Studies on how the skills needed to carry out usercentred design (UCD) activities can be taught and learnt have been limited, although the impact of UCD is widely recognised in professional settings. Conducting UCD activities in educational contexts within the constraints of university courses remains a challenge, specifically when students are in their first year and are just beginning to engage with the complexities of software development. In this paper, we argue for the importance of early exposure to a variety of UCD activities, with the help of scaffolding and decomposition, through the step-by-step UCD Sprint process. We explore the integration of the UCD Sprint process for 7 weeks in a 12-week, first-semester, firstyear Computer Science undergraduate course, focusing on how students experience exposure to a wide range of UCD activities. Data is gathered using two questionnaires: the background questionnaire completed by 215 students at the start of the course, gathering data on demographic information, and the perceived experience questionnaire completed by 57 students, gathering data on comfort levels with UCD activities and overall feedback on the UCD Sprint process. The students rated the UCD Sprint steps as generally thought-provoking, particularly valuing steps involving direct user engagement, such as interviews and highfidelity prototyping. However, process-related steps were rated lower for perceived long-term usefulness. Qualitative feedback highlighted the UCD Sprint process as clear and beneficial. Suggestions for improvements to the process included reducing its complexity and optimising the learning materials for guiding the students in using the process. Statistically significant increases in comfort levels with UCD activities, including user research, evaluation, and design were observed post-course. The main contribution of this paper lies in its insights into the student experiences with the individual UCD activities contained within the UCD Sprint, assessing how early exposure to UCD activities can enhance their comfort with performing core UCD activities. By offering early, scaffolded exposure to UCD activities through the UCD Sprint, we are actively designing a student-centred learning environment that prioritises hands-on experience and engagement with UCD principles. This approach not only fosters student comfort and competence in UCD activities but also empowers them to take an active role in their learning journey, encouraging them to become more adept at understanding and addressing user needs, ultimately preparing them for future careers in a rapidly evolving, user-focused tech industry.

Abstract The integration of user-centred design (UCD) practices in software development is fundamental for enhancing the overall experiences of software users. In this paper, we summarize the results of various research studies on what the stated limitations of UCD practices are. A process called the UCD Sprint was introduced recently with the goal of addressing some of the existing UCD practice limitations for integrating UCD practices in software development. The guided usage of the step-by-step process has been studied with students and UCD practitioners in courses showing positive results, where participants describe benefits while using the process, such as the speed of the process, its clear structure, guidance. In this paper, we describe results from a synthesis study summarizing results on how guided usage of the UCD Sprint can address UCD practice limitations. Furthermore, we describe results from a series of interviews with UCD practitioners on how they currently practice UCD, the challenges and limitations they experience and their views on how unguided usage of the UCD Sprint would potentially fit their UCD practices. While the interviewees recognize the importance of user involvement, they highlight challenges in aligning user interests with other stakeholders' interests. All participants had used processes like design sprints for structuring their UCD practices. Interviewees have generally tailored the traditional approach of design sprints, showcasing a nuanced understanding of UCD practices. The results show that the UCD Sprint process is considered by UCD practitioners as a promising approach for practicing UCD. The process is viewed with enthusiasm, but the need for clear objectives and adaptability to the work contexts of the UCD practitioners remains essential. UCD practitioners’ adaptive strategies of their UCD practices emphasize the need for flexibility and adaptation of UCD practices and processes.

This special issue presents four papers featuring extended versions of full papers originally published at the Conference INTERACT 2023, which was held August 28th to September 1st, 2023, at the University of York, York, UK. We will first present the INTERACT Conference and then the selection process of papers that ultimately led to publication of this special issue in Interacting with Computers. The INTERACT Conference is held every 2 years. It started in 1984, making it one of the longest running conferences on human–computer interaction. INTERACT 2023 was the 19th International Conference of Technical Committee 13 (Human–Computer Interaction) of the International Federation for Information Processing (IFIP). IFIP was created in 1960 under the auspices of UNESCO. The IFIP Technical Committee 13 (TC13)1 aims to develop the science and technology of human–computer interaction (HCI). The INTERACT Conference series is an important showcase for researchers and practitioners in the field of HCI. Coming under the open, inclusive umbrella of the IFIP, INTERACT is truly international in its spirit and attracts researchers from many countries and cultures. The venues of the INTERACT conferences over the years bear a testimony to this inclusiveness.

