assumed you will login to Blackboard regularly (at least three times per
week), follow the guidelines in the syllabus and course guide for the assignments and due
dates, and contribute regularly (1-2 times per week) to the asynchronous Forum activities
throughout the course.
During Weeks 1 and 2, read/review the following in order of listing:
• Professor Dringus will open the Class Bios thread in the discussion forum.
Post your introduction in Class Bios. This is required and should be done by the end of
the first week.
Read text chapters as indicated from the At-a-glance Schedule Table.
• Professor Dringus will open the
Practice Theme discussion thread in the forum.
Important — READ ME! You are
required to post at least one contribution to the
Practice Theme by Monday, January 16th. This is to confirm you are enrolled and
participating in the course.
• By week #2, Dr. Dringus will post
HCI Introduction notes (Powerpoint) in the Course
Content area in Blackboard and introduce concepts into the forum.
Read articles for discussion forum:
• Raskin, J. (1994, September). Intuitive equals familiar.
Communications of the ACM,
37
(9), 17-18.
• Weiser, M. (1994, January). The world is not a desktop.
Interactions, ACM, 7-8.
Do This! HCI: The Field. What is it? Visit the ACM SIGCHI website
http://www.sigchi.org/. This is the official international professional organization for
Computer-Human Interaction. (ACM SIGCHI publications and proceedings must be
accessed through our electronic library!) Go to the website only for the open access
resources and to learn more about HCI and the CHI organization.
Do This! What is CHI and what makes the CHI conference the premiere conference for
HCI and usability professionals? The Georgia Tech Research Group put together this
brief video about CHI’13 (in Milan, Italy) and also an overview of GT’s research
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ly0eN-4YQGc. Everyone should have at least one
CHI conference experience sometime in their career particularly for people who design
or test interfaces or help other people use technology! Perhaps I will see you at a future
CHI conference!

21
Weeks #3-4 Theme: Challenges of Serving Users: HCI Concepts & Terms; Understanding
Users: Human Aspects of HCI
Read text chapters as indicated from the At-A-Glance Schedule Table.
Week #3, Professor Dringus will open the HCI Concepts and Terms discussion thread in
the forum and will post PowerPoint slides in the Course Content area.
Read article for discussion forum:
Marcus, A. (2003, September & October). When is a user not a user? Who are we?
What do we do?
Interactions, ACM, X.5, 28-34.
Professor Dringus will open the UX/UI Inspection discussion thread in the forum.
Do This! Watch this brief YouTube video, What is HCI? by Alex Leone, University of
Washington,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtvwustmEDI I like this overview for
its “simplicity” (simplicity happens to be one of the HCI concepts mentioned in this
video). After watching the video, what do you think about the role of simplicity in
technology design? What is the most simple technology design you’ve seen? Why?
Think about this and hold your thoughts for the discussion forum.
Week #4, Professor Dringus will post notes (PowerPoint) on Human Aspects of HCI in
the Course Content Area.
Read article for discussion forum:
Bohmer, M., & Kruger, A. (2013). A study on icon arrangement by smartphone users.
Proceedings of CHI ’13, April 27-May2, 2013, Paris, France. ACM.
Do This! Screen Shot Study. Wonder what simple ways we can capture user
perceptions of their own user habits and preferences? Read Bohmer and Kruger’s paper
for some good insights on how people categorize their smartphone experiences and
common concepts for arranging icons on smartphones. Reflect on your own icon
arrangement and preferences on your smartphone. Which category (see pg. 2139) do you
discover about your preferences? What are your 3 most important/most frequently used
mobile phone functionalities, features, applications, webpages, applications, etc.? Why?
Think about this and hold your thoughts for the discussion forum.
Weeks #5-6 Theme: Usability Concepts: Measuring User Experience; Working with
Participants
Read text chapters as indicated from the At-A-Glance Schedule Table.
Professor Dringus will open the Usability Concepts discussion thread in the forum and
22
will post notes (PowerPoint) in the Course Content area.
Read article for discussion forum:
Greenberg, S., & Buxton, B. (2008). Usability evaluation considered harmful (some of
the time).
Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference ’08, Florence, Italy, 111-120.
Chrusch, M. (2000, September & October). Seven great myths of usability.
Interactions, ACM, 13-16.
Do This! Visit the Usability Experience Professionals’ Association (UXPA) website at
http://www.usabilityprofessionals.org/. The UXPA site is the home of the open access
publication,
Journal of Usability Studies. (A potentially great resource to find literature
support for integration in your papers.) Is UX a part of your approach to your work as a
technologist?
Week #7: Theme: Usability Evaluation Methods and Techniques, Assignment #1 UX/UI
Inspection paper Due, Sunday, February 26, 2017, Midnight ET.
