61.25% net decrease in total clicks (Criteria Met)

100% net decrease in total highlights (Criteria Met)

20.48% net decrease in total time (Criteria Not Met)

The margin of error in this set of data is tough to decipher. I say this because all of the data inputted by one person could have been vastly different than what someone else inputted. This is because I didn't specify a margin by which people needed to enter their data. This theoretically wouldn't be an issue, however, since everyone who completed this test was supposed to complete both the document method and the website method for their given transcript. Then, since they would complete both methods, their rounding methods would also be the same for both methods, reducing the issue of whether or not their inputs would skew my data in the end. Whether everyone still did both methods is still, unfortunately, left up to the tester. Long story short, the margin of error for the data could be anywhere from 1 click to hundreds of clicks, or 1 second to a couple minutes. If I were to do this test again, I would specify a margin on which I want the testers to round their numbers to. 

Some possible experimental errors are:

• Incorrectly counting the number of clicks while filling out either method of pre-check

• Incorrectly stopping/starting stopwatch when beginning or ending each method of pre-check

• Misunderstanding how to use either method of pre-check and taking additional time than what is needed

• Incorrectly counting the number of highlights used in the document method of pre-check

• Misunderstanding instructions in the survey and giving false data

• Due to lack of motivation, not giving accurate data in survey response

• Due to missing classes in the website database, not understanding to skip these classes, and instead giving up

• The idea of random chance not being fully removed as a culprit when discussing my data and not keeping my "p-value" below the 0.05 margin.

Even though I did manage to meet two of my criteria, when it comes to the timing of things, there were a couple of things that people still seemed to struggle with. These things were:

• Understanding that you had to enter all classes from your high school career

• Understanding that you had to enter both semesters of classes, as opposed to just one, and the other class will add itself.

• Understanding what certain classes were named

• Knowing that if you couldn't find a class just skip it

• Knowing that the academic planner was your best friend for completing this website method of pre-check

• How to effectively search for classes and use the search bar as a whole.

After completing this test, it seems clear to me that instructions were still the number one issue of my new method of pathway precheck. If I were to give better and more straightforward instructions or adjust the way people enter classes to a sectioned-off set-up, people might have been able to reach that 50% decrease in the total time mark.

28.1% decrease in total clicks

100% decrease in total highlights

47.67% decrease in total time

These tests were conducted a check step to ensure that my data was not caused due to random chance.

71.2% decrease in total clicks

100% decrease in total highlights

32.07% decrease in total time

These tests were conducted a check step to ensure that my data was not caused due to random chance.

66.22% decrease in total clicks

100% decrease in total highlights

11.97% increase in total time

These tests were conducted a check step to ensure that my data was not caused due to random chance.

79.46% decrease in total clicks

100% decrease in total highlights

14.15% decrease in total time

These tests were conducted a check step to ensure that my data was not caused due to random chance.