Several studies have shown that involving users in design processes is a key factor in understanding user needs and essential for designing computer systems capable of providing valuable user experiences. However, many practitioners do not emphasize user needs sufficiently and neglect user involvement in software design and development. The UCD Sprint is a recently proposed, step-by-step, cost-effective process that focuses on involving users in design activities. This article reports a mixed-method study in which, for the first time, practitioners working in companies used the UCD Sprint; the study’s main objective was to investigate the impact of the UCD Sprint on practitioners’ design practices. The results show that, among the various activities associated with this process, those that involved users were particularly appreciated by practitioners. Thus, the UCD Sprint can enhance the innovativeness of company design practices; it enables practitioners to obtain sufficient information to create systems that fit users’ needs.

Software development presents technical and social challenges for new entrants to the field, particularly in empathizing with potential users. That can lead to misunderstanding of users' needs and requirements, affecting the user experience. Research has shown that implementing user-centred design (UCD) methods during software development positively impacts the overall user experience. Thus, teaching higher education students UCD methods from the beginning of their undergraduate studies is preferable, as upskilling later in their professional work can be a more complex endeavour. A process called the User-Centred Design Sprint (the UCD Sprint) covering 14 UCD methods was introduced to first-semester undergraduate Computer Science students at Reykjavik University, during a 7-week period through lectures and on-site problem-solving sessions. As additional support, the students were provided with a digital aid on the UCD Sprint, supporting the learning process. Feedback on the learning of the UCD Sprint process was collected through in-person surveys with 70 respondents, and qualitative digital aid evaluations through student reporting from 110 respondents. The findings show that the students rated direct interaction with users, especially high. On the opposite end, the students rated methods aimed at refining the initial ideas on the lower side of the rating scale. The students mentioned seeing the value of using the UCD Sprint process when developing software to better empathize with and cater to users' needs. The students used the digital aid provided alongside tools such as in-class slides, the textbook, and internet-based support. Overall, the student feedback on the digital aid was positive, with students appreciating clear instructions for conducting the methods in the UCD Sprint process. This paper reports a mixed-method study with results diverging into a three-fold contribution. Firstly, it reports the perceived usefulness of the UCD Sprint process and the experience of using it during the course. Secondly, findings from the usage of a digital aid to accompany the UCD Sprint process are reported. This provides the basis for the third contribution, which is presented in terms of recommendations that others can utilise when developing digital aids for assisting students in higher education.

Abstract As the complexity of IT systems increases, the demand for methods taking the whole work situation into account grows. The Vision Seminar (VS) process addresses the future usage of technologies in complex digital work environments. This paper describes the experiences of conducting the VS process in the context of a large IT project to improve study-administrative work. The participants and stakeholders' experiences of participating in VS workshops were studied as the effect the participants and stakeholders believed the vision might have. Data were gathered through interviews and a survey. The participants were confident that the time spent on workshops was worthwhile and that achieving the future described in the resulting vision was feasible. The stakeholders perceived the VS process as rigorous. They were happily surprised by the positive spirit and engagement displayed by the participants. The utility of the resulting vision not being obvious was the most notable weakness mentioned.

Previous research has established that leaders in information and communication technology (ICT) are crucial for establishing a user-centred systems design perspective in ICT for work-related tasks. This paper therefore describes the perspectives of 18 ICT leaders in three kinds of leadership roles (managers, project leaders and specialists) in order to understand their views of user-centred systems design concerning ICT. It uses the concept of technological frames of reference to analyse three domains: technology-in-use, technology strategy and nature of technology. The results show that many specialists see user involvement as a critical factor in successfully establishing new information and communication technologies, but that these systems are currently built around the needs of management rather than end users. Looking forward, all three relevant social groups are optimistic about how ICT will become more user-centred and more strategically aligned in the future. However, changes in ICT are described as extremely energy-consuming and difficult – akin to ‘walking in the jungle with a machete’. Finally, we discuss the relevance of technological frames and present some implications for the successful establishment of user-centred system design as a perspective in organisations.

The usage of User Experience (UX) methods has been studied through the years. However, little is known about UX professionals’ lifelong learning processes related to UX methods in Agile, choosing what UX methods to use, and the enablers and hindrances for using the UX methods. The study aims to broaden current knowledge about UX professionals’ lifelong learning practices to understand their work situations better. The paper describes how UX professionals learn about and choose UX methods, their frequency of use, and the enablers and barriers when using the UX methods in Agile. An interview study was conducted with 13 UX professionals from various industries and two countries working with Agile and UX. We used a qualitative approach, and a thematic analysis was carried out to answer the research questions. The results show that support from colleagues is an essential component for learning about the methods and how to use UX methods. Time pressure makes UX professionals choose methods they know will deliver their desired results. Prototyping, user testing, user journeys, and workshops are the most frequently used UX methods. Additionally, the results show that UX professionals think that the UX methods are often too complicated and take too long to learn. Additionally, they find it challenging to integrate UX methods into Agile. These findings indicate that UX methods might work better if designed to be less complicated and deliver results more efficiently. Moreover, collegial and peer learning is central to UX professionals. The HCI community could be more active in supporting this culture by sharing information and learning. Finally, the usability and UX of the tools affect which UX methods are used.

