Name Game - Requirements Discovery

Name Game — Requirements Discovery Summary (from two class transcripts)

Compiled: 2025-10-09

Sources: combined interview transcript and the note‑taking matrix template.

Note‑Taking Matrix

Write short, clear notes. Quotes are verbatim when the exact words matter.

Quote (verbatim) Need or Pain How Often? Impact (who/how) Rule or Limit (constraint) Opportunity or Idea
“Before you enter the game, it should have a list of people that you can select… [people] you have already known… will not appear in the game.” Skip people I already know to save time. Likely at first‑run (onboarding) and as knowledge grows. Players avoid wasted reps; faster focus on unknown names. Must not remove ability to practise known people later. Onboarding flow to mark known/unknown; toggle to revisit.
“I’m more familiar with students in grade 12 and 11… is there a way to choose the category of the grade…?” Filter practice set by grade. Frequent; practice by specific cohort. Tailors practice; improves motivation. UI should make filters obvious/persistent. Grade filter (already present but unclear).
“Maybe their grades should also appear so that we kind of know their grade level.” Not enough context on card; add grade text. Every question when revealed. Better recognition & learning cues. Avoid biasing multiple‑choice guesses. Show grade alongside name/house when revealing.
“Co‑curricular/club groups… practise people in the same club.” Filter by club/interest. Sometimes; large clubs. Relevant practice sets. Needs reliable roster data per club. Club filter; “my groups” quick filters.
“If you continually don’t know one person’s name, it just appears and appears until you actually know [them].” Adaptive repetition for weak items. When user struggles. Faster mastery; targeted practice. Avoid over‑repetition fatigue. Spaced/adaptive scheduler.
“See the result… people I know are… in which group/co‑curricular.” Personal insights about where knowledge comes from. After a practice session; over time. Reflection; plan who to meet/learn. Respect privacy; student‑only view. Per‑user report linking known people to groups.
“Pie chart of the houses you know best and the grades you know best… teacher’s end: who is most well‑known.” Visual reports for students; analytics for adults. Periodic (weekly/monthly). Students see gaps; staff spot outreach needs. Role‑based access; aggregate to avoid singling out unfairly. Student dashboards; staff dashboards.
“Same people coming up in the distractor pool pretty often.” Distractor repetition reduces variety. Observed during play. Boredom; learning bias. Keep target round‑robin logic; also diversify distractors. Improve distractor selection, track recent usage.
“Autocomplete one‑photo ‘test’ mode… more valid statistics.” A mode that measures true recall (not elimination). As needed for assessment/analytics. Higher‑quality data on “knownness.” Must be fast to answer (autocomplete or name list). Test mode: single photo + type‑ahead, or photo + many names.
“A mode that’s one photo and like eight names… / Duolingo‑style matching.” Alternative UIs to keep it engaging. Sometimes; variety. Engagement; different skills. Keep results comparable across modes. Variants: 1‑photo‑many‑names; matching grid.
“Timer… different levels… harder modes put more people in… add a streak.” Difficulty & gamification. Optional modes. Motivation; replay value. Don’t penalize learning; keep practice mode low‑pressure. Timed mode, larger option sets, streak & combo scoring.
“Delete the Next Question button… automatically jump to the next question.” Reduce friction between questions. Frequent. Faster flow. Only after answer is locked; make it a setting. Auto‑advance toggle with small delay.
“Hard to tell when you’ve gotten a question right… screen animation… fireworks/green screen.” Clear feedback on correctness. Every answer. Confidence; delight. Respect accessibility; subtle in test mode. Success/failure animations, haptics, sounds (configurable).
“Grade filter works once then stops… can’t change restriction while a question’s active.” Bugs in filters; state locking. Reproducible in session. Blocks practice; confusion. Must be stable; safe to change mid‑session or clearly disabled. Fix grade filter bug; allow/disable changes consistently.
“Record pronunciation / write phonics… earlier NameCoach tool had glitches.” Share correct name pronunciation. As needed per person. Inclusion; respect for names. Storage & consent; playback UX. User‑uploaded audio; phonetic hint field.
“Add people besides students… faculty, staff.” Whole‑community coverage. School‑wide launch. Improves belonging, service connections. Data import for all roles; filters by role. Include non‑students with role tags.
“Don’t make the photo black and white after we click the right [answer].” Visual treatment preference. Each correct answer. Aesthetics; clarity. Keep contrast/readability. Alternative reveal styles (border/glow/check).
“Finite amount of questions… exclude the previous answer from appearing on the next question’s options.” Avoid immediate repeats; reflect finite roster. Every session. Removes trivial elimination; variety. Still allow target to reappear later. Enforce ‘no previous target in next options’ rule.
“Live Kahoot‑style showdown… or asynchronous group challenge.” Play together or compete over a window. Events; teams; advisories. Community‑building; motivation. Needs rooms/challenges & anti‑cheat basics. Live rooms + asynchronous challenges with leaderboards.

