Description
Interaction and Final Project hand-in
The fourth and final part of your project consists of designing interactions for your visualizations, implementing
them, and describing what you did.
Additionally, this hand-in constitutes the final project hand-in, and so, should also introduce, discuss, and conclude your project work.
The hand-in consists of four parts, aside from your general introduction (1), discussion (5), and conclusion (6):
1) Decide on the final visualization design in terms of representation, presentation, and interaction (3.6).
While you should not consider representation alternatives, you might consider and discuss alternative
solutions for interacting with the visualization.
2) Implement one or more compatible interactions (3.7).
3) Describe your final implemented visualization (4).
4) Describe your process (4.1).
These are described in detail in the following sections
FINAL STATIC DESIGN (3.6)
Based on your previous hand-ins, you decide on one visualization design that you choose for your final implemented visualization. You consider which interactions you want to offer, potential alternative and incompatible
interactions, and any secondary information to show as part of your entire design. Secondary information could
be text descriptions, legends, axes, or even small visualizations that might for example function as menus.
PROTOTYPING INTERACTION(S) (3.7)
You implement and describe your interactions, using D3 as appropriate. You can use sketches or screenshots
from the final implemented visualization to describe the interactions.
FINAL IMPLEMENTED VISUALIZATION (4)
You describe your final implemented visualization and include screenshots. You describe what it offers, how it
might be used, and what insights might be had from using it. You provide a link to the final version so that we
can easily try it for ourselves (we suggest you use Github or http://pages.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/~[YOUR CPSC ACCOUNT NAME]).
PROCESS REFLECTIONS (4.1)
You describe your process of implementing the final visualization. Perhaps considering interaction made you revise some ideas? Perhaps interacting with it made you realize something about the data that you hadn’t noticed?
Perhaps the interaction itself made it possible to experiment in new ways? Or perhaps considering interaction
mostly in the end of your project made you question the way you split what information can be understood from
the visualization alone, versus brought up through interaction? Describe your thoughts about your process.
SUMMARY
As outlined above, you describe what you have done in writing based on the four headings and submit this as a
pdf report that includes every part of your project. The final report should have the following sections:
1. Introduction new
2. Data description hand-in 1
2.1. Data descriptions hand-in 1
2.2. Pros and cons of data sets hand-in 1
2.3. Data set decision hand-in 1
3. Design process new, but probably just needs signposting. Could state design goals
3.1. Sketch-able data subsets hand-in 2
3.2. Design direction hand-in 2 (“Design direction in sketches”)
3.2.1.First sketches hand-in 2
3.2.2.Variations hand-in 2
3.3. Process hand-in 2
3.4. General design direction hand-in 3
3.5. Prototyping variations hand-in 3 (“Three variations”)
3.5.1.Variation A hand-in 3
3.5.2.Variation B hand-in 3
3.5.3.Variation C hand-in 3
3.6. Implementation process hand-in 3 (“Process of implementing representation…”)
3.7. Final static design new
3.8. Prototyping interaction(s) new
4. Final implemented visualization new
4.1. Process reflections new
5. Discussion new
6. Conclusion new
As the outline above indicate, it includes your previous hand-ins.
For the introduction, you describe what the project is about, the goal of the visualization, the visualized data on a
high level, what you present in your report, and your main conclusions.
For the discussion, you reflect on what you did in the project. You discuss what might have been interesting to
do if you had more time/resources, the advantages/disadvantages of the visualizations, and your main insights
from doing the project (for example, what did you learn or what do you need to learn more about).
For the conclusion, you briefly state your main achievements.
The above outline includes your previous project hand-ins – while you can incorporate feedback when creating
your final visualization, do not edit these previous hand-ins.
SUBMISSION
You submit your hand-in as a pdf. Use the template provided along with this description (if your preferred writing
tools do not take docx, then just follow the main structure of the template). The title/subtitle of your report should
include “CPSC 583 Final Project Report” and “[student id] | [date]”.
DEADLINE
Wednesday April 14, 11:59pm Calgary time.
NEXT STEPS
You will receive a final mark for your project in D2L.
