Peer Testing [9 pts]

Gather functional and usability feedback from your peers

Be prepared to run a heuristic evaluation in your assigned sessions on your machine and participate in another team's evaluation.

On the day of the peer testing session, the instructor will post an assigned schedule of heuristic evaluations. Every student will run at least one evaluation and participate in at least one other team's evaluation. All sessions must give the same instructions and ask participants to do the same tasks.

The grade for the peer testing session is assigned to the student running the evaluation. Note that you must have the system running on your own machine rather than a teammate's machine.

Evaluation Rubric

Total marks possible: 9 points.

Criteria	Exceeds Expectations	Meets Expectations	Below Expectations
Preparedness Is the session ready to go at the start of the assigned time?	[3 pt] The ones running the stations - are their computers ready and is the task list available before the start of the session? The ones participating in an evaluation - are they ready to start at the assigned stations before the start of the session?	[2 pt] The students are prepared at the start of the session.	[0 pt] The student was late and/or could not get their computer ready in time for the evaluation.
Evaluation Professionalism	[3 pt] A proper introduction of the system was described that points out the uniqueness of their project. The student was actively taking notes based on the participant's actions, reactions, and feedback. All identified issues are logged in the GitHub repository (show to TA/instructor).	[2 pt] The student ran the evaluation and was paying attention most of the time. All identified issues are logged in the GitHub repository (show to TA/instructor).	[0 pt] The student did not run an evaluation, or was not paying attention at all during the evaluation. No issues were logged.
Participation Professionalism	[3 pt] The student completed all the sessions and followed the evaluation instructions as requested. After the session, the student submitted a peer evaluation on the course website for all the teams they evaluated, with comments that are constructive, thoughtful, and helpful for the other team(s).	[2 pt] The student completed all the sessions and followed the evaluation instructions as requested. After the session, the student submitted a peer evaluation on the course website for all the teams they evaluated, with helpful comments.	[0 pt] The student did not participate in all the assigned sessions or was not professional when working with another team. After the session, not all the expected peer evaluations were available, or the comments were vague and not helpful.