Course enquiries
Course email
Course overview
- Study period
- Semester 2, 2026 (27/07/2026 - 21/11/2026)
- Study level
- Undergraduate
- Location
- St Lucia
- Attendance mode
- In Person
- Units
- 2
- Administrative campus
- St Lucia
- Coordinating unit
- Elec Engineering & Comp Science School
DECO6500 Advanced Human-Computer Interaction explores how human experience is shaped within socio-technical systems, and how HCI practitioners can responsibly analyse, design, evaluate, and intervene in systems where technological agency shifts and challenges human self-determination. The course extends foundational HCI theories and methods to examine the relationships between people, technologies, institutions, data, culture, and society. Students will develop the critical, ethical, and practical judgement needed to understand complex technological systems and shape them in ways that support human agency, inclusion, accountability, and social impact.
In Semester 2, 2026, DECO6500 will focus on how interactive technologies can be understood, designed and evaluated as parts of wider socio-technical systems. Rather than beginning with a preferred technology or application, you will investigate a complex problem connected to an approved United Nations Sustainable Development Goal target and examine how that problem is shaped by relationships among people, organisations, technologies, services, infrastructure, policy, culture and wider social conditions.
Across three connected assessment tasks, you will progressively move from understanding a problem to evaluating a possible intervention and its wider consequences. You will first develop an evidence-informed map of a bounded socio-technical problem. You will then work collaboratively to develop a prototype and conduct a mixed-method evaluation of its interface and immediate human–system interaction. Finally, you will independently examine what may happen if that intervention enters a real-world setting, including its dependencies, risks, benefits, burdens, power relationships and possible unintended consequences.
This course treats all external sources of information (including textbooks, academic articles, developer forums, online tutorials, and generative AI) as pieces of a wider knowledge ecosystem. You are permitted to engage with these diverse forms of cognitive support to help solve complex problems. However, you will be assessed on your ability to critically select, evaluate, and validate these inputs. You will be expected to determine what knowledge is needed, evaluate what different sources can and cannot contribute, integrate evidence carefully, make uncertainty visible and remain accountable for the conclusions and recommendations you produce. You retain full responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of your decisions. If you choose not to use AI tools, alternative information pathways are fully supported and will not disadvantage you.
By the end of the course, you should be able to move beyond asking only whether an interface works for an individual user. You should also be able to ask how a proposed system may redistribute work, authority, opportunity, risk and responsibility, and make a defensible judgement about whether it should be redesigned, further evaluated, introduced under particular conditions, constrained or not pursued.
Course requirements
Assumed background
The pre-requisite for DECO6500 is DECO2500 - Human-Computer Interaction (or equivalent).
Masters students who have not completed a course on HCI as part of their Bachelor degree, or who do not have industry experience in the area, should complete DECO7250 prior to attempting this course.
Prerequisites
You'll need to complete the following courses before enrolling in this one:
DECO2500 or DECO7250
Incompatible
You can't enrol in this course if you've already completed the following:
COMP4501 or COMP7501 or DECO7450 or DECO4500
Course contact
Course staff
Course coordinator
Dr Peter Worthy
Lecturer
Dr Peter Worthy
Miss Mint Tanprasert
Timetable
The timetable for this course is available on the UQ Public Timetable.
Aims and outcomes
In this course, we aim to
- Provide students with an advanced understanding of HCI as the study of human experience within socio-technical systems, extending beyond the traditional focus on the interaction between an individual user and a technological artefact.
- Develop students’ understanding of how technologies and social contexts shape each other, including the ways technologies are influenced by people, organisations, cultures, infrastructures, policies, values, data, and wider systems.
- Equip students with practical skills to investigate complex socio-technical contexts through contextual inquiry, stakeholder analysis, systems mapping, and the identification of relationships, feedback loops, tensions, and leverage points.
- Support students to design and prototype interventions that respond to socio-technical problems, while considering usability, accessibility, human experience, inclusion, implementation constraints, and broader system effects.
- Equip students to evaluate technological interventions across multiple layers, including interaction quality, human experience, stakeholder relationships, organisational workflows, technical and data infrastructures, ethical concerns, governance, equity, and unintended consequences.
