英文代写-AY 2020/2021
时间:2021-04-22
Alliance Manchester Business School, User Experience Design BMAN 24662, Semester 2, AY 2020/2021
Assessment criteria: UX report


Goals and objectives (10%)
Research (user research, ideation
and prioritisation) (30%)
Content (30%) Creativity (25%) Presentation & Language (5%)
70-
100%
- Excellent understanding of the
project brief.
- Executive summary explains the
undertaken work and deliverables.
- Competently delivers project and
competitor assessment

- Demonstrates proficient mastery
through superior analysis and
rationale.
- Expertly draws from primary and
secondary research findings.
- Appropriate and logical approach to
ideation and prioritisation.
- Excellent rationale behind the
proposed changes/recommendations.
- Your UX report contains all
of the recommended
elements (sections)
- The amount of detail
provided in each section
shows a very advanced
ability to integrate the full
range of principles and
theories in relation to UX
research and design.

- The idea and
execution of the
proposed changes
(prototype,
wireframes) are
exceptionally
engaging,
imaginative,
original and on
strategy.
- The report is well organised and
coherent, with no discernible
typographical or grammatical errors.
- It is evident that care has been
taken to present material in a clear,
and neat, manner.
- The ability to demonstrate a
coherent line of thinking is clear.
- This report is very well
referenced providing
references where needed and in a
full, accurate and
complete manner.
60-
69%

- Good understanding of the project
brief.
- Executive summary explains the
undertaken work and deliverables.
Some elements of the summary
could be more on target.
- Competently delivers project and
competitor assessment.
Assessment could be more on
target.

- Demonstrates competence through
good analysis and rationale.
- Competently draws from primary
and secondary research findings.
- The report could benefit from
stronger rationale behind various
decisions (ideation, prioritisation,
persona requirements, etc.).
- The rationale behind the proposed
changes/recommendations could be
strengthened.
- Your UX report contains
most of the recommended
elements (sections)
- The amount of detail
provided in each section
shows a good ability to
integrate a range of
principles and theories in
relation to UX research and
design.

- The idea and
execution of the
proposed changes
(prototype,
wireframes) are
engaging and on
strategy.
- There are occasional typographical
or grammatical errors.
- There are occasional lapses in
coherence.
- This report is mainly well referenced.
In most cases it provides references
where needed and in a full, accurate
and complete manner.
50-
59%
- Some understanding of the project
brief.
- Executive summary explains some
of the undertaken work and
deliverables. However, the
summary could be more on target.
- Assessment could be more on
target.

- Demonstrates some competence in
relation to analysis and rationale.
- Draws from some primary and
secondary research findings.
However, the presented research
lacks rigour and some deliverables.
- The report needs stronger rationale
behind various decisions (ideation,
prioritisation, persona requirements,
etc.).
- The rationale behind the proposed
changes/recommendations is
relatively weak.
- Your UX report contains
some of the recommended
elements (sections)
- The amount of detail
provided in each section
shows some ability to
integrate a range of
principles and theories in
relation to UX research and
design.

- The idea and
execution of the
proposed changes
(prototype,
wireframes) could
be more engaging
and more on
strategy.
- Lapses in style - slight inaccuracies
in spelling and syntax.
- Lapses in coherence.
- This report is mostly
adequately referenced.
However, this element
needs improvement. It
may be that some references are
missing or are inaccurate or not
complete.
40-
49%
- Limited understanding of the
project brief.
- Executive summary should be
more on target.
- Assessment should be more on
target.
- Demonstrates low competence in
relation to analysis and rationale.
- The presentation could benefit from
much stronger rationale behind
various decisions (ideation,
- Your UX report does not
follow the recommended
structure and is difficult to
follow
- The content of each section
shows low ability to integrate
- The idea and
execution of the
proposed changes
(prototype,
wireframes) are
somehow
- Lapses in style, many inaccuracies
in spelling and syntax.
- Lapses in coherence.
- This report is inadequately
referenced. This element needs

prioritisation, persona requirements,
etc.).
- The rationale behind the proposed
changes/recommendations is weak.
a range of principles and
theories in relation to UX
research and design.
engaging but not
on strategy
serious improvement. It may be that
some references are missing or are
inaccurate or not complete.
Fail - Presentation demonstrates a
struggle to engage fully with the
task and there is a resultant lack of
focus/clarity. - The proposed
solutions are not illustrated or
clarified with specific examples or
detail.
- The author appears to have
struggled at times to understand the
task.
- Report does not build on primary
and secondary research.
- Very limited consideration for
justification of the proposed solution

- You did not follow the
recommended structure for
your report.
- Insufficient engagement
with the module and its
content
- The idea and
execution of the
proposed changes
(prototype,
wireframes) are
not engaging and
are not on
strategy
- Errors in punctuation, grammar,
style and coherence which frequently
pose a challenge to the audience.
-There were no references and / or
the incorrect citation and referencing
technique has been used.


















































































































































































































































学霸联盟


essay、essay代写