使用P5.js框架了解JavaScript的基础知识

Design Brief
IDEA9103: Design Programming Semester 2, 2019

DESIGN BRIEF
IDEA9103: Design Programming
Semester 2, 2019 | 6 credit points
This document contains the detailed assessment guidelines for IDEA9103 Design Programming. It is the official version of the assessment, describing the aims, tasks and deliverables for each assessment item, together with expected workload, due dates, submission instructions, assessment criteria and accompanying grade descriptors for standards-based assessment. The document should be read in conjunction with the IDEA9103 Unit of Study outline. Any clarifications to the assessment will be posted on the Canvas site (http://canvas.sydney.edu.au/) during semester.
1. Design Brief
Design as a practice allows us to push the boundaries of technology to discover new ways of interacting with the world. Designers were quick to embrace the possibilities of modern computing and in the middle of last century began using programming as a creative tool. Early computer artists began to explore the creative behaviours exhibited by computational systems and discovered a whole new way of searching for artefacts.
In this class students will use programming as a creative tool to design algorithmic systems which produce visual designs. Students will be required to:
– Develop a knowledge of algorithmic design methods.
– Learn the fundamentals of JavaScript using the P5.js framework.
– Design interactive computational systems that produce creative behaviours.
2. Assessment Tasks Overview
The subject is divided into three assessment tasks as described in the table below. The three assessment tasks represent your entire unit of study mark.
A2: In-Class Quiz A,B
NOTE: The weight represented here is proportional to the total assessment weight for this unit of study. For example, a weight of 30% means that this assessment component contributes 30% of the total mark for this unit of study.
Assessment Results and Feedback
Assessment results and feedback will be provided within 2 weeks of the submission date.
Assessment Policies and Procedures
For assessment policies and procedures, including academic integrity, late submissions, and special consideration, see the unit of study outline.
Architecture, Design and Planning
Assessment Item
Deliverables Weight Due
Assessment Criteria
A1: Computer Assisted Drawing Machine
A design based on a historical example of computer art.
30%
Monday September 2nd, 23:59
B,C
This quiz will be taken in-class and is based on tutorials 1-6.
30%
Friday September 27th, In-class
A3: Interactive Algorithmic System
An interactive algorithmic system which produces creative behaviours.
40%
Friday November 8th, 23:59
A,B,C

Assessment Rubric
The following specific assessment criteria will be used for assessing your submissions to help guide your learning:
A. Programming Proficiency: Students ability to comprehend, modify and integrate code from diverse sources, as well as create interactive digital artefacts by authoring programs.
B. Design quality: Ability to evaluate the technical, aesthetic and human-centred qualities of interactive digital artefacts in terms of visual design, navigation design, layout, and interaction design, use of design principles, etc., as well as appropriateness of chosen design solution in regard to audience and context.
C. Design Concept & Design Communication: Understand and communicate design decisions and the architectural constraints of computer programs. Including overall quality of the report submissions– in terms of content (depth and clarity of explanations, references to principles and other material covered in lectures and tutorials, as well as demonstration of further research and solid understanding of the material covered) and style (writing style, structure, layout and formatting, consistency, grammar).
Architecture, Design and Planning
HD
D
CR
P
F
Proficient use self-authored code demonstrating a thorough comprehension of programming concepts.
Original and self-authored code demonstrates a considered ability to comprehend, modify and integrate code.
Demonstrates an ability author and integrate code with sufficient
comprehension programming concepts.
of
Demonstrates an ability to comprehend original code through the use of modified, integrated programming concepts.
Students has not demonstrated an ability to author original code and/or the ability comprehend, modify or integrate code has not been demonstrated.
HD
D
CR
P
F
Clear and convincing interaction, layout and visual design to the level of professional standards.
Clear and well-considered interaction, layout and visual design.
Mostly clear and adequately considered interaction, layout and visual design.
Satisfying interaction design, layout and visual.
Unclear, inadequate interaction, layout and visual design.
HD
D
CR
P
F
Excellent demonstration and solid understanding of the topics taught in the unit and clearly documented project that matches professional standards. Presented in an attractive and aesthetically pleasing format to an exceptional level of quality.
Thorough demonstration and solid understanding of the topics taught in the unit and clearly documented project. Presented in an attractive and aesthetically pleasing format to a high- level of quality.
Satisfying demonstration and understanding of the topics taught in the unit and well-documented project. Presented in an attractive and aesthetically pleasing format at a good level of quality.
Some demonstration and understanding of the topics taught in the unit and mostly well-documented project. Presented in an attractive and aesthetically pleasing format at a satisfactory level of quality.
Inadequate demonstration and understanding of the topics taught in the unit and
missing project Poorly formatted.
and confusing documentation. presented and
3. Assessment Task Descriptions
A1: Computer Assisted Drawing Machine (30%, individual, 21 hours over 4 weeks)
Design and implement a simple algorithmic design based on a historical example of computer art. The aim of this assessment is to develop your ability to take a visual idea and implement it in code. The work must include the use of algorithmic principles such as rule-based structures to generate surprising and unpredictable outcomes, for example your design must be both consistent in its visual style but change each time the program is run. The sketch must be made on either Open Processing or the P5.js editor. Students are required to submit a design based on one example from the archive of historical computer art provided in class. This will also

