Proposal

For this assignment, you will submit a draft of your project proposal. The proposal should follow ACM CHI Publication format.

Details

your proposal should cover the following topics:

• Problem: What is the problem that you are solving, and why is it important? For examples, read the first couple of paragraphs in the Introduction section of systems/applications papers in personal health informatics.
• Insight and theoretical contribution: What is the unique perspective that you bring to the research? How does it solve the problem? Keep in mind that even impressive technology prototypes are, at their core, answering a research question or establishing a thesis
• System: What is the exact system that you are building to instantiate this insight? What will it do? Include a low- or medium-fidelity sketch of the envisioned system.
• Related work: Write a paragraph describing 4-5 pieces of published research, how they inform your project, and where your work transcends this knowledge.
• Evaluation plan: how will you know if your system solved the original problem? (This should include the design of your study.) For example, think about how will you know you succeeded? What will you measure? How will you measure it? Possible evaluation methods are A/B testing, interviews, survey etc.
• Study design: What are you going to do? Be detailed and precise. This can involve a large range of example outputs from your system, a field deployment, or a controlled study.
• Measures: How will you know you succeeded? What will you measure? How will you measure it?
• Ecological validity: Why does your study answer your research question? Why does your evaluation address your hypothesis? Make sure your study, and the variables you're measuring, properly address the question you are asking.
• Recruitment Plan: Most evaluations involve participants. How will you get them? For pilot studies, we suggest you recruit from within the class - "trading" participation with other groups is a great way to learn about what others are doing. For larger studies (e.g. for those not building a system), you need a clear recruitment plan.

Proposal examples: 1 & 2
Note that the example assignments were done in Sauvik Das's CS4/8803 Usable Privacy & Secruity class.

I encourage you to iterate multiple times on this proposal. You are free to change directions after submitting your draft, but the sooner you nail down a direction, the better your project is likely to be.

Tips on running effective studies with people:

• If you have instructions, present them to participants in written form. You'll have a lot on your mind. Likely too much to remember to say everything you want. Written instructions also help insure that everything is consistent across participants.
• Remember to instrument your software so that it logs all relevant user actions. How often did people ___?
• Whatever you try first is almost guaranteed to have bugs so iteratively prototype your experiments just like you iteratively prototype interfaces. Test early and often and leave time for iteration in your schedule.
• If you're asking someone to do a task, it helps to provide a good motivating scenario.

Deliverable

Your project proposal should be submitted on Canvas.

Grading

	Insufficient	Adequate	Proficient	Mastery
Problem (4 pts)	1: The problem is unclear, unimportant or not well-motivated.	2: The problem is clear but only motivated at a mediocre level. The solution feels like a hammer trying to find a nail.	3: The problem is clearly articulated and well-motivated.	4: The problem poses a novel perspective or a major opportunity for innovation.
Insight (4 pts)	1: The insight is not well described or has been covered previously in prior work.	2: The insight is clear, but makes only an incremental contribution to the field.	3: The insight delivers a reasonably novel idea relative to the literature.	4: The insight makes a significant contribution to the literature.
System (2 pts)	1: The system description is unclear or incomplete.		2: The main idea of the system is made clear through writeup and sketch.
Related Work (4 pts)	1: Major related work is missing.	2: Much of the relevant related work is present, but either some is missing or its relationship to this project is weak.	3: Related work is present and well-represented. Its relationship to the project is clear.
Evaluation (4 pts)	1: The method is unlikely to lead to an evaluation of the insight or system.	2: The evaluation plan might work, but is vague or has methodological flaws, or there are obvious better methods.	3: The evaluation is likely to test the proposed insight or system, but has some minor methodological flaws or is overly complicated.	4: The evaluation is methodologically valid, not overly complicated and well thought through.
Scope (2 pts)	1: Project may need to be substantially scaled back to finish by the end of the semester.		2: Project can likely be completed within the semester if the team works hard.

---

Proposal Revision

This is the final revision of your project proposal. It is weighted much more heavily than the draft. The formal requirement is that you revise your project proposal to address my comments on your draft.

Deliverable

Highlight the parts that you changed from the original proposal and submit it on on Canvas.

Grading

Rubric is the same as with the original proposal.