Cite Right: Project

Configuring the Tool

  During the development stage of the project, the design took on several iterations, each one addressing usability issues identified during testing.  I used the principles of learnability, flexibility, robustness, efficiency, memorability, errors, and satisfaction to evaluate the project as I moved through the development stage (Issa & Isaias, 2005, p. 33). I also gave careful thought to Woolgar’s (1990) notion of configuring the user to evaluate how the tool itself shaped the user. 

In terms of learnability, the design of the project made it simple and straightforward to use. In the first iteration, I thought that although the learnability seemed intuitive, given that each user might approach technology differently, I added an instruction page to provide an overview of the different ways that users could progress through the tutorial. This also highlighted the flexibility of the tool, as students could either use the side progress arrows to move through the tutorial, use the arrows at the bottom of the page to go to the next or previous lesson or the key button to go to the quiz.  In the final iteration, I added a sidebar menu to help the user understand the logic of the tutorial, as well as to facilitate movement through the tutorial according to the user's specific needs. 

Regarding robustness, this tool provided a well-developed overview of the material, with options to deepen learning through illustrative examples. In the final iteration I added an indexed resource page.  Quizzes provided the user with assessment strategies throughout the tutorial, and provided feedback for each unit. The initial plan was to use a similar quiz format for each section, but during development, I identified and implemented other formats that were better suited to the content in each section. This also increased variety, which had the potential to sustain user interest.  In terms of efficiency, I utillized a design which repeated through each section making it easy for students to learn to navigate the tool quickly.  This also increased memorability through repetition.  The graphics, interactive variety and ease of use made the tool enjoyable to work through, which could increase user satisfaction.

Configuring the User

Reflecting on how this tool shaped the user provided insights into the usability of the tool.  Woolgar (1990) argues that the “user’s character and capacity, her possible future actions are structured and defined in relation to the machine” (p. 89).  The design of this tool was meant to provide the user with a lot of agency, but it also limited and defined what and how the user learns.  The ‘what’ and ‘how’ are quite narrowly focused, and therefore the user is defined quite narrowly defined as well.  For instance, this tool would not be well-suited to users who are interested in other styles of citation or who are not visual/textual learners.  

Conclusions

Overall, the tool worked well and provided a good overview of citation mechanics and rationales.  I will use this tool in my own courses.  In terms of what I would do differently, I would add tools for assessing user satisfaction and errors in usability. I would, for instance, add a feedback page so that I users can provide feedback which could be used to improve the tool.  I also plan to redesign the tool to include options for users to choose the citation style that is the focus of their tutorial. 

References

Issa, T., Isaias, P. (2015). Usability and human computer interaction (HCI). In Sustainable Design. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6753-2_2

Woolgar, S. (1990). Configuring the user: The case of usability trials Published for the University of Keele by Routledge & Kegan Paul. doi:10.1111/j.1467-954X.1990.tb03349.x