- Develop students’ ability to conduct rigorous analysis of qualitative and quantitative evaluation data and communicate findings in ways that support responsible design, implementation, and strategic decision-making.
- Strengthen students’ professional judgement in assessing the broader impacts of technology, including how HCI practice can support human agency, wellbeing, accountability, cultural safety, sustainability, and more inclusive socio-technical futures.
Learning outcomes
After successfully completing this course you should be able to:
LO1.
Analyse human needs, values, behaviours, and experiences within complex socio-technical contexts using appropriate contextual inquiry, qualitative, and quantitative research methods.
LO2.
Synthesise HCI theories, socio-technical perspectives, and research evidence to explain how technologies, people, organisations, infrastructures, policies, cultures, and wider systems shape each other.
LO3.
Develop and justify socio-technical systems maps that identify actors, boundaries, relationships, feedback loops, tensions, leverage points, and broader conditions shaping human experience and technological practice
LO4.
Design, prototype, and evaluate technology-based interventions that respond to socio-technical problems, considering usability, accessibility, inclusion, implementation constraints, stakeholder needs, and human experience.
LO5.
Critically evaluate technological interventions across multiple system layers, including stakeholder relationships, organisational workflows, technical and data infrastructures, ethical concerns, governance, equity, cultural safety, sustainability, and unintended consequences.
LO6.
Justify the strategic selection and responsible integration of diverse knowledge sources, including formal research, practitioner knowledge, crowdsourced documentation, and generative systems, within complex problem-solving workflows, demonstrating intellectual accountability for the synthesised outcome
LO7.
Establish, enact, evaluate and adapt accountable collaborative practices to support effective teamwork, shared decision-making and the achievement of collective outcomes.
Assessment
Assessment summary
| Category | Assessment task | Weight | Due date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Paper/ Report/ Annotation | A1 Socio-technical Systems Map (Individual) | 20% |
18/08/2026 2:00 pm |
| Portfolio, Project |
A2 Collaborative Evaluation Inquiry (Group)
|
40% |
22/09/2026 2:00 pm |
| Paper/ Report/ Annotation, Presentation |
A3 Layered Systemic Evaluation (Individual)
|
40% |
A3.1 Layered Systemic Evaluation Report - submission is due at 2pm on 9 Nov 2026. 9/11/2026 - 9/11/2026 A3.2 Critical Discussion - Times will be made available for you to book a specific time to during the period 10 Nov to 13 Nov, 2026 10/11/2026 - 13/11/2026 |
A hurdle is an assessment requirement that must be satisfied in order to receive a specific grade for the course. Check the assessment details for more information about hurdle requirements.
Assessment details
A1 Socio-technical Systems Map (Individual)
- Mode
- Written
- Category
- Paper/ Report/ Annotation
- Weight
- 20%
- Due date
18/08/2026 2:00 pm
Task description
In this individual assessment, you will select an approved Sustainable Development Goal target and define a manageable problem situation within it. You will investigate the wider socio-technical system and create an evidence-informed map showing the consequential people, organisations, technologies, practices, rules, resources, relationships and system dynamics that contribute to the problem.
Through this assessment, you will learn how to frame a complex problem, define and justify a system boundary, identify dependencies and power relationships, and use diverse knowledge sources to build a defensible interpretation of a socio-technical system. You will also identify uncertainties and directions for later human-centred inquiry.
This assessment item ensures that students are provided with feedback prior to Census week (excluding situations where students have extensions approved beyond the census date).
Information Sources (including AI Tools)
You may use Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools (including Generative AI and Machine Translation tools), and other external sources or systems to support this assessment. Their use is optional, and choosing not to use AI tools will not disadvantage you.
You remain responsible for determining what knowledge and assistance are appropriate, evaluating the relevance and limitations of contributions, verifying consequential claims, and deciding what should influence your final system map and analysis. Any use of AI tools must be acknowledged in accordance with the course requirements. Your Accountable Knowledge Integration Statement must explain the role of any consequential human or technological contributions and how you evaluated and integrated them. Failure to acknowledge AI tools use may constitute student misconduct under the Student Code of Conduct.
