Human-Centred
Design Challenge
Synthesize research, ergonomics, inclusive design, product analysis and responsibility in one fast redesign sprint.
By the end of class, you should be able to…
Retrieve prior learning
Use UCD, ergonomics, percentiles, usability and product analysis without prompts.
Analyse a product
Identify evidence-based strengths, weaknesses and barriers.
Prioritize requirements
Make justified trade-offs for users and stakeholders.
Communicate a redesign
Present a concept with clear evidence links, not decoration.
Redesign a shared classroom charging station.
The station sits on a high counter. Cables tangle, status lights are small, some users cannot reach the back ports easily, and unplugging one device can disturb others. It must remain safe in a busy classroom and support multiple users.
Translate the brief into design evidence.
Who needs access?
Different reach, dexterity, vision and device needs.
Connect → confirm → remove
Observe where errors and interference occur.
Busy shared classroom
Crowding, movement, liquids, cable hazards.
Students + staff + school
Access, safety, durability and maintenance.
Which human-factor requirements matter most?
| Lens | Question | Possible evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Reach | Can intended users reach all ports? | Low-percentile reach / layout test |
| Clearance | Can hands and devices move without collision? | Hand/device dimensions + observation |
| Vision | Can status be understood at a glance? | Target size, contrast, redundant cues |
| Muscle control / dexterity | Are connectors stable and easy to align? | User attempts, error rate, insertion force |
Analyse the current product before replacing it.
What already works?
Capacity, charging performance, compact footprint?
What creates failure?
Reach, cable interference, unclear status, unstable connectors?
What needs evidence?
Connection time, errors, accessibility, cable movement, safety.
Choose one extreme user to expose hidden barriers.
What if the back row is inaccessible?
Could layout or orientation bring all interaction forward?
What if colour-only LEDs are insufficient?
Could shape, text or spatial mapping add redundancy?
What if alignment is difficult?
Could guides, larger targets or cable management reduce precision demand?
Trade-off decision
A redesign places every port at the front for easier reach, but the exposed cable loop now creates a trip / snag hazard in a busy classroom.
What should the team do?
Turn evidence into success criteria.
Communicate one redesign concept.
Critique the evidence chain, not the drawing style.
“What evidence supports this feature?”
Push beyond preference.
“Who might still be excluded?”
Use inclusive design.
“What new problem does this create?”
Use responsibility and trade-off thinking.
Which course concept answered each question?
| Question | Concept |
|---|---|
| Who struggles and why? | UCD + user research |
| Can users reach / fit / manipulate it? | Ergonomics + anthropometrics |
| Can more people access it? | Inclusive design + design for extremes |
| How well does the current product perform? | Product analysis + usability |
| What wider consequences exist? | Responsibility of the designer |
Can you retrieve it without looking back?
Before you leave…
Problem Statements & Design Specifications
Keep the evidence chain moving: user → research → decision → test.
Integrated application of A1.1 ergonomics · B1.1 UCD · C1.1 responsibility · C1.2 inclusive design · C3.1 product analysis, preparing for B2.1 problem statement/specifications.