• Professor Dringus will post notes (PowerPoint) on Usability Evaluation Methods and
Techniques in the Course Content area.
At this stage you should be working on final writing and proofing of your paper.
• Assignment due on Sunday, October 09, 2016, midnight ET, in Blackboard assignment
drop box– no extensions!!!!
Week #8: Theme: User Experience Observation: Direct and Indirect Data; Usable Privacy
& Security
Professor Dringus will open the HCI and Usable Security discussion thread in the
forum.
Professor Dringus will post lecture notes on User Experience Observation: Direct and
Indirect Data in the Course Content area.
Read the first article listed and then choose ONE of the rest of the following articles for
discussion forum:
Jaferian, P., Hawkey, K., Sotirakopoulos, A., Velez-Rojas, M., & Beznosov, K. (2011).
Heuristics for evaluating IT security management tools.
Proceedings of the Symposium
on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS)
, July 20-22, 2011, Pittsburg, PA, USA, 1-20.
Lampson, B. (2009, November). Usable security: How to get it. Communications of the
ACM, 52
(11), 25-27.
23
Narayan, A., & Shmatikov, V. (2010, June). Myths and fallacies of “personally
identifiable information”.
Communications of the ACM, 53(6), 24-26.
West, R. (2008, April). The psychology of security. Why do good users make bad
decisions?
Communications of the ACM, 51(4), 34-40.
Whitney, H. (2009, March & April). The counterfeit you. Interactions, ACM, XV.2, 37-
40.
Do This! Watch this brief YouTube video by Rachna Dhamija on UsableLogin,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLoZ-nlX1V4. I attended a presentation of hers (not
this one) at a SOUPS (Symposium on Usable Privacy & Security)
http://cups.cs.cmu.edu/soups/2014/ conference. She’s doing some good stuff on web
authentication. Certainly new solutions for user authentication are under development in
industry and government. What is your main concern regarding user authentication and
user privacy? What effective practices can we do to remember passwords and protect our
privacy/identity? We shall discuss these and other issues in the forum.
IMPORTANT NOTE: SPRING BREAK OCCURS BETWEEN WEEK #8 AND WEEK
#9. NO ONLINE ACTIVITIES FROM MARCH 6-12, 2017. THE COURSE WILL
RESUME AT THE START OF WEEK #9, MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2017
Week #9 Theme: Usability Test Planning (General)
Read text chapters as indicated from the At-A-Glance Schedule Table.
Professor Dringus will open the Usability Evaluation discussion thread in the forum and
will post PowerPoint slides in the Course Content area.
Read articles for discussion forum (optional):
Jeffries, R., Miller, J.R., Wharton, C., and Uyeda, K. (1991). User interface evaluation in
the real world: a comparison of four techniques.
Conference Proceedings of the SIGCHI
1991 “CHI ‘91″ Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference “Reaching Through
Technology”, April 27-May 2, 1991,
edited by Robertson, S., Olson, G., Olson, J.. New
Orleans, LA. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA. ISBN: 0-201-51278-5.
Tohidi, M., Buxton, W., Baecker, R., & Sellen, A. (2006). Getting the right design and
the design right: Testing many is better than one.
Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI
Conference ’06
, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 631-639.
Professor Dringus will open the Usability Task List discussion thread in the forum.
24
Do This! As we start thinking about UE and usability task lists, we tend to get lost in
the procedures, often forgetting why we are doing a usability test. We have to think about
usability in terms of improving design and striving for good design. Usability guru Jared
Spool talks about what it means to design to make a usable brand. Here the emphasis is
on company website design. What do you think the distinction is between brand and
usability? Have you considered including people’s perceptions of brand as part of your
UE? See
Strike Up the Brand: How to Design for Branding by Jared Spool,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-Ruc8iq4xo
Weeks #10-11 Theme: Usability Test Planning (Methods)
Read text chapters as indicated from the At-A-Glance Schedule Table.
Usability Evaluation and Usability Task List discussion threads continue in the forum.
Professor Dringus will post Powerpoint slides in the Course Content area.
Do This! UX Test Strategy and Task List. Let us seek inspiration from the authors of
Design 101, S. Mirti and A-S Gauvin and others from their MOOC offered by iversity.
Thinking about your interface choice for your usability test, perhaps some inspiration will
help you think through what you want to learn about the interface and what your
participants will do in the usability test to help you discover the usability issues
(problems and challenges) of the interface. Let’s think about cooking as a design exercise
and as a way to think about our task list. We shall think about our task list as ingredients
to prepare a great dish we enjoy cooking. First the inspiration from Julia Child, “I think
you have to decide who your audience is. If you don’t pick your audience, you’re lost
because you’re really not talking to anybody. My audience is people who like to cook,
who want to really learn how to do it.” Amazing advice! Let’s also focus on the
audience (potential users of the interface and our potential participants in the usability
test).