RUBRICS OF YOUR PROJECT WORK
You made informed decisions (~25%) You built it (~50%) You effectively communicated your design (~25%)
Design Process Design Principles Implementation Style of Report Visuals
Excellent You followed the design processes
discussed in the course and your
design decisions are clearly aligned
with that process. You reflect on
design trade-offs and how your
process navigated you towards
your decision
Your design shows significant evidence that they were supported by
research or design principles, e.g.,
by citing papers and topics you
learned in the course. Your terminology is precise and correct
Your visualization is interactive and
functional. It may be extremely
creative/ambitious but slightly
buggy. It may also have polished,
bug-free interactions but not as
creative/ambitious as the top prototypes
Both style and tone are very
strong, but a reader would be able
to differentiate between your
work and that of a company. For
example, this could be because of
grammatical issues, unclear pacing,
etc.
Visuals clearly shows the design
process and aligns with the design
decisions made. They may not
completely capture interaction or
may not be of professional quality
Good You mostly followed a design process, but the level of reflection
leaves something to be desired.
You may be writing summaries
more than reflection. Important
aspects of your design may be
glossed over or important steps in
the design process appear rushed
Your writing contains evidence
that your decisions are aligned
with existing principles, but your
terminology may be imprecise. You
may be missing some key concepts
or some of your references may be
incorrect
Your visualization is functional with
some small bugs. While most of
the interactions make sense, some
lead to confusing user experience
Style and tone were pitched correctly, but there are areas of improvement – there may be a section of the writing that could use a
subheading, or key points emphasized. Writing may be too casual or
too formal. Visuals may be distracting
There are visuals in the document,
but it may not align with your writing. There may be a disconnect between the evidence you show and
your decisions. An aspect of the
design process may have been addressed inadequately
Developing A significant component of your
reflection may be missing. It may
read like a summary rather than a
reflection. The length is likely too
short with little structure that reflects the design process
Your writing refers to a couple of
design principles, but largely lacks
precision and citations (links)
Your visualization is limited. The
scope of your project was defined
in such a way that this should have
been completed
Writing or structure does not work
well in some respects. The writing
might be incoherent, or the specified structure might not be used
well. In addition, there are likely
clarity issues, either due to writing
content or style
Critical components of your design
process are lacking evidence. From
looking at the pictures in the document, it is very difficult to discern
how your design progressed
Lacking Writing is incomplete. Little to no
reflection of the design process
There is little to no evidence that
the readings/lectures have been
incorporated into this assignment.
At best, there are loose references
While there is evidence of progress
towards a visualization, there is
nothing to interact with
The reporting structure was not
used and there are likely issues in
how figures are included and referenced
Very little evidence. The images
that are there do not demonstrate
a connection to the design process
Missing No reflection No design principles referenced There is little to no evidence of
work on this project
No style to judge. Perhaps not submitted as a pdf
No documentation of the design
process to explain your decisions
How to interpret the rubrics: By the end of the term, my goal is for you to be consistently achieving the Excellent row in the rubric. This roughly corresponds to getting full marks (100%). Good roughly
corresponds to 90% and developing to 70%. While I enjoy seeing Expert level quality (green, below), this will not be reflected in your mark. The weighting for the dimensions is listed above the columns.
Rough relation to each project hand-in: Hand-in 1: NA, but also required a suitable choice of dataset to carry out the project which leans especially on Design Process and Design Principles at this stage.
Hand-in 2: Design Process, Design Principles, Style of Report. Hand-in 3: All categories, especially Implementation and Visuals. Hand-in 4: All categories, especially Implementation. As percentages,
each hand-in contributes approximately the following to your final grade: 1 – 10%; 2 – 20%; 3 – 30%; 4 (the new parts) – 40%.
Expert
(exceeding
expectations
for the
course)
You clearly reflect on each significant step of the design processes
discussed in the course that is relevant to this project. They are in
alignment with both your goals
and with your decisions. Your description is indistinguishable from
that written by a vis researcher,
and the depth of reflection
demonstrates mastery over the
design space
You have supported each decision
you made by research or design
principles discussed in lectures or
readings. Those principles are
clearly articulated, use precise terminology, and properly cite their
original source. Your decisions are
supported to a degree passing
peer review at top publication venues
Interacting with your visualization
is virtually indistinguishable from
interacting with a polished product. Your design is not just functional, but also ambitious and creative
Your writing is professional in quality. Your document exemplifies a
tone and visual style that makes it
indistinguishable from highly visible authors and companies
Visual evidence clearly shows the
design process and aligns with the
design decisions made. All visuals
are extremely high quality