Job Stories → User Stories → Acceptance Criteria

Below, each job story links to one or more user stories with acceptance criteria. Not every criterion is “happy path”; edge/negative cases are included.

1) Onboarding: mark who I already know

Job story. When I first start using the app and want practice to be efficient, I want to quickly mark people I already know so the game focuses on unknown names.

User story A (Student). As a student, I want an onboarding screen to mark known people so early practice targets only unknowns.

Acceptance criteria.

2) Filters (grade/house/club)

Job story. When I want to focus on a cohort, I want to filter by grade/house (and clubs) so practice is relevant.

User story B (Student). As a student, I can filter by grade and house to scope the practice set.

Acceptance criteria.

User story C (Student/Club member). As a student, I can filter by my co‑curricular groups to practise people I’ll meet.

Acceptance criteria.

3) Adaptive repetition

Job story. When I keep missing a person, I want that person to reappear more often so I eventually learn them.

User story D (Student). As a student, I want the app to repeat missed targets more frequently until I answer correctly twice in a row.

Acceptance criteria.

4) Reporting & insights (student)

Job story. When I reflect on my progress, I want to see which grades/houses/groups I know best so I can plan practice.

User story E (Student). As a student, I can view charts (e.g., pie charts) showing recognition by house/grade and drill into where I know people from (classes/clubs).

Acceptance criteria.

5) Analytics (staff)

Job story. When supporting community connection, I want aggregate data on who is widely known and who isn’t so we can act.

User story F (Staff). As staff, I can see aggregate “knownness” trends over time and identify less‑known individuals or groups.

Acceptance criteria.

6) Test mode (single photo + type‑ahead / many‑names)

Job story. When collecting accurate data, I want a recall‑focused interface so guesses aren’t driven by elimination cues.

User story G (Student). As a student, I can take a “Test” where I must type/select the correct name for a single photo, with autocomplete to keep it fast.

Acceptance criteria.

User story H (Variant). As a student, I can take a “1 photo : many names” test variant (e.g., 8–10 names) to increase difficulty.

Acceptance criteria.

7) Gamification (timer, streaks, difficulty, live/asynchronous challenges)

Job story. When I want extra challenge or a group activity, I want timers, streaks, and leaderboards (live or asynchronous).

User story I (Student). As a student, I can enable a timed mode (e.g., 5/10/20s) and see streaks that boost score.

Acceptance criteria.

User story J (Group). As a class/team, we can join a live room (Kahoot‑style) or an asynchronous challenge window and compare results.

Acceptance criteria.

8) Repeat & option constraints

User story K (Student). As a student, I never see the previous question’s correct target included as an option in the very next question.

Acceptance criteria.

User story L (Everyone). As a player, I don’t see the same distractors too frequently within a session.

Acceptance criteria.

9) Flow & feedback

User story M (Student). As a student, I can enable auto‑advance after a short delay once I answer.

Acceptance criteria.

User story N (Student). As a student, I get clear feedback (animation/sound) on correct/incorrect.

Acceptance criteria.

10) Pronunciation

User story O (Community member). As a community member, I can add a pronunciation (audio or phonetic) for my name.

Acceptance criteria.

11) Whole‑community scope

User story P (Organizer). As an organizer, I can include faculty/staff in the roster and filter by role.

Acceptance criteria.

12) Card details

User story Q (Student). As a student, I see grade (and house) shown clearly with the person’s name when revealed.

Acceptance criteria.

13) Stability & filter bugs

User story R (Student). As a student, I can change filters reliably; grade filter works repeatedly; changing restrictions mid‑question is either allowed safely or clearly disabled.

Acceptance criteria.


End of document.