require researching the artist who created the artwork or design to develop an understanding of both how and why computers enabled the artist to create the work.
Importantly, this code must be your own. You must make significant modification to any example you base your code on, and you must demonstrate your understanding of how the code functions.
Algorithmic principles relevant to this assignment include:
– Nested Loops (wk2)
– Conditionals (wk2)
– Mapping (wk2)
– Randomness (wk3)
– Noise (wk3)
Significant modification:
– Copying directly from code you did not author is not allowed:
o CodefromOpenProcessingcanbeusedtohelpyouunderstandwhattodobutshouldnotbe
copy and pasted into your assignment.
o Codefromthereferenceguidecanbeusedfreelyinyourassignment.Howevercodefromthe
reference guide will only be a useful starting point for your assignment. – If you are concerned or unclear about this speak with you tutors for clarification.
Demonstrate your understanding:
– Commenting “//” can be used to explain to the marker what is happening in the code, this demonstrates your understanding of the code and helps the marker understand how the code functions. A comment should not be used every line, but only at important parts of the code, for example to point out what a nested for loop in your sketch does for the visual output.
– Best practice syntax and formatting, as well as using clear variable names is also important in demonstrating your understanding.
T2. Implement your design in P5.JS, and experiment
with its development. Software design, much like all
design tasks is iterative. Implementation benefits One .ZIP containing: from re-considering your initial development ideas.
Once you have constructed the design in code, does – index.html it work as well as you intended? How can you – mySketch.js iterate on this design to better achieve the desired
outcomes of this assignment?
References: You need to cite any references used in your research, including images. Make use of one specific referencing style consistently throughout your report and list your references in a correctly formatted bibliography at the end of your document. We recommend using APA (American Psychological Association) referencing guidelines. Examples and guidelines can be found on http://www.citethisforme.com/guides/apa or http://libguides.library.usyd.edu.au/c.php?g=508212&p=3476096
Architecture, Design and Planning
Task
Deliverable
T1. Research existing historical algorithmic designs. Explore the possibilities of simple rule-based systems by finding examples of p5.js sketches, digital artworks, new-media artworks or interactive digital applications.
One A4 page of research, including images. APA referencing must be included in a bibliography (Bibliography does not contribute to page count). It should be named using the follow convention:
“IDEA9103_A1_lbra1234.pdf”

Expected workload: Students are expected to spend approximately 21 hours working on this assignment. This is calculated by the percentage assessment weighting of the minimum hours of student effort outside of face- to-face classes. This is only provided as a guide; each individual student may spend more or less time, depending on their study preferences and learning ability.
A2: In-Class Quiz (2 hours)
The objective of the in-class quiz is to test your knowledge and understanding of topics related to design programming. Students will have two hours to complete a series of design challenges which will be based on all learning material from tutorials 1-6. The quiz will be offline, but students will be able to access the P5.JS reference guide which contains example code and function descriptions.
Expected workload: Students are expected to spend approximately 21 hours preparing for this quiz. This is calculated by the percentage assessment weighting of the minimum hours of student effort outside of face-to- face classes. This is only provided as a guide; each individual student may spend more or less time, depending on their study preferences and learning ability.
A3: Interactive Algorithmic System (40%, individual, 28 hours over 6 weeks)
For assignment three you will be required to design a complete interactive algorithmic system. The work must include the use of algorithmic principles such as rule-based structures to generate surprising and unpredictable outcomes and incorporate interactivity through the use of input methods such as sound, cameras, API’s or direct mouse and keyboard control. Keep in mind to incorporate key concepts covered during the semester in your design. The work must not be a game.
This assignment is delivered in two parts, both a design evaluation and the design itself. The design evaluation will be a practical exercise in evaluating a software system once in a prototype state. You will be expected to use the outcomes of your evaluation to inform your final design. A Significant iteration is expected to be made based on these findings. This will involve incorporating user-feedback into your final design and demonstrating your ability to apply an evaluative method in the development of a software system.
Importantly, this code must be your own. You must make significant modification to any example you base your code on, and you must demonstrate your understanding of how the code functions. The code submitted in A3 cannot be based on the code submitted in A1.
Architecture, Design and Planning
Task
Deliverable
T1. Complete a series of design challenges.
Create original code based on design stimulus.

Architecture, Design and Planning
Task
Deliverable
T1. Design evaluation is a critical step in the design process. Here we will be using heuristic evaluations to identify issues with initial iterations of software. Documentation on these processes as well as templates and examples will be provided.
A 4-page design report with appendix for raw data. Containing a heuristic evaluation on your software system and the iteration of your design presented based on your results This report should also outline the design concept and anything that inspired your concept.
T2. Develop your concept further with research on existing systems then proceed in developing your interactive algorithmic design. Once you have constructed a prototype, does it work as well as you intended? Use the user evaluation results to inform an iteration on the design. It is often helpful to break the visual problem down into concepts that can be built using code.
It is desirable to develop a work that is both surprising in its algorithmic nature but is structured enough that it has clear conceptual boundaries.
A zipped folder with final submission files. Ensure that code works before submitting. This folder needs to contain any libraries used or media required to run your assignment locally.
Submission: Submit three items to Canvas. An Open Processing Link and an exported sketch .ZIP file. As well as a 4-page .PDF containing your design evaluation. The .PDF should be named using the unit of study code, assessment number and your unikey, for example “IDEA9103_A1_lbra1234.pdf”.
Note: Report can contain an appendix that does not contribute to page count
Your brief should include:
• Design description and concepts
• Evaluation process description
• Evaluation findings
• Summarized Heuristic evaluation templates
• Design implementations based on findings
• Appendix for raw data
References: You need to cite any references used in your research, including images. Make use of one specific referencing style consistently throughout your report and list your references in a correctly formatted bibliography at the end of your document. We recommend using APA (American Psychological Association) referencing guidelines. Examples and guidelines can be found on http://www.citethisforme.com/guides/apa or http://libguides.library.usyd.edu.au/c.php?g=508212&p=3476096
Expected workload: Students are expected to spend approximately 28 hours working on this assignment. This is calculated by the percentage assessment weighting of the minimum hours of student effort outside of face- to-face classes. This is only provided as a guide; each individual student may spend more or less time, depending on their study preferences and learning ability.