Assignment #0 Samples

Rating scheme:

0 – not clear that the paper was actually read

1 – needs considerable work

2 – on the right track, but are missing at least one key point or many smaller points

3 – good job, a bit of fine tuning required

4 – excellent job, got the full essence of the paper

** Note: this scheme may be adjusted during the term if necessary. **

Below are some samples that received a rating of 3 or 4. (Note that Assignment 0 was not required for the first two papers. A few people chose to submit reviews and they serve as nice examples.)

 

*** Note: all the samples below have now been removed. ***

Johnson, J. et al. (1989). The Xerox Star: A Retrospective. (Reprinted in BGBG, p. 53 - 70) 

sample 1 [PDF] 

Myers, B. (1998). A Brief History to Human-Computer Interaction Technology. ACM Interactions, 5(2), 44-54.

sample 1 [PDF]

sample 2 [PDF]

Landauer, T. (1995). The Trouble with Computers. The MIT Press.

sample 1 [PDF]

sample 2 [HTML]

sample 3 [PDF]

How to Design Usable Systems, Gould (Excerpt reprinted in BGBG, p. 93 - 121)

sample 1 [PDF]  (temporarily disabled)

sample 2 [HTML] (temporarily disabled)

Norman, D.A. (1986). Cognitive Engineering. In D.A. Norman, S.W. Draper (Eds.), User Centered System Design (pp 31-61). 

sample 1 [PDF]

Norman, D.A. (1988). The Psychopathology of Everyday Things. (Excerpt reprinted in BGBG, p. 5 - 21)

sample 1 [PDF]

Norman, D.A. (2002). Emotion & design: Attractive things work better. ACM Interactions, 9(4), 36-42.

sample 1 [PDF]