Agility is an overarching ideal for empirically-driven software development processes that embrace change in order to improve quality, economy, and simplicity. While the pursuit of Agility has held prominence in software practice and research for over two decades, user experience (UX) designers struggle to integrate their work processes with agile software development. As empirical processes are constantly evolving, so is this integration struggle for UX designers. We, therefore, present an industrial case study of how a Danish software company integrates UX design and agile software development. We conducted a case study involving (a) one iteration of individual interviews with 10 employees (four UX designers, three software developers, two project managers, and one solution architect) and (b) a follow-up iteration consisting of a workshop with 6 employees (three UX designers, two solution architects, and one project manager) two years later. We analyzed how the company's approach to integration with 'upfront design' and 'work in parallel' involve mutual adjustments as opposed to assimilation or separation of UX design and software development. Our analysis shows how integration through mutual adjustments made distinct contributions to UX designers' and software developers' pursuit of Agility. They experienced notably different work processes that still dealt effectively with change and contributed to quality, economy, or simplicity. Nevertheless, as shown from a follow-up workshop two years after our first interviews, these processes were still susceptible to integration struggles over time. We conclude that integration based on mutual adjustment potentially makes Agility for UX designers and software developers different and mutually complementary. This integration contrasts with assimilation, which potentially makes their Agility mutually indistinguishably, and with separation, which makes their Agility different and mutually competing.

One way to ensure good user experience of IT systems is to conduct user centred evaluation, aimed to provide feedback to IT professionals on their IT systems from the user perspective. The objective of this paper is to explore a conceptual framework, named RAMES that supports evaluators when planning, comparing and documenting user centred evaluations in a structured way. The framework structures the elements of an evaluation into five categories: Roles, Activities, Materials, Environments, and System. The framework was developed based on a theoretical analysis. Two explorative studies with 92 participants in total show that two thirds of the participants found it easy or rather easy to use the framework, and 33% find it likely that they would use the framework again. The conclusion of the studies is that frameworks such as RAMES enhance the implementation of user centred evaluations.

Human–computer interaction (HCI) practice has emerged as a research domain in the HCI field and is growing. The need to transfer HCI practices to the industry began significantly with the works of Nielsen on usability engineering. To date, methods and techniques for designing, evaluating, and implementing interactive systems for human use have continued to emerge. It is, therefore, justified to conduct a systematic mapping study to determine the landscape of HCI practice research. A Systematic Mapping Study method was used to map 142 studies according to research type, topic, and contribution. These were then analyzed to determine an overview of HCI practice research. The objective was to analyze studies on HCI practice and present prominent issues that characterize the HCI practice research landscape. Second, to identify pressing challenges regarding HCI practices in software/systems development companies. The results show that HCI practice research has steadily increased since 2012. The majority of the studies explored focused on evaluation research that largely contributed to the evaluation methods or processes. Most of the studies were on design tools and techniques, design methods and contexts, design work and organizational culture, and collaboration and team communication. Interviews, case studies, and survey methods have been prominently used as research methods. HCI techniques are mostly used during the initial phase of development and during evaluation. HCI practice challenges in companies are mostly process-related and on performance of usability and user experience activities. The major challenge seems to be to find a way to collect and incorporate user feedback in a timely manner, especially in agile processes. There are areas identified in this study as needing more research.

Learning outcomes are a standard specification of knowledge, skills and capabilities that a student is expected to acquire by attending a course or a degree program. While, in theory, the process of evaluating learning outcomes appears to be trivial, in practice it is a complicated and daunting process. In this study, we evaluate how learning outcomes can be effectively applied. The work focuses on the quality of both the specification of the learning outcomes and the assessment of whether these outcomes are reached. We discuss different abstraction levels for learning outcomes and the issue of alignment between high-level and low-level learning outcomes. We also address the criteria for assessing whether a student is meeting a learning outcome. Our work is focused on project-oriented courses, where assessing learning outcomes is seen as particularly challenging. In particular, we draw on an empirical study focused on systematically collecting key performance indicators of the progress towards achieving learning outcomes. The data gathering was done during the course through in-class questionnaires and individual diary notes, as a complementary process to the traditional observations made by the teacher running the course. This data serves as the basis for understanding how individual students advance towards the stated learning goals. We also conducted a focus group discussion after the course to better understand how to interpret the data collected during the course. An important result of our work is forming an understanding and vocabulary regarding learning outcomes and the assessment of how well students meet these learning goals in project-based educational settings. In addition to this, we make the following major contributions: •We present a systematic methodology to gauge how well students meet learning outcomes through in-class self-evaluation.•We present the results of an empirical study of a process-oriented evaluation of the students' development towards stated learning outcomes.•We state some lessons learned from this process that are applicable for designers of project-based courses.