Assessment security
Open assessment: In this assessment you can use resources such as your notes, course materials, and other tools, including AI, while completing the task. The focus is not on memorising information, but on understanding, applying judgement, and demonstrating your own thinking.
Submission guidelines
The A1 outputs will be submitted to Learn.UQ. Further information about submission will be available in the assessment brief (also available in Learn.UQ).
Deferral or extension
You may be able to apply for an extension.
The maximum extension allowed is 7 days. Extensions are given in multiples of 24 hours.
The maximum extension available for A1 is 7 days. A1 is a foundation for A2: students use their system map, evidence and identified directions for inquiry when joining their team and defining the focus of the collaborative project. Limiting the extension period ensures that students can receive feedback, contribute their A1 knowledge to early team decisions, and participate fully in the supported transition into A2. A longer extension would reduce access to these learning activities and may affect both the student’s progress and the work of their team.
Late submission
A penalty of 1 grade for each 24 hour period from time submission is due will apply for up to 7 days. After 7 days you will receive a mark of 0.
A2 Collaborative Evaluation Inquiry (Group)
- Team or group-based
- Mode
- Written
- Category
- Portfolio, Project
- Weight
- 40%
- Due date
22/09/2026 2:00 pm
- Learning outcomes
- L01, L03, L04, L06, L07
Task description
In this group assessment, your team will bring together relevant knowledge from A1, define a focused opportunity for intervention, develop a prototype and conduct a mixed-method evaluation of the interface and immediate human–system interaction. You will collect and analyse qualitative and quantitative evidence, refine the prototype where appropriate, and document the inquiry through a collaborative research notebook.
Through this assessment, you will learn how to plan and conduct an accountable collaborative inquiry, develop a prototype for evaluation, apply qualitative and quantitative methods, and integrate different forms of evidence into defensible findings. You will also develop teamwork capabilities and learn to distinguish between what an evaluation demonstrates, what it suggests and what remains uncertain.
Information Sources (including AI Tools)
Your team may use Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools (including Generative AI and Machine Translation tools), and other external sources or systems to support this assessment. Their use is optional, and choosing not to use AI tools will not disadvantage the team.
The team remains collectively accountable for deciding what forms of assistance are appropriate, setting boundaries on their use, evaluating and verifying consequential contributions, and integrating them into a coherent inquiry. Individual team members must also understand and be able to explain contributions that materially affect the shared prototype, evaluation, analysis or findings. Any use of AI tools must be acknowledged in accordance with the course requirements and made visible where it materially shaped the work. Failure to acknowledge AI tool use may constitute student misconduct under the Student Code of Conduct.
Assessment security
Open assessment: In this assessment you can use resources such as your notes, course materials, and other tools, including AI, while completing the task. The focus is not on memorising information, but on understanding, applying judgement, and demonstrating your own thinking.
Submission guidelines
The A2 outputs will be submitted to Learn.UQ as a PDF. Further information about submission will be available in the assessment brief (also available in Learn.UQ).
Deferral or extension
You may be able to apply for an extension.
The maximum extension allowed is 7 days. Extensions are given in multiples of 24 hours.
The maximum extension available for A2 is 7 days. A2 is a collaborative assessment and provides the project, evaluation evidence and unresolved questions that each student must use as the foundation for A3. Limiting the extension period supports coordinated participation and collective decision-making within the team, allows the shared project to be completed in time for students to begin their independent A3 inquiry, and preserves access to the teaching activities that support the transition between the two assessments. A longer extension may disrupt the work and accountability of other team members and substantially reduce the time available for A3.
Late submission
A penalty of 1 grade for each 24 hour period from time submission is due will apply for up to 7 days. After 7 days you will receive a mark of 0.
A3 Layered Systemic Evaluation (Individual)
- Hurdle
- Identity Verified
- Mode
- Oral, Written
- Category
- Paper/ Report/ Annotation, Presentation
- Weight
- 40%
- Due date
A3.1 Layered Systemic Evaluation Report - submission is due at 2pm on 9 Nov 2026. 9/11/2026 - 9/11/2026
A3.2 Critical Discussion - Times will be made available for you to book a specific time to during the period 10 Nov to 13 Nov, 2026 10/11/2026 - 13/11/2026
- Other conditions
- Secure.
