IST-110 Usability assignment
Section 1/2 -- University Park
22 Feb 2000
This assignment is due at the start of class on Thursday, Feb 24, 2000.
There are three purposes to this assignment:
1. To apply concepts of usability to a web-interface
2. To practice the group-working skills that we have been
stressing in class and lab, and
3. To extend our thinking about socio-technical analysis to
the web environment.
The assignment will be done by four-person work-groups. These work-groups will be assigned (and these work groupings will be announced in a subsequent email).
The assignment has five parts:
1. SELECT a particular pair of web sites from the list
below.
2. COMPARE these two sites (see below for more details).
For BOTH competitors, ASSESS their web presence (see below
for more details).
Comment on the SOCIO-TECHNICAL nature of each web site.
3. Provide four constructive comments on how to improve EACH
web site (i.e. 8 suggestions).
The resulting paper should run from four (good!) to
cannot run more than eight pages, 1" margins 11 point type
(too long!) and include:
1. An introduction and outline of the group's work
2. An explanation of how the data were collected for the two
web sites being evaluated.
3. An analysis and comparison of each of the two web sites,
including a discussion of any insights on the
socio-technical nature of each web site's current design
4. Four specific suggestions for how to improve each web
site
5. As an appendix, any additional reference/support used to
develop the analysis (other URLs, texts, journal articles,
etc.), including the main page (and URL) for each web site.
Note that you may want to explain how you developed your criteria for analysis (i.e., used the ones below, added something, removed something, etc.). Please include copies of any usability instruments and data collected during any usability testing.
This paper must be available through the web, and have the URL printed clearly on it.
Grading Criteria
Quality of writing and presentation (1.0 point)
Web site comparison (2.0 points)
Socio-technical insights/analysis/discussion (2 point)
Web site suggestions (4.0 points per site)
Additional supporting material/discussion (1 point)
Team-member peer assessment (1.0 point)
(15 points total)
1. Web sites to be considered
a. The Penn State Library web site (or a subportion) and another university library's web site.
b. The School of IST's web site or a subportion of it, and the web site of another department, either at Penn State or similar department or school at another university.
c. A pair suggested by Sawyer/Santoro.
d. A pair of web sites as agreed with the instructor, for example, retailing, high technology, computing, electronic gaming, sports, politics, education, finance/banking, real estate, publishing, or software.
2. Web site usability criteria:
There are both numerous web-site evaluation checklists available and also many sites that discuss what good (web) design is relative to bad (web) design.
Here are three pertinent web site URLs (and I expect that
you will find others):
1.
http://cedcc.psu.edu/ritter/web-demo
2.
http://instone.org/howtotest/index.html
3.
http://www.webaim.org/guidelines/index.htm
4. Example of a very good
piece of work (copied with permission)
Lee, A. T. (1999). Web usability, a review of the research. SIGCHI Bulletin, 31(1), 38-40. [handed out]
Please organize your analysis around the following high-level criteria:
Users Who are the expected users of this site?
Their characteristics will include:
. age
. experience
. goals
Tasks What will the users be trying to do with the
web site? The analysis should look at
. tasks
. frequency of tasks
With these in mind, you can then examine the following topics related to supporting users performing their tasks:
Navigation This includes (but is not limited
to) elements such as:
· Web site complexity
· Ability to navigate the web site
· Validity and quality of links
· Effectiveness of search engines
Content This includes (but is not limited
to) elements such as:
· Purpose/audience of the web site
· Clarity and depth of content provided
· Indications of the authenticity/trustworthiness of
content
Presentation This includes (but is not limited to)
elements such as:
· Quality of metaphors
· Graphic design (effective use of color, layout, etc.,
with minimum clutter)
· Speed of downloading images
· Two-way communication - ability of the user to
communicate with organisation
· Quality of any interactive surveys and usability
testing
Value This includes (but is not limited to)
elements such as:
· Provides what is needed
· Completeness of the web site
· Currency of the web site
This analysis focuses on the use and value of a web site to a potential user. As such, it is a form of socio-technical analysis. Thus, I expect that you will comment if there are any indications of the types of uses, the social, and/or psychological elements of use.
3. Suggestions for improvement
The suggestions should be concrete and non-general. These comments should arise from the analysis and should be detailed/action-oriented, not general. That is, the comments should clearly tie to both the analysis and the particulars of the web site(s) being discussed.
I look forward to your assignments!
