Assignment Overview

Last week, you modeled one coherent structural system for your project through:

• A Site Map (Information Architecture)

• A State-Aware User Flow (Temporal Logic)

You clarified:

• What objects exist

• How they relate

• Where decision nodes occur

• How the system behaves over time

This week, you will be expanding that system. You must explore alternative structural responses to the same user need. This will set you up for the capstone structural project next week, lo-fi wireframes.

This assignment requires you to create six structurally distinct concept sketches for your own project.

Be sure to carefully read over the following sections from this module lesson:

• Surface vs Structural Variation

• Axes of Structural Difference

• What a Concept Sketch Must Include

• Decision Node Relocation Diagram

• State Change Map

Assignment Purpose

This structural modeling assignment evaluates your ability to:

• Expand the solution space before commitment

• Demonstrate structural flexibility

• Model system behavior conceptually

• Show decision logic and state awareness

• Avoid premature visual refinement

Primary User Need

Use the same primary user need you defined in your previous assignment.

Use divergent thinking to creatively how the system responds to it.

Deliverable

You will be submitting:

• 6 low-fidelity concept sketches

• Each sketch clearly labeled with a short structural title

• A 2–3 sentence explanation under each sketch describing:

  • What structural assumption changed

  • Where decision logic occurs

  • How this concept differs from the others

Acceptable formats:

• Single PDF or a scanned paper or digital sketches (iPad acceptable)

• The sketches must remain clearly low-fidelity

Structural Requirements

Each sketch must:

• Represent a distinct structural model

• Show user action → system response

• Include at least one visible state change or decision node

• Remain rough and conceptual (not wireframe-level polish)

At least three of your six sketches must significantly alter your Week 6 user flow structure.

Structural differences may include:

• Entry logic shifts

• Workflow sequencing changes

• Decision node relocation

• Control model changes (user-driven vs system-driven)

• Responsibility distribution changes

• Temporal commitment changes (when validation occurs)

If your sketches could share the same wireframe structure, they are not divergent enough.

Strong vs Weak Examples

Weak Example — Cosmetic Variation

• Entry logic identical across all sketches

• Decision node appears in the same place

• Workflow remains unchanged

• Only layout or navigation arrangement varies

This demonstrates fluency, but not flexibility.

Weak Example — Polished but Structurally Thin

• Detailed UI elements

• Styled components

• Clean alignment

• Linear flow

• No visible decision logic

• No state modeling

This prioritizes expression over structure.

Strong Example — Structural Variation

• Entry logic shifts between models

• Decision nodes move earlier or later

• System responsibility changes

• Commitment occurs at different points

• Flow logic visibly differs

These sketches model different system behaviors — not just different layouts.

Evaluation Criteria (25 Points)

1️⃣ Structural Variation (8 Points)

Are the six concepts meaningfully distinct at a structural level?

2️⃣ System Logic Visibility (5 Points)

Do sketches clearly show:

• Decision points

• Conditional branches

• State changes

• System behavior

3️⃣ Alignment to Core User Need (4 Points)

Do all six concepts clearly address the same primary user need?

4️⃣ Appropriate Fidelity (4 Points)

Are sketches appropriately low-fidelity and exploratory?

5️⃣ Structural Justification (4 Points)

Do written explanations clearly articulate:

• What structural assumption changed

• Where decision logic occurs

• How this differs from other concepts

How to Do Well

Before sketching:

• Revisit your Week 6 user flow.

• Identify major decision nodes.

• Ask: What if this decision occurred earlier? Later?

• Ask: What if entry logic changed?

• Ask: What if the system acted first instead of the user?

• Avoid adding features unless they alter structural logic.

• Keep fidelity low.

• Label structural changes clearly.