20101013 - Ballard, Web site usability...educational web sites

Web site usability: A case study of student perceptions of educational web sites by Ballard, Joyce Kimberly, Ph.D., University of Minnesota, 2010 , 408 pages; AAT 3408366 My Interest: 1) Nielsen's Heuristics. 2) Xerox Heuristic Evaluation Checklist. 3) Computer Use/User Self-Efficacy Scale. 4) Quality of Web-based Instruction. 5) Usability Testing – think-aloud protocol. 6) Usability Testing – eye tracking. 7) Usability Testing – time-error log. 8) Methodology of data analysis. 9) Theoretical framework. 10) Validity & reliability. Action: To read the Dissertation in future. Research Goal The purpose of this research study was to understand the construct of usability from the perspective of 74 students enrolled in six online courses offered by one online and distance learning program at a large, public university in the Midwest. Methodology Six courses, designed and developed by two different groups, professional and nonprofessional developers, were selected. The study used both quantitative and qualitative measures to record the experiences of students enrolled in the six online courses. First, the courses were evaluated using Nielsen's (1994, 2000, 2002) heuristics as operationalized by the Xerox Heuristic Evaluation Checklist (1995) as a standard measure of usability, then rank-ordered by heuristic evaluation score. Comments: I would love to see this Xerox Heuristic Evaluation Checklist. I suppose this is a UET (usability evaluation tool) for UEM = heuristic evaluation. Would love to know WHAT are the usability criteria (heuristics) used in this Checklist. Eachus and Cassidy's (2006) Computer Use Self-efficacy Scale was used as a pre-course survey to measure students' computer self-efficacy prior to beginning their online course. Comments: Would like to see the details of Computer Use/User Self-Efficacy Scale. Stewart, Hong, and Strudler's (2004) Quality of Web-based Instruction was used as a post-course survey to measure student satisfaction with their online course experience. A subset of 29 students participated in usability testing sessions in the usability lab. A think-aloud protocol provided qualitative data in the form of verbal reports, eye-tracking recordings provided data confirming the think-aloud protocol data, and a time-error log provided "time to complete tasks," and "error rate" data as students completed seven typical tasks required to successfully participate in an online course. A summary, debriefing interview with each student was conducted to record any additional student comments and any student recommendations for improving the courses. Qualitative data were examined for themes and a coding scheme was created. This coding scheme, which illustrated the issues specific to educational web sites, was compared to Nielsen's (1994, 2000, 2002) heuristics to evaluate whether Nielsen's (1994, 2000, 2002) heuristics, widely accepted as the standard for the design and development of business and commercial websites, also apply to educational web sites. Comments: I will want to review her Guidelines for educational web sites. These can be correlated with learning-related usability criteria. Design and development guidelines for educational web sites were written by the researcher based on the study findings. These guidelines were mapped to Nielsen's heuristics as operationalized by the Xerox Heuristic Evaluation Checklist (1995). Results Discussion The results of the quantitative and qualitative measures used were analyzed by course and course development type. The most significant results of this study came from the analysis of the variables according to course development type. The results of the study findings include that the course design type, professional or nonprofessional, was related to usability as measured by students' error rates, Nielsen's heuristic evaluation scores, and student satisfaction scores. The professionally-developed courses were found to be significantly higher in usability than the non-professionally-developed courses by task error rate, Nielsen's heuristic evaluation score and student satisfaction scores. The analysis of students' verbal reports resulted in three times as many positive comments for the professionally-developed courses when compared to the positive comments for the non-professionally-developed courses. The results of the quantitative and qualitative measures used were also analyzed by course. When comparisons were made between courses using courses as the unit of analysis the findings were different. The rank-order of courses was mixed between course types when compared by error rates. The Nielsen's heuristic evaluation scores as measures of usability for educational web sites were not consistent with students' judgments of course usability as measured by error rate scores. There was no relationship between the usability ranking of courses by Nielsen's heuristics and usability as judged by students' error rates. However, an analysis of students' verbal reports identified 52 common themes and confirmed the importance of Nielsen's heuristics in educational course design. Comments: She has found that Nielsen's heuristics are important and relevant for educational course design and educational websites. This is a good support for my literature review. The correlation between the self-efficacy score and error rate means was nonsignificant. The correlation between self-efficacy and error rate was small; very close to zero. There was a small positive correlation between student satisfaction and usability as measured by error rates. Conclusion Based on the analysis of the study variables according to course development type, the results of this study found that Nielsen's usability heuristics, a respected evaluation tool used primarily to measure the usability of commercial web sites, can be used to evaluate instructional web sites and used to differentiate between levels of usability in the same way usability is judged by students. Chapter Two 14 Review of the Literature 14 Theoretical Framework 15 Usability. 17 Defining Usability 18 Usability and Web-based Instruction 19 Web-based Instruction and Instructional Design 21 Instructional Design 23 Defining Instructional Design 24 The Need to Evaluate Design and Quality 26 Instructional Design Differences . 29 Usability and Aesthetics 32 Usability Guidelines for Interface Design 34 Summary 35 Chapter Three 37 Research Method 37 Introduction . 37 Research Questions and Data Collection . 38 Rationale of the Methodology 41 Xerox Heuristics Evaluation: A System Checklist 42 Rationale 42 Validity . 44 Reliability 48 Method 48 Survey One Computer User Self-efficacy Scale (CUSE) 50 Rationale 50 Validity 52 Reliability 52 Survey Two Student Evaluation of the Quality of Web-Based Instruction 52 Rationale 52 Validity . 54 Reliability 54 Institutional context . 55 Institution . 55 College 55 Online Distance Education Program . 56 Course Management Systems 56 Course Selection 57 Student Selection/Recruitment . 60 IRB Approval 61 Recruitment Procedures 61 Data Collection Procedures . 62 General Collection Procedures . 63 Volunteers for Usability Testing . 64 Follow-up Attempts 65 Quantitative Data Collection 65 Timing of Instrument Use 65 Qualitative Data Collection . 66 Timing of Usability Testing 66 Qualitative Data from the Usability Testing Sessions 67 Usability Testing 67 Usability Testing Site 67 Pre-determined Tasks 69 Think-aloud Protocols 69 Time Log, Video, Audio, & Eye-tracking Data Collection 72 Time Log Data 72 Video, Audio, and Eye-tracking Data 73 Error Log . 75 Summary Interview 77 Post-course Student Evaluation of the Quality of Web-Based Instruction 77 Limitations of the Study 77 Summary 78 Chapter Four . 81 Research Findings 81 Research Questions 83 Summary 114