Heuristic evaluation exercise - answer
Module 2: Answer key
Heuristic evaluation of the fictional course portal
Return to the exercise using its original browser tab. Examples show potential impact rather than measured user behaviour. Several heuristics may apply to one issue.
General evaluation
1. Submit a valid enquiry. What is the main problem after pressing Send?
Answer B: No submission status or confirmation
Principle: Visibility of system status
Evidence / inspection: Open Enquiry, enter a name and an email containing @, and press Send. Nothing indicates processing or success.
Impact / interpretation: Users may repeat the action or remain unsure whether it succeeded.
Improvement / next step: Show processing feedback, then a clear confirmation and next steps.
2. Open Enquiry. Which label assumes specialist knowledge?
Answer D: INTK_CD
Principle: Match between the system and the real world
Evidence / inspection: The form uses INTK_CD and unexplained codes such as BX26.
Impact / interpretation: Prospective learners cannot confidently identify the appropriate course start date.
Improvement / next step: Use “Preferred course start” and readable dates, with explanations where needed.
3. In Enquiry, enter your details, select Next, then Back. What goes wrong?
Answer A: Previously entered details disappear
Principle: User control and freedom
Evidence / inspection: Moving back from the review step rebuilds the form without retaining entries.
Impact / interpretation: Users lose work and must enter their details again.
Improvement / next step: Preserve entries and allow revision without unnecessary loss.
4. Compare the main action labels on the two course pages. Which issue appears?
Answer C: The same enquiry action uses Apply now and Register
Principle: Consistency and standards
Evidence / inspection: Apply now and Register both open the same enquiry form for two courses.
Impact / interpretation: Users may infer that the actions start different processes.
Improvement / next step: Use a consistent label for the same action.
5. Inspect the date field before entering a value. Which issue could cause an avoidable mistake?
Answer B: It accepts ambiguous dates without format guidance
Principle: Error prevention
Evidence / inspection: Preferred start is a free-text field with no format instructions or date validation.
Impact / interpretation: An entry such as 04/05/26 could represent different dates.
Improvement / next step: Provide a suitable date control and an unambiguous format.
6. Open each course’s Additional details, then visit Compare. What makes comparison harder?
Answer A: Users must remember fees and schedules from other pages
Principle: Recognition rather than recall
Evidence / inspection: Compare lists names and links while fees and schedules remain on separate course pages.
Impact / interpretation: Users must remember details or switch repeatedly between pages.
Improvement / next step: Show the relevant course details together in the comparison view.
7. Try to find all part-time courses from Courses. What creates unnecessary effort?
Answer D: No study-mode filter or search
Principle: Flexibility and efficiency of use
Evidence / inspection: Courses provides a listing without search or study-mode filtering.
Impact / interpretation: Users must inspect individual descriptions to identify suitable options.
Improvement / next step: Offer filters and search that support the task.
8. Open a course page. What competes with essential course information?
Answer C: Large repeated promotions before the details
Principle: Aesthetic and minimalist design
Evidence / inspection: Repeated promotional blocks dominate the course page, while essential information sits below them.
Impact / interpretation: Learners may overlook fees, schedules and entry requirements.
Improvement / next step: Prioritise decision-making information and reduce promotional clutter.
9. In Enquiry, enter an email without @ and select Send. What makes correction difficult?
Answer B: “Invalid input” gives no field or correction guidance
Principle: Help users recognise, diagnose and recover from errors
Evidence / inspection: The page displays only “Invalid input” above the form.
Impact / interpretation: Users must guess which entry to correct.
Improvement / next step: Identify the email field and explain how to correct it.
10. Find help about equivalent qualifications. What is missing?
Answer A: Task-specific eligibility guidance or a contact route
Principle: Help and documentation
Evidence / inspection: Course pages mention equivalent qualifications. Help contains a slogan without useful eligibility guidance or a support contact.
Impact / interpretation: Users cannot confidently determine whether their qualifications qualify.
Improvement / next step: Explain equivalencies and provide an accessible support route.
Audit: feedback & errors
1. Which action lacks confirmation after valid input?
Answer B: Send enquiry
Principle: Visibility of system status
Evidence / inspection: Which action lacks confirmation after valid input?
Impact / interpretation: Uncertainty may prompt repeat submission.
