Read the task
Each concept tells you what to try. Clarity uses a trace exercise; the other two use a guided function.
University of Glasgow · Computing Science Honours Project
Three approaches to helping learners understand an answer, explore its evidence and choose their next step. See the prototypes, watch their workflows and compare the designs.
THE DESIGN QUESTION
Instead of presenting an answer and leaving the learner there, these designs explore a complete loop: try an activity, examine specific evidence, request more explanation if useful, and decide what happens next.
This is an exploratory, formative HCI project. The Figma prototypes simulate selected interactions. They do not execute Python, integrate with Moodle, or demonstrate measured learning gains.
THREE DIFFERENT APPROACHES
Three interfaces. Distinct interaction styles. A shared focus on giving learners clear evidence and meaningful choices.
SEE THE EXPERIENCE
Each recording shows a scripted, synthetic journey based on the Figma designs. These are demonstrations, not captures of actual participants or the interactive Figma player.
DESIGN COMPARISON
A comparison of design choices, not a ranking of learning effectiveness. Clarity's trace exercise differs from the function task used in Focus Lab and Pathway.
| Experience | Clarity / A | Focus Lab / B | Pathway / C |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interaction | Structured trace and radio choices | Guided code workbench | Conversational choices |
| Illustrative task | Loop tracing, values 4, 6, 6, 8 | Build max_two(a,b) | Build max_two(a,b) |
| Feedback | Per-field expected values | Three example checks | Messages with example evidence |
| Extra help | Explain a trace step | Inspect why a case behaved that way | Request a conversational explanation |
| Next action | Edit / continue / finish | Revise / retry / finish | Edit / explain / finish |
Different task content affects what participants experience. Feedback about the interface should be distinguished from feedback about the learning exercise.
PARTICIPANT EXPERIENCE
Use the prototypes as a design preview. If you're participating in a formal review, follow the approved information and instructions supplied by the researcher. You're reviewing an interface, not sitting a programming test.
Each concept tells you what to try. Clarity uses a trace exercise; the other two use a guided function.
Choose an answer, view feedback, request help if useful or leave it unopened.
Try editing or correcting a previous response and note whether the journey feels clear.
Only take part through a separately authorised session. You're welcome to decline or withdraw under the approved process.
TAKE A CLOSER LOOK
Screens, demonstration videos, the source designs and clear research context, organised in one place.
DOWNLOAD
Wireframe screens for all three concepts, a workflow overview and the recording guide. No participant records or draft consent forms.
Download ZIPSIX VIDEOS
Explore the desktop and mobile walkthroughs, then download a video for closer review.
View video galleryDESIGN SOURCE
Open the editable source and presentation flows in Figma. A compatible device and viewer access are required.
Open FigmaRESEARCH DOCUMENTS
Information, consent, instructions and debrief documents are prepared as LaTeX drafts. Approved participant downloads will appear following the University's ethics release.
Read the neutral exploration guide ↗Formal research documents await authorisationNo. They are authored interactive Figma demonstrations showing selected task responses and feedback. The implemented React application is a separate later part of the Honours Project.
No. This showcase has no forms, cookies, usage analytics or participant data store. Figma follows its own privacy and access rules when you choose to open an external prototype.
No. They are scripted, synthetic walkthroughs assembled from verified Figma design screens and explanatory states. They do not depict study participants or actual browser interactions.
The University's ethics review and final release details are still pending. Draft consent documents are intentionally withheld from participant distribution. The researcher will provide the approved information and consent materials before an authorised session.