Let’s identify the starting ingredients (potential task list items) and to find a way to
communicate why they are important.
During this week carefully choose a recipe to cook for yourself or for someone else. It
can be an ordinary recipe but choose it carefully! Cook your chosen recipe and share
with us (in the discussion forum) a picture of your starting ingredients. This is a simple
yet effective approach to help us focus on UX strategy. How does this cooking visual
help us see the importance of the task list for our usability test? (Hold your thoughts for
the discussion forum.)

25
Weeks #12-13 Theme: Conducting the User Test; Debriefing; Reporting Results,
Discussion, and Recommendations
Read text chapters as indicated from the At-A-Glance Schedule Table.
Usability Evaluation and Usability Task List discussion threads continue in the forum.
Professor Dringus will post notes (PowePoint) slides in the Course Content area.
Read article:
Wilson, C. (2007, September & October). The problem with usability problems: Context
is critical.
Interactions, ACM, 46-50.
Do This! More inspiration from the authors of Design 101, MOOC course, iversity! As
we reflect on the process of collecting data throughout our usability test process, every
good usability test facilitator should develop good habits of taking notes on a daily basis.
This week we focus on notemaking or notetaking. The authors of Design 101 remind us,
“When we talk about taking notes, we mean written notes, but also visual ones (sketches,
photographs, other)….You need to organize your notes. You need to reshape your
thoughts through space to be able to tell later on your compelling stories.” Regarding the
usability test, you’ve taken notes by jotting down what participants say and do throughout
the test process. What did you observe? What usability problems did the participants find
through completing the task list? What compelling data do you have to share about the
participant’s experience with the task list? This exercise is partly what I expect you will
reflect on in your usability evaluation report. We shall share our experiences also in the
discussion forum!
Week #14 Assignment #2 Usability Evaluation (UE) Paper Due in Blackboard on Sunday,
April 23, 2017, midnight ET
Important: Even though we will not have new readings for this week, we will
continue our discussions in on-going discussion forum threads, as needed.
Use this week for final writing and proofing of your paper.
• Assignment due on Sunday in Blackboard assignment dropbox– no extensions!!!
Weeks #15-16 Theme: Impacts: The Future of HCI
Professor Dringus will open the Impacts: The Future of HCI discussion thread in the
forum.

26
Read at least two articles for discussion forum:
Shneiderman, B. (2011, September & October). Claiming success, charting the future:
Micro-HCI and macro-HCI.
Interactions, 10-11.
McNaney, R., Vines, J., Roggen, D., Balaam, M., Zhang, P., Poliakov, I., & Olivier, P.
(2014). Exploring the acceptability of Google Glass as an everyday assistive device for
people with Parkinson’s.
Proceedings of CHI ’14, April 26-May 1, 2014, Toronto,
Canada. ACM, 2551-2554.
Prior, S., Waller, An., Black, R., & Kroli, T. (2013). Use of an agile bridge in the
development of assistive technology.
Proceedings of CHI’ 13, April 13-May 2, 2013,
Paris, France. ACM, 1579-1588.
Do This! Have you seen this video segment with Katie Couric? It’s about the Jibo, the
social robot. (The video segment can be found by searching “Katie Couric Interviews
Maker of the World’s First Family Robot”.) If you can scroll to 3:35m in the video, Katie
asks an important question. While the response given by Cynthia Breazeal (MIT Media
Lab) seems to make sense, I’m wondering how this type of “human empowerment” is
built into the design. Where is the line and when is it crossed?
http://news.yahoo.com/katie-couric-social-robot-jibo-205004529.html
Do This! Obviously, there is A LOT of future stuff on technology innovations on the
Web. One area that continues to develop is gesturing and surface technology. It’s worth
watching Jeff Han on Ted Talks (9 minutes),
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jeff_han_demos_his_breakthrough_touchscreen.html
Check it out!
Do This! More cool stuff – see exTouch, an embodied, spatially aware interface system
that allows users to manipulate actuated objects in space using augmented reality. See
http://tangible.media.mit.edu/project/extouch/ and http://vimeo.com/57514726
Do This! Even more cool stuff – see Ninja Track, a belt shaped object that consists of
ABS parts hinged both longitudinally and transversely. It has a musical instrument that
plays sounds depending on user interaction. See
http://www.yuichirock.com/nt/ and
https://vimeo.com/32763532
End of Detailed Course Schedule