Evaluation

Initial Study

We recorded the experience of our different participants experiencing a sample presentation with Minerva and without Minerva. Immediately after each experience participants would fill out this survey to allow us to get an understanding of how effective Minerva was on improving their experience, what aspects of Minerva were appealing, and whether or not it Minerva worth pursuing to improve in the first place.

Cross-sectional study with 10 participants using surveys and interviews.

Group A:

1. Go through presentation without Minerva

2. Take post-presentation survey A-1: https://forms.gle/NkSFqPEYwXvv6VCs5

3. Go through presentation with Minerva

4. Take post-presentation survey A-2: https://forms.gle/nCWHmuuncrzWru6S9

5. Conduct interview

Group B:

1. Go through presentation with Minerva

2. Take post-presentation survey B-1: https://forms.gle/5fRrmQM5ACfwJ7U37

3. Go through presentation without Minerva

4. Take post-presentation survey B-2: https://forms.gle/5uHeJtA6d19vGsTZ7

5. Conduct interview

Post-Presentation Survey

Interview Procedure

Start with introductory, general questions about their experiences with technical STEM presentation. Move on to questions about issues they face, insert any specific concerns you may have. Next focus on the interface itself and the efficiency of it. You can ask your own questions but make sure to have at least 10 of the ones below.

Give the interviewee space to articulate their opinion after asking your question. No need to exactly follow the questions, follow the flow of the conversation.

The main goal of the interview is to learn whether or not Minerva was effective in improving their experience.

General:

• Was this your first time hearing about this topic?

• Do you attend technical STEM presentations often?

• Would you attend more presentations like this in the future?

• Do you feel intimidated by these types of presentations?

Issues/Concerns:

• Did you have any trouble keeping up with the presentation?

  • If so, any particular reasons?

• Did you feel like you had a sufficient amount of time to learn about difficult or unknown terms?

• Did you feel distracted at any point?

  • If so, why?

Software:

• What differences did you notice between the two different presentation styles?

• How intuitive was the software?

• Are there any particular issues you had using the software?

• Was there anything you wish was there or wasn't there?

• Would you consider using Minerva in the future?

Findings

"Yes I actually would (use Minerva again), because it really is useful in a lot of educational situations, because I don’t have to stop the entire class if I have a question about something, I can just look it up on minerva."

Overall, Minerva does in fact make the experience of watching presentations easier. It's a fairly intuitive software to navigate for 90% of the users. Despite still having some bugs in the software that interrupted user experience like needing to refresh every time you go to a new presentation slide, all the users still demonstrated an appreciation for Minerva. Besides faster software, another common comment was perhaps adjusting the design to be sleeker as well as adjusting how and what vocabulary is displayed. All 10 of the participants shared that they were interested in using Minerva again, although 4 of the 10 did mention that they would if Minerva became more efficient and some of the issues were fixed.

Conclusion

There is a need for further assistance for participants of technical STEM presentations and through our initial user study, we find that Minerva can serve to fulfill that need. With further finetuning to the software, Minerva could be extremely beneficial.

We're on the right track!