Task description
In this individual assessment, you will extend the A2 project beyond the immediate interaction and examine what may happen if the proposed system enters a wider real-world context. A3 has two components.
- In A3.1, you will individually prepare a Layered Systemic Evaluation Report that extends the A2 project beyond the immediate interaction and examines what may happen if the proposed system enters a wider real-world context. You will define an evaluation focus, select relevant systemic layers, construct an appropriate evidence base, analyse dependencies, risks, benefits, burdens, values and power relationships, and develop a reasoned recommendation about what should happen next.
- In A3.2, you will participate in an individual critical discussion with a member of the teaching team. This discussion will require you to explain and defend the focus, method, evidence, analysis and recommendations presented in your report, and to respond to questions that test your independent understanding. In accordance with UQ Assessment Procedures, this discussion will be video recorded.
Across both components, you will learn how to design and conduct a bounded systemic evaluation, integrate project, contextual, comparative and anticipatory evidence, and make proportionate recommendations under conditions of uncertainty. You will develop greater independence in selecting methods, evaluating knowledge and defending your final judgement.
Information sources (including AI Tools)
A3.1: Layered Systemic Evaluation Report
You may use Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools (including Generative AI and Machine Translation tools), and other external sources or systems to support the preparation of your report. Their use is optional, and choosing not to use AI tools will not disadvantage you.
You are independently responsible for selecting the knowledge and assistance required, evaluating the credibility, relevance and limitations of contributions, determining what verification is proportionate, and defending the resulting analysis and recommendations. Any use of AI tools must be acknowledged in accordance with the course requirements and made visible where it materially influenced your evaluation method, evidence, analysis or judgement. You must be able to explain and defend all parts of the submitted report independently. Failure to acknowledge AI tool use may constitute student misconduct under the Student Code of Conduct.
A3.2: Critical Discussion
This assessment task is to be completed in person. The use of AI tools will not be permitted. Any attempted use of AI tools may constitute student misconduct under the Student Code of Conduct.
Assessment security
Secure assessment: This assessment is designed to protect academic integrity and assess your understanding of course concepts. You must only use the approved materials and tools for this assessment task. Use of prohibited materials in this task may be investigated and treated as academic misconduct. See assessment instructions for more details.
Hurdle requirements
The A3.2 Critical Discussion element of this assessment is a hurdle requirement, meaning that you must pass the critical discussion to pass the course as a whole. Failure to meet the requirements of the A3.2 Critical Discussion element will result in a capped course grade of Marginal Fail (3), regardless of your performance in other assessment items.Submission guidelines
A3.1 Layered Systemic Evaluation Report
The A3.1 outputs will be submitted to Learn.UQ as a PDF. Further information about submission will be available in the assessment brief (also available in Learn.UQ).
A3.2 Critical Discussion
The Critical Discussions requires you to participate in an individual face-to-face and in-person critical discussion with a member of the teaching team. The discussion is the secure assessment component of A3 and is used to assess your independent understanding and accountability for the submitted work.
Deferral or extension
You may be able to apply for an extension.
The maximum extension allowed is 28 days. Extensions are given in multiples of 24 hours.
A3.2 Critical Discussion
Students with an approved extension for submission of the A3.1 Layered Systemic Evaluation Report will need to complete their Critical Discussion on the next business day following the extended date for their A3.1 submission at a time to be advised. Despite any extension, A3.2 will continue to be conducted as a secure assessment requiring face-to-face in-person oral discussion and video-recording of the discussion. If students do not attend this rescheduled session for A3.2, they will be awarded a grade of X (0).
Late submission
A3.1 Layered Systemic Evaluation Report
A penalty of 1 grade for each 24 hour period from the time submission is due will apply for up to 7 days. After 7 days you will receive a grade of 0.
A3.2 Critical Discussion
Late submission of the Critical Discussion is not accepted, as these are oral sessions scheduled during a time that you will book in advance. The reviews require the presence of both the student and a member of the teaching team to ensure the integrity of the assessment process.
