Usability Findings
Two usability tests were completed by the LAO team, as well as several other usability tests by a research faculty member. A compiled list of comments concerning the LAO site is listed below.
REGISTRATION FINDINGS:
o Our users felt that there was an enormous amount of information to read prior to joining LAO in the Site Tour. Neilson states that, “don’t require users to read long continuous blocks of text; instead, use short paragraphs, subheadings, and bulleted lists.” “Write 50 percent less text.” “Users don’t like to scroll.” (Nielson, 2000)(page 101-103)
o The numbers of fields on the registration pages were a bit lengthy also.
o The registration page asked to type in a screen name, our user was a bit confused about what that was.
o She also commented that the facilitator is working with one student at a time, so that is not a group.
o Most students do not have email also.
o Should users put work or home phone number in the registration?
o Users didn’t like how much personal information was required to be filled out for the student. The information seemed unnecessary, and time-consuming to fill out.
o The entire sign-up process was a bit tedious and asked for too much information.
o Password should not be displayed on the screen after joining LAO for privacy issues
NAVIGATION/ ACCESSABILITY FINDINGS:
o Prior to registering, the navigation icons are pictured, but do not work.
o Users were confused about where to go first in order to facilitate the lesson.
o Top menu bar is confusing. The words on each icon need to be clear.
o Navigation of each section is confusing, one user who has been on this site quite a few times now couldn’t figure out how to select another story.
o Join LAO link is displayed at the bottom of a very lengthy page. The user could not find the link
o One user was very frustrated with a second window opening up to read the story. By accident she would close the LAO site window and then have to log back in. This happened several times throughout the session.
o User found it frustrating when she selected the link “End Story,” it closed the whole window. She thought it would automatically go to the post reading activities. She then had to figure out on her own where to proceed after the story was read.
o User said that there was so much information; sometimes it was difficult it narrow down, you need to be able to skim the material. Program required a lot of reading directions. Directions and language needs to be user friendly.
o Program is time-consuming and may be difficult for teachers to find the time to complete every part.
o Liked how you could move at your on pace
ACTIVITIES
Pre-reading:
o Picture walk—the pictures are displayed around the title of the story. There are no arrows or numbers as to tell users which direction students should start and continue the walk
Reading the story
o User stated a need for more engaging pictures and different pictures on each page of the story
o Some comprehension questions in the story McFeeglebee’s Pond appeared out of order and was confusing to the student.
o Add a variety of stories with varying difficulties.
o Immediate feedback after each question instead of at the end of the set of questions
o Add animated pictures
o Liked the moral of the story
Post-reading
o The user suggested that there were too many options to choice from the post reading.
o Post readings should be “hot” links
o Post activities titles were not in a language in which students would likely understand, like “Blends and Digraphs”
o User stated they couldn’t find fun games to do after the story. He had no interest in writing anything out like a story web. He wanted to read or hear the story.
Design of site:
o Users liked the personal touch of their name being displayed on the website.
o One child suggested putting more colors into the site
o Icons clearly represented their purpose.
o Was suggested that the menu be displayed at the top and bottom or side
Content
o Students liked the award at the end that can be printed out.
o Both of the children liked the story they read and choose write a story for the post activity
o Purpose of site was not clear to some of the users
o Felt that the assistive technology section would be helpful to users.
o Display stories that are current and up to date that keeps students’ interest. Examples: Michael Jordan
o Didn’t like that stories weren’t printable and not able to type inside or cut and paste the session planner. Session planner should be more than just a hard copy resource. Purpose of session planner should be clearly stated.
o What kind of supplemental materials can be used with LAO?
o Liked the opportunity to individualize each reading lesson according to the unique need of the student. For my student I was able to create a story with larger print and fewer words per page.
General Statements:
o Who is the site recommended or approved by?
o The only difficulty was that the modem at the school was not fast enough to support the site, so it would take a long time to load, or shut down, or simply freeze. Is there a way to prevent freezing?
o Can the program used with a large group of kids?
o Liked that the child was able to incorporate literacy and technology and build their confidence in both areas.
o Like the idea of the site, good for parents, and showed the same sequence as a teacher would use.
OUR COMMENTS (Smita and Amy)
o Purpose of site should be displayed on the home page (Nielson, 2000) (page 166)
o Button’s style should be consistent throughout the site, e.g. the move-on button.
o Clearly state who the users are for the site
o Buttons need to be bigger for accessibility
o After accessing the child for reading level, there should be a link to proceed to the pre-reading activities.
REFERENCES:
Nielson, J. (2000). Designing web usability. Indianapolis: New Riders.