Quality assurance is a subject that has grown dramatically in importance in recent times. In previous work, we have described how the ACM Curricula can be used to support the Quality Assurance process of educational programs, using the Computer Science program at Reykjavik University as an example. Faculty members and employers of graduates participated in the process, that resulted in providing both detailed quantitative data and qualitative information. The assessment also raised awareness of how abstract topics and learning outcomes from an international standard can be used when revising the curricula of a particular course in a CS program. Quality assurance is indeed a continuous process, where the results of evaluations should be used to drive improvements. In this paper we focus on how a Database course was re-structured based on a recent quality assurance process.

How can students be included as critical stakeholders in the systems and services provided by a university? To address the whole student experience, we engaged students and employees at a large Swedish university in a vision seminar process to elicit how these groups envisioned an ideal future university, and the necessary changes to technology and organisational structures required to achieve this ideal version. The process entailed six four-hour workshops with four groups consisting of six participants each. A survey instrument was used to follow up on the participants' experiences of participating in the vision seminar process and their thoughts on the future of the university. The results show that the participating students were more positive compared to the university employees. The students envisioned harmonized interdepartmental systems, seamlessly integrating a variety of services into one university-provided solution. The employees envisioned their future work as flexible, enabled by technology providing excellent support without hindering pedagogical and organisational development. Using technological frames, these visions of the future are identified, analysed and discussed in relation to the quality of university education and a holistic view on students' university experience. Finally we discuss the broader implications of the visions on the future of university education.

Two project management approaches, Agile and Lean, have increasingly been adopted in recent years for software development. Meanwhile, in the field of human–computer interaction (HCI), user experience (UX) has become central in research and practice. The new hybrids between the two fields—Agile UX and Lean UX—were born a few years ago. As Agile, Lean, and UX have different principles and practices, one can query whether the couplings are well justified and whether Agile or Lean is more compatible with UX work. We have conducted a conceptual analysis and tended to conclude that Lean instantiated as Kanban fits UX work better than Agile instantiated as Scrum. To explore further our claim, we performed a secondary data analysis of 10 semistructured interviews with practitioners working with Scrum and Kanban in different sectors (Study 1). This study enabled us to gain insights into the applications of the two processes in real-life cases, their strengths and weaknesses, and factors influencing the practicality of implementing them. Both processes seem not favorable for UX work in practice. Among others, one intriguing observation is loose adherence to the related guidelines and principles. A query derived from the analyses of the interviews is that “customer,” as compared with “user,” has more frequently been referred to by our interviewees, irrespective of the process they adopted. We have then been motivated to investigate this issue, using a web-based survey with another batch of practitioners (N = 73) in the software industry (Study 2). Results of the survey indicate that the practitioners in general had a reasonable understanding of the concepts “user” and “customer,” although a minority tended to treat them as synonyms. Limitations of the current studies and implications for future work are discussed.

The main features of the Scrum process are intense communication between different stakeholders, and rapid feedback based on regular delivery of working software. The integration of traditional user-centred evaluation activities in this context is challenging. Hence, this paper presents an interview study of 21 informants, categorised in four different professional roles. The main contribution of the paper is an overview of the types of user-centred evaluation conducted by information technology professionals in various Scrum projects. Results show that various forms of feedback are indeed gathered on the usability and user experience of the software, system or service being developed. However, the user-centred evaluations conducted typically are informal with few users, gathering empirical qualitative data and performed during short unplanned sessions. Performance measurements gathering quantitative data are seldom used. The informants in the business specialist role merely ask users about their opinion, whereas the other roles use several user-centred evaluation activities to gather feedback on their design. Generally, feedback is gathered throughout the whole project, but often evaluation is conducted early in the project or even before the actual development starts. Finally, these results are discussed in relation to previous studies in the area.

Research on heuristic evaluation in recent years has focused on improving its effectiveness and efficiency with respect to user testing. The aim of this paper is to refine a research agenda for comparing and contrasting evaluation methods. To reach this goal, a framework is presented to evaluate the effectiveness of different types of support for structured usability problem reporting. This paper reports on an empirical study of this framework that compares two sets of heuristics, Nielsen’s heuristics and the cognitive principles of Gerhardt-Powals, and two media of reporting a usability problem, i.e. either using a web tool or paper. The study found that there were no significant differences between any of the four groups in effectiveness, efficiency and inter-evaluator reliability. A more significant contribution of this research is that the framework used for the experiments proved successful and should be reusable by other researchers because of its thorough structure.