Course grading
Full criteria for each grade is available in the Assessment Procedure.
| Grade | Description |
|---|---|
| 1 (Low Fail) |
Absence of evidence of achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: Demonstrates little or no achievement of the course learning outcomes. Shows minimal engagement with socio-technical HCI concepts, evaluation methods or the assessment tasks, and provides insufficient evidence of an ability to investigate, analyse or evaluate an interactive system. Decisions, claims and conclusions are absent, largely unsupported or not meaningfully connected to evidence. |
| 2 (Fail) |
Minimal evidence of achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: Demonstrates major deficiencies in understanding and applying socio-technical HCI concepts and methods. The work is substantially incomplete, poorly framed or based on weak and inappropriate evidence. Analysis remains largely descriptive, important relationships and consequences are overlooked, and decisions are insufficiently justified. Knowledge sources and contributions are accepted with little critical evaluation, and communication is frequently unclear or inconsistent with disciplinary expectations. |
| 3 (Marginal Fail) |
Demonstrated evidence of developing achievement of course learning outcomes Course grade description: Demonstrates developing but insufficient achievement of the course learning outcomes. Shows limited understanding of socio-technical systems, human–system interaction and evaluation, but applies these concepts inconsistently or superficially. The work identifies some relevant evidence, relationships or concerns, but analysis, integration and justification remain underdeveloped. Claims may exceed the available evidence, uncertainty and limitations are not adequately addressed, and communication lacks sufficient clarity or coherence. |
| 4 (Pass) |
Demonstrated evidence of functional achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: Demonstrates functional achievement of the course learning outcomes. Shows sound understanding of relevant HCI and socio-technical concepts and applies appropriate methods to investigate and evaluate a bounded problem or intervention. Develops reasonable findings and decisions supported by adequate evidence, recognises important limitations and wider implications, and demonstrates an acceptable level of responsibility for selecting and integrating knowledge. Communication is clear enough to convey the inquiry, evidence and conclusions in accordance with disciplinary conventions. |
| 5 (Credit) |
Demonstrated evidence of proficient achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: Demonstrates proficient achievement of the course learning outcomes. Shows substantial understanding of socio-technical HCI and applies relevant concepts and methods effectively across problem framing, design and evaluation. Develops coherent and convincing analysis that connects evidence, relationships, consequences and recommendations. Knowledge sources are selected, evaluated and integrated thoughtfully, with appropriate attention to uncertainty, ethics, power and limitations. Communication is clear, well structured and professionally presented. |
| 6 (Distinction) |
Demonstrated evidence of advanced achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: Demonstrates advanced achievement of the course learning outcomes. Shows advanced and integrated understanding of socio-technical systems, human experience and evaluation, and adapts concepts and methods appropriately to complex contexts. Produces insightful and well-supported analysis of relationships, dependencies, power, risks and consequences, leading to well-justified and proportionate decisions. Demonstrates strong epistemic agency through critical source evaluation, careful integration, effective verification and transparent accountability. Communication is precise, coherent and persuasive. |
| 7 (High Distinction) |
Demonstrated evidence of exceptional achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: Demonstrates exceptional achievement of the course learning outcomes. Shows sophisticated, independent and context-responsive understanding of socio-technical HCI, and uses concepts and methods with exceptional judgement across complex and uncertain problems. Produces original, deeply integrated and compelling analysis that makes consequential relationships, tensions, power arrangements and possible systemic effects visible. Knowledge is selected, evaluated, integrated and verified with exceptional rigour, and the resulting judgements are proportionate, defensible and intellectually accountable. Communication is exceptionally clear, precise and effective. |
Additional course grading information
Qualitative Grading
Grades for assessment during the semester will identify your work as being of a particular standard from the following list:
- No assessable work received (X) - applies when no assessable work has been received
- Low Fail / No Academic Merit (1)
- Fail (2)
- Marginal Fail (3)
- Pass (4)
- Credit (5)
- Distinction (6)
- High Distinction (7)
These grades map directly to the standard UQ Grade descriptors outlined in the Assessment Procedure (from https://policies.uq.edu.au/document/view-current.php?id=184 - Part H). It is recommended that you read the descriptors and example criteria that are associated with each of the UQ grade standards. Note, that percentages or numerical marksﾠare not required in grading assessment or for calculatingﾠgrade cutoffs. Percentage cutoffsﾠare primarily employed in courses that utilise quantitative (numerical based) methods for marking.ﾠ
The final grade for the course will be initially constructed from the individual grades according to assessment weightings. It will then be reviewed & moderated based on overall performance across the course.
