Nielsen's 10 Heuristics — Reference Cards & Evaluation Worksheet

Year 11 Digital Technologies · Evaluating Interfaces lesson

Kaiako note: Print the reference cards double-sided or on card, one set per pair — students keep these visible during the evaluation task. The severity scale is Nielsen's own 0–4 rating (Nielsen, 1994). The evaluation worksheet has 10 rows; for a single 60-minute lesson, students typically only complete 4–6 rows well rather than rushing all 10 — prioritise depth of evidence and a genuine proposed fix over coverage.
Reference Cards — Nielsen's 10 Usability Heuristics
1Visibility of System Status

The system should always tell you what's going on.

Example: A loading spinner during checkout, a progress bar on a form, an "unsaved changes" warning.

2Match Between System & the Real World

Speak the user's language, not the system's.

Example: A trash-can icon for delete; "Add to cart" instead of "Submit item to array."

3User Control & Freedom

Give users a clearly marked "emergency exit."

Example: Undo/redo, a visible back button, being able to cancel a payment before confirming.

4Consistency & Standards

Don't make users guess whether different words or actions mean the same thing.

Example: The same icon always does the same thing across every page of a site.

5Error Prevention

Better than a good error message is a design that prevents the error happening.

Example: Greying out a "submit" button until a required field is filled in.

6Recognition Rather Than Recall

Minimise how much the user has to remember.

Example: A dropdown of recent searches instead of forcing you to retype them.

7Flexibility & Efficiency of Use

Let both beginners and experts move quickly.

Example: Keyboard shortcuts for power users, alongside menus for beginners.

8Aesthetic & Minimalist Design

Every extra unit of information competes with the units that matter.

Example: A cluttered homepage with 40 competing banners vs. one clear call-to-action.

9Help Users Recognise, Diagnose & Recover From Errors

Error messages should be in plain language and suggest a solution.

Example: "Card declined — check the number and try again" instead of "Error 402."

10Help & Documentation

Even though it's best if the system needs no explanation, help should be easy to find when needed.

Example: A searchable FAQ or a "?" tooltip next to a confusing field.

Severity Scale (Nielsen, 1994) — use this to rate each violation you find

0Not a usability problem
1 — CosmeticFix only if there's spare time
2 — MinorLow priority; annoying but workable
3 — MajorHigh priority; important to fix
4 — CatastrophicMust fix before release

Heuristic Evaluation Worksheet — Name: _____________________ Date: ___________

Website/app being evaluated: _______________________________________________

If you need a suggestion, choose ONE: a government service (e.g. a Services NZ, IRD or NZTA task), a retail/e-commerce site, a news/media site, a transport or booking site (e.g. a bus/train journey planner, an airline), or an app already on your phone that you use often.
Heuristic Pass / Fail / N-A Severity (0–4) Evidence — what did you see? Suggested fix
1. Visibility of system status
2. Match with the real world
3. User control & freedom
4. Consistency & standards
5. Error prevention
6. Recognition rather than recall
7. Flexibility & efficiency
8. Aesthetic & minimalist design
9. Error recovery / messages
10. Help & documentation

Whakaaro Iho — Reflection Questions

1. Which heuristic did your site violate most severely? Describe exactly what you saw.

2. Pick your worst violation. Write a one-sentence redesign instruction a developer could act on (not just "make it better").

3. Which heuristic did your site do well? Why does that matter for the user?

4. Heuristic evaluation uses an expert's judgement, not real users. What might it miss that real usability testing (watching an actual person use the site) would catch?