Improvement / next step: Show a clear submission confirmation.
2. What does “Invalid input” fail to communicate?
Answer C: The affected field and correction
Principle: Error recovery
Evidence / inspection: What does “Invalid input” fail to communicate?
Impact / interpretation: The reader must guess how to recover.
Improvement / next step: Name the field and give correction guidance.
3. What would prevent ambiguous date entries?
Answer A: A suitable date control with clear format
Principle: Error prevention
Evidence / inspection: What would prevent ambiguous date entries?
Impact / interpretation: Ambiguous formats can produce incorrect dates.
Improvement / next step: Use an unambiguous date input.
4. What can you conclude after Send produces no visible feedback?
Answer D: The demo provides no visible status
Principle: Visibility of system status
Evidence / inspection: What can you conclude after Send produces no visible feedback?
Impact / interpretation: Actual user behaviour needs testing.
Improvement / next step: Report observed feedback and potential impact.
5. What is the strongest evidence for the email error finding?
Answer C: The exact steps and generic message
Principle: Error recovery
Evidence / inspection: What is the strongest evidence for the email error finding?
Impact / interpretation: Reproducible evidence supports the finding.
Improvement / next step: Record input, action and message.
Audit: control & consistency
1. Which sequence demonstrates loss of user control?
Answer B: Enter details, Next, Back
Principle: User control and freedom
Evidence / inspection: Which sequence demonstrates loss of user control?
Impact / interpretation: Returning loses entered data.
Improvement / next step: Retain data across review steps.
2. What is a direct improvement to the review flow?
Answer A: Preserve entries when users return
Principle: User control and freedom
Evidence / inspection: What is a direct improvement to the review flow?
Impact / interpretation: Users can revise without repeating all entry.
Improvement / next step: Preserve and prefill the previous entries.
3. Why can Apply now and Register confuse readers here?
Answer D: They open the same enquiry form
Principle: Consistency and standards
Evidence / inspection: Why can Apply now and Register confuse readers here?
Impact / interpretation: Different labels can suggest different processes.
Improvement / next step: Use one meaningful action label.
4. Which evidence supports the inconsistent-label finding?
Answer C: Both labelled actions open the same form
Principle: Consistency and standards
Evidence / inspection: Which evidence supports the inconsistent-label finding?
Impact / interpretation: Behaviour confirms the labels refer to the same action.
Improvement / next step: Record labels and resulting destinations.
5. Does one successful click prove the whole enquiry journey is usable?
Answer B: No, it establishes only that interaction in that attempt
Principle: Evaluation limits
Evidence / inspection: Does one successful click prove the whole enquiry journey is usable?
Impact / interpretation: Other task steps and users remain untested.
Improvement / next step: Inspect the full sequence and relevant states.
Audit: content & efficiency
1. Which content receives excessive emphasis on course pages?
Answer C: Repeated promotional banners
Principle: Aesthetic and minimalist design
Evidence / inspection: Which content receives excessive emphasis on course pages?
Impact / interpretation: Promotions compete with task information.
Improvement / next step: Prioritise fees, schedules and requirements.
2. What should Compare show to reduce memory demands?
Answer A: Fees, duration and schedules together
Principle: Recognition rather than recall
Evidence / inspection: What should Compare show to reduce memory demands?
Impact / interpretation: Users can compare without remembering separate pages.
Improvement / next step: Present relevant details side by side.
3. Which control would help users locate part-time courses?
Answer D: A study-mode filter
Principle: Flexibility and efficiency of use
Evidence / inspection: Which control would help users locate part-time courses?
Impact / interpretation: A filter reduces avoidable browsing.
Improvement / next step: Add task-relevant filtering.
4. Which change addresses INTK_CD most directly?
Answer B: Use a familiar label and readable dates
Principle: Match with the real world
Evidence / inspection: Which change addresses INTK_CD most directly?
Impact / interpretation: Plain wording supports understanding.
Improvement / next step: Use Preferred course start and clear dates.
5. Which help content supports eligibility decisions?
Answer C: Equivalent-qualification guidance and a contact route
Principle: Help and documentation
Evidence / inspection: Which help content supports eligibility decisions?
Impact / interpretation: Users need actionable eligibility support.
Improvement / next step: Explain equivalencies and offer support.