Calculation of final grades for course
The final course grade is calculated by assigning each assessment grade its numerical grade value, multiplying that value by the assessment weighting, and adding the weighted results. The resulting aggregate is then converted to the corresponding whole-number qualitative course grade.
Example 1:
If a student receives the following grades:
- A1 Socio-technical Systems Map: Grade of 4 at weighting of 20%
- A2 Collaborative Evaluation Inquiry: Grade of 5 at weighting of 40%
- A3 Layered Systemic Evaluation: Grade of 6 at weighting of 40%
The final grade will be calculated as:
(4x0.2) + (5x0.4) + (6x0.4)
= 5.2
Grade = Credit (5)
Calculation of grades for individual assessment items
The weighted grade-point aggregation with conversion to a final qualitative grade band (described above) will also be used when determining the grade for each assessment item taking into account the grade and weighting for each criteria item.
Final Grade Moderation
The final grade for the course will be initially constructed from the individual grades according to assessment weightings. It will then be reviewed & moderated based on overall performance across the course. The course coordinator reserves the right to moderate grades.
Hurdles in this course
There is one hurdle in this course attached to A3 Layered Systemic Evaluation - Critical Discussion.
Supplementary assessment
Supplementary assessment is not available for some items in this course.
If you receive an overall grade of 3 in this course, then you will only be eligible for supplementary assessment if you have achieved at least a 4 (PASS) on the A2 Collaborative Evaluation Inquiry (Group) assessment item. Due to the design and development aspects of this team-based project over time and the use of the outputs from the A2 Collaborative Evaluation Inquiry in the A3 Layered Systemic Evaluation (Individual) assessment item, supplementary assessment will not be available to students who receive a failing grade on the A2 Collaborative Evaluation Inquiry assessment item (Approved by EAIT AD-A).
Learning resources
You'll need the following resources to successfully complete the course. We've indicated below if you need a personal copy of the reading materials or your own item.
Library resources
Find the required and recommended resources for this course on the UQ Library website.
Learning activities
The learning activities for this course are outlined below. Learn more about the learning outcomes that apply to this course.
Filter activity type by
Please select
| Learning period | Activity type | Topic |
|---|---|---|
Multiple weeks From Week 1 To Week 13 |
Lecture |
Weekly Lecture Weekly lectures introduce and explain the key concepts, theories, methods and examples that underpin the course. They will develop your understanding of socio-technical systems, human experience, evaluation, systems thinking, ethical and cultural responsibility, and accountable knowledge integration. Lectures provide the conceptual foundation needed to interpret the assessment tasks and make informed decisions throughout the course. |
Applied Class |
Weekly Applied Class Each week, you will participate in one three-hour applied class. These classes are designed to directly support the completion of the assessment tasks by helping you apply course concepts and methods to your own project work. Applied classes will include structured activities, practical exercises, collaborative work, tool training, project development and formative feedback. They may also provide additional or more specific guidance about how assessment requirements should be interpreted and completed. Activities will progressively support system mapping, teamwork, prototyping, evaluation design, qualitative and quantitative analysis, layered systemic evaluation and preparation for the individual critical discussion. Because the assessment tasks build across the semester, regular participation in applied classes is important for keeping pace with the project and developing the capabilities assessed in the course. |
Policies and procedures
University policies and procedures apply to all aspects of student life. As a UQ student, you must comply with University-wide and program-specific requirements, including the:
- Student Code of Conduct Policy
- Student Integrity and Misconduct Policy and Procedure
- Assessment Procedure
- Examinations Procedure
- Reasonable Adjustments for Students Policy and Procedure
- AI for Assessment Guide
- Recording of Teaching Policy and Procedure
Learn more about UQ policies on my.UQ and the Policy and Procedure Library.
School guidelines
Your school has additional guidelines you'll need to follow for this course: