Ideas for Research Proposal in Review

HCI 591 is doing a project research proposal.
These are two ideas I have for that project, thought I would get your feedback.
Might be nice to tie this project in with my future research and thesis?

Evaluate a development teams key roles and identify high
level processes for UI/UX implementation and testing. Create a paper, pattern
library, and/or wiki to identify various methods, key elements, and techniques
based on known criteria from clients and past proposals. Identify items missing
from proposals and business case/use case for why the newly recommended
elements should be implemented.

compliance/WCAG2.0 AA – these are the standard regulations set forth by the
United States Government and UK for digital service standards to ensure EIT and
web applications created for public use by the governement are reasonably
accessible to all users. Meaning, anyone with a disability should be able to
use EIT (electronic and information technology) with equal access. Disabilities
span further than just a user who is blind, deaf, or in a wheel chair. These
regulations are created to also protect users with color blindness, who have
multiple impairments, have learning disabilities, and impaired motor skills
etc. I would like to research pitfalls to the implementation of these
regulations for government agencies and contractors, create testing guidelines
and recommendations (beyond what is listed on web aim), do user testing and get
feedback from users with impairments, and feedback from users who use programs
like JAWS. I would then like to compare the US and UK regulations while
defining how compliance measures up to actual accessibility recommendations
from sites like web aim. Please note that compliance is not the same as actual
accessibility and neither are the criteria for successfully being compliant.

Response 2:

I apologize, my initial email was too vague in an effort to quickly disseminate
the information and not bore you.
I probably should have prefaced in my original email that both topics I’ve
proposed are items I have to do anyway for work. I’ve already spent over two
years collaborating and gathering process flow information and specific data
about GD’s development teams to create a better process flow for our
organization. When I first arrived, we did not have a very good process plan in
place for implementing UX, we arrived at the conclusion that many, many steps
that the design team agreed are important where being skipped. So, a friend and
I started a design collaboration workgroup and invited the only other 2
designers, our boss, and eventually the development teams. It started out with
a lot of white board drawing, tons of notes, and multiple meetings to discuss which
methods we would used based on different criteria or problems. Later we started
implementing training at the end of each meeting, which is where we started
invited the development team.
After the first year, or somewhere around there my friend left. Our team
now has three designers and I’m not sure that GD has very many UX staff outside
of our team. There are even less design people who are certified and trained in
508 compliance (many QA staff but for different reasons).
To respond to the concerns in your email, I agree, my initial
description of both potential research projects where poorly articulated and
too vague to get a proper grasp on my background with them and where I would
like to take them in the future. Based on the fact that I already have some
research accomplished on this project and that I was already planning on doing
both projects I do not believe that either project will be too difficult to
To answer your questions:
How would
you gather data about the wide range of development teams’ organizational
? I’ve had extensive training in program management and have read a
large majority of my organization’s policies. I already write most of our team’s
technical documentation, collaborate on RFI/RFP responses regularly, and have
previous experience collaborating with every member of our application
development team within the HCSD department and larger sector that would be
relevant to the documentation my stakeholders desire to have documented. My
management team is particularly interested in further promoting the UI/UX
skillset and other skills relevant and specific to the application development
team. This would include 508 compliance, software engineering, cyber security,
program management, project management, business analyst, staticians, stakeholders
(for us are usually clinicians and staticians – both of which we have onsite), management,
and quality assurance. Some teams have more skillsets and additional team
members, but I think this is a good start and would be sufficient for this
Would you
need an activity theory or actor-network theory just to begin to try to model
UI/UX implementation strategies
? I had not previously hear of these
theories, so I looked up both.
For activity theory I read Wikipedia and L.S. Vygotsky, Robert W. Rieber
(1997). I’m still unsure of how to implement activity theory, but like that it
is described as a particularly useful lens in qualitative research
methodologies like ethnography and case studies. I do a lot of work in both of
those fields, so if you know of another book I could reference that would be
appreciated. (I also read about SSAT – systemic structural activity theory)
I read the description of Actor-network theory on Wikipedia. This lead
me to reading about essentialism. I noted that the writers said ANT is a constructivist
approach that avoids essentialist explanations. According to Wikipedia
essentialism provided the basis for taxonomy, protean theory, and in part
involves categorizing and grouping characteristics. Isn’t this partially what I’m
proposing to do for the UX process- categorize, group, and layout a workflow?
If so, is actor-network the appropriate route for this research? Is this
research or an evaluation? I would probably lean more towards evaluation as the
primary purpose with research as the secondary since I will need defensible
criteria and have business stakeholders.
I’m not
certain that a case study of one or two implementations would permit the
breadth of conclusions your paragraph seems to imply you’d seek
. I agree,
but I’m not hoping to implement a case study, so much as document past
performance and attempt to create a field map for teams within General
Dynamics. This will be especially useful for program/project managers in the
early stages of vision documents as they begin to layout business requirements
and timelines.  I’m very open on which
method I should use to research the information and form conclusions, mostly
because I only know of a few formal terms for this outside of extensive UX
methods for IT and program management.
Don’t assume the US and UK have identical accessibility policies;
they don’t.
Don’t underestimate the ADA, in addition to Section 508, as well, as
well as WAI-ARIA and IndieUI.  
worked with both, and agree they do not. The US’s policies are stricter in many
ways. Ironically, neither are truly fully accessibility friendly. Web Aim has
stricter standards that the government regulations. I’ve worked on projects for
compliance and accessibility for both countries. I’m currently in the process
of creating policies, expanding government documentation of accessibility, and
building a wiki to facilitate disseminating this information to teams.
Your text has some minor issues with your descriptions of
disability; you might consider rephrasing those, so as to adopt a tone more in
keeping with that used by groups such as the WAI (of which, did you know, I was
once a member of a working committee?).

Agreed. I need to work on being more formal with the tone I use and watch the verbiage.
The initial writing was meant to be informal for class and I worried that if I
was too formal and broad some classmates might not know specifically what I
wanted to research, so I’d end up without a teammate. We also had a word limit.
The US/UK comparison/contrast might be quite useful; has that
never been done before?
I haven’t seen it done
online, but know from personal experience that our team has done it. You also
have to keep in mind there are only a handful of government contracting agencies
that work in both countries. Again, this is just an opinion and not fact but I
also think these two countries have a really good foundation for web standards
in this area. I’ve seen some of the standards for other countries, but France,
Germany, Kosovo, and Spain are going to be much harder for me to document since
my linguistic skills for each country are still extremely elementary and this
field is extremely technical. I am, however, in the process of studying French
and have the intention of learning multiple other languages in the next five

The problem is, I am having a really hard time translating methods and
technical terms. They are also not things I can generally ask my friends who
are expats, foreign natives, or language teachers because they do not know what
I’m talking about even in English. Would really appreciate any resources you
might direct me toward for that. The languages I am interested include: Korean
(the seoul dialect), Japanese (hiragana and katakana – not kangi), Mandarin Chinese,
French, German, Italian, Kosovian-Albanian, Macedonian, Spanish, ASL, and
British-English (technical writing – learning this has really affected and
confused some of my spelling/grammar over the past four years). I’ve already
taken 2 years of Japanese and have multiple friends from Japan from my time
living in WA (near Japan airlines) and three foreign exchanges students. I
started to learn sign language at a very small age with my mother and continued
my education when I studied marine biology for two years for use when scuba
diving (so I mostly know diving/fish related stuff). I’ve been attempting
French on and off again for over 5 years, with a tutor for 2, and community
education courses for another 2. The most useful resource I’ve found was within
the last two years, I’ve been doing a program on my iPhone called Duolingo.
Unfortunately this does not include technical terms, at all.

Wikipedia (2016). Activity theory. Accessed 2/2016.
Wikipedia (2016). Essentialism. Accessed 2/2016.
L.S. Vygotsky, Robert W. Rieber (1997). The Collected works of L.S
Vygotsky. Volume 3. Plenum Press.
Wikipedia (2016). Actor-network theory. Accessed 2/2016.

Sorry this email is really long. At some point I need to learn the happy
medium between being too brief and too wordy. 

via Blogger


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s