Task/Scenario Evaluation #2 :Introduction to UI Design (User Interface Design Specialization) Answers 2026
✅ Question 1
Does the response contain a sensible smartwatch user task?
-
✅ Yes
-
❌ No
Explanation:
The task aligns with something a smartwatch user would reasonably want or need to do.
✅ Question 2
Clarity of the task description
-
❌ Completely!
-
✅ Mostly. The task has some areas that are less clear, but most learners could figure it out.
-
❌ Not very well
-
❌ No description provided
Explanation:
The task is understandable but could be clearer or more concise in places.
✅ Question 3
Is the task specific and concrete?
-
❌ Yes, well done!
-
✅ Mostly. A few minor issues, but generally concrete.
-
❌ Parts too vague
-
❌ No description / too abstract
Explanation:
The task is concrete enough to evaluate, with minor ambiguity.
✅ Question 4
Clear statement of who is doing the task?
-
❌ Yes, who is clear
-
✅ Who isn’t clear in the text, though someone with smartwatch knowledge could probably figure it out.
-
❌ Who isn’t specified at all
Explanation:
User context is implied rather than explicitly stated.
✅ Question 5
Is this a complete job (not just a sub-step)?
-
❌ Yes, complete job
-
✅ The task is more of a sub-task that would never be done alone.
-
❌ No meaningful task
Explanation:
The task feels like part of a larger activity rather than a full user goal.
✅ Question 6
Is the task central and important for smartwatch design?
-
❌ Yes, core and critical
-
✅ Mostly. This doesn’t seem like a core task, but it is valuable.
-
❌ Not really
-
❌ No meaningful task
Explanation:
Important, but not one of the most critical smartwatch interactions.
✅ Question 7
Any interface-dependent “how” instructions?
-
❌ No, pure task
-
✅ There are minor “how” elements, but it is mostly about “what.”
-
❌ Too specific about “how”
-
❌ No meaningful task
Explanation:
Some implementation details appear, but they don’t dominate the task.
✅ Question 8
Do scenario steps match the task?
-
❌ Yes
-
✅ Not quite, but somewhat.
-
❌ Steps don’t match
-
❌ No meaningful scenario
Explanation:
Steps loosely align, but the mapping is imperfect.
✅ Question 9
Are steps understandable to a typical smartwatch user?
-
❌ Yes
-
✅ Not quite, but somewhat.
-
❌ No
-
❌ No meaningful scenario
Explanation:
Most steps are understandable, though some may be unclear or unrealistic.
✅ Question 10
Does the scenario include “what” vs just “how”?
-
❌ Just “how” steps
-
✅ Some “what” mixed in.
-
❌ As much “what” as “how”
-
❌ No meaningful scenario
Explanation:
The scenario includes intent occasionally, but leans toward procedural steps.
✅ Question 11
Is the action sequence reasonably correct?
-
❌ Yes
-
✅ Mostly.
-
❌ I don’t think so
-
❌ No meaningful scenario
Explanation:
The sequence is plausible but not entirely clean or optimal.
🧾 Summary Table
| Q# | Best Evaluation Choice | Key Evaluation Insight |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Yes | Task relevance |
| 2 | Mostly clear | Instruction clarity |
| 3 | Mostly concrete | Specificity |
| 4 | Who implied | User context |
| 5 | Sub-task | Task completeness |
| 6 | Mostly important | Design priority |
| 7 | Minor “how” | Task vs implementation |
| 8 | Somewhat aligned | Scenario-task fit |
| 9 | Somewhat clear | User language |
| 10 | Some “what” | Scenario quality |
| 11 | Mostly correct | Logical flow |