Usability and Accessability Report of Course

Syllabus for WRGT 3306

Jeremy Parker
WRGT 3306 (Digital Media 2)
University of Central Arkansas, UCA
Conway, AR
Parker.jd0021@gmail.com
AbstractThrough testing the usability of the course syllabus
of WRGT 3306, I have found primary concerns for several
elements of the product that need to rectified in order to
maximize its potential usability for its target, and general
audience. Furthermore, I have found issue with the accessibility
of the document in its intended format as well. A briefing of the
methods used to find these problems, and identification of said
problems will be presented in the following. I will also present,
and briefly go over viable solutions to the issues this document
exhibits.
Keywordsusability; accessibility; testing; target; audience

I. INTRODUCTION
The usability and accessibility of a product should be of
primary concern by the developer(s) of the product; if the
product has major flaws concerning either, then the product
loses effectiveness, and/or may be discarded by the user. For
the aforementioned reason, testing of the usability and
accessibility of a product has been found to be extremely
useful. However, it so happens that, in my circumstance, the
purpose of the WRTG 3306 course is to teach the importance
of usability and accessibility, but the course syllabus and
materials outlining the course are difficult to use. In order to
find the reasons students view the materials to be difficult I
conducted both usability and accessibility testing on students
taking WRTG 3306, and students not taking the class. From
these testing sessions I was able to gather data evidencing
particular problem elements of the syllabus and course
materials. Based on these findings, I have been able to target
the problematic aspects, and come up with possible resolutions
for the materials.
II. METHOD OF TESTING
The method of testing used was a simple usability and
accessibility test. During these tests, we were in user dyads
where I would act as the test facilitator and the other as the
testing participant. I chose to have the user test the syllabus in
its hard-copy format, and the project specific outlines in its
digital format. My reason for utilizing both formats is due to
the fact that the only hard copy handed out was the course
Identify applicable sponsor/s here. If no sponsors, delete this text box
(sponsors).

syllabus; the project descriptions are to be found online via the

Blackboard application at myuca. Pretesting, I simply asked
general questions about the users use and expectations of a
course syllabus. Following the pretest general questions, I
requested that the user carry out specific tasks regarding
usability and accessibility. I urged the participant to think out
loud while performing these tasks in order for me to gain
perspective of the participants train of thought.
A. Usability Testing Specifics
The specific areas of the syllabus and course materials I
focused on were the elements of denseness of text, unnecessary
repetition, obscure location of information, and hyperlinking.
The following are the aforementioned issues with more
elaboration.
1.

I was able to test the denseness of the text via the

multiple tasks I had the participant carry out regarding
other themes. The testing of the text density was more
implicit rather than explicit, as I noted their opinions
via a comments/explanation section.

2.

The use of unnecessary repetition of information added

to the density of the text.

3.

The element of obscure location of information can fall

under the category of hierarchical structures. The
information in the materials I felt lacked organization
in certain areas as particular pieces or information
were not readily available in the expected location.

4.

Hyperlinking can be an issue if the link is not working

properly and/or links to an unexpected, yet related,
page.

B. Accessibility testing
For the accessibility portion of the testing I chose to focus
on readability, use of jargon, and understandability for students
that have English as a second language (ESL).
The
aforementioned are primary issues of accessibility because
low-vision users are very common, a strong use of jargon can
often be associated with particular fields teaching technical
skills, and ESL students are present and attending UCA.

1.

In testing for readability, I looked at the physical

density of the text, as well as font size.

2.

In testing for jargon, I looked at whether the user found

understanding of the text and the overall intent of the
document.

3.

Due my acquaintance with several ESL students, I find

it important that course material, such as syllabi and
project descriptions, be accessible to ESL students.

Hyperlink directly to page that leaves no questions

Img.1[1]

C. Post-Test Questionnaire
Following the accessibility part of the testing, I asked the
user of his/her experience of the overall materials. I inquired
as to whether listing effectively broke up the text, making it
more manageable to read, and if the participant was able to
identify a hierarchical order to the syllabus. The final
question asked what all the participant may want to see
implemented into the design of the course materials.

No sidebar showing chapter outline

Img.2[2]

III. RESULTS
The results proved that a uniform calendar outlining the
entire semester schedule would be more useful than the current
system that has four separate calendars. I found that most
people dont typically read through the entire syllabus, rather
they skim for important information, which leads to heavy use
of headings. In that respect, I found some headings were often
overlooked as they were lost in a wall of text. The density of
text proved to be problematic as other things, such as
tardiness policy, were hard to find. Lastly, regarding
usability, I found the hyperlinks to be ineffective as they did
not link to the specific page needed. I tested the Canadian
Style Guide Manual link and the users found difficulty in
locating the desired information.
The accessibility results exhibited strong use of jargon
throughout the syllabus.
Such terms as multimodal,
rhetoric, and recursive should be replaced. Often times the
text size was found to be too small and dense. Finally, since
the online files are pdf, the browser could not do translation of
the page to another language, some ESL users may find this
feature quite useful if it were offered.
IV. SUSGGESTED RESOLUTION
Based on the results found through testing, I would
recommend the building of a site using WordPress or Weebly
that the students would be able to access. When constructing
this site make sure to key on the following points:

Reduced word density

More accessible terminology

Uniform calendar for entire semester

Clear hierarchical order/categorization

Increased font size

Sidebar w/ chapter outline

Automatically open new tab for hyperlinks

No running header

By focusing on these points, the document will be far more

usable and accessible for the intended audience.
V. CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the overall materials examined and tested
were not entirely unusable, but presents itself in a daunting
manner, and lacks organization in key areas. This leads to
some policies being overlooked by the user, and/or hard to
locate. If the documents were to be constructed via one of the
methods listed above, there would be a translation option for
the documents via the browser. Krugs first law of usability,
Dont make me think![3] is a standard by which you should
be looking at moving forward with these materials.
REFERENCES
The template will number citations consecutively within
brackets [1]. The sentence punctuation follows the bracket [2].
Refer simply to the reference number, as in [3]do not use
Ref. [3] or reference [3] except at the beginning of a
sentence: Reference [3] was the first ...
Number footnotes separately in superscripts. Place the
actual footnote at the bottom of the column in which it was

cited. Do not put footnotes in the reference list. Use letters for
table footnotes.
Unless there are six authors or more give all authors
names; do not use et al.. Papers that have not been published,
even if they have been submitted for publication, should be
cited as unpublished [4]. Papers that have been accepted for
publication should be cited as in press [5]. Capitalize only
the first word in a paper title, except for proper nouns and
element symbols.
For papers published in translation journals, please give the
English citation first, followed by the original foreign-language
citation [6].
[1]

Public Works and Government Services Canada (2014). Writing Tools

The Canadian Style. Retrieved from

http://www.btb.termiumplus.gc.ca/tpv2guides/guides/tcdnst
yl/index-eng.html?lang=eng

[2]

[3]

Public Workds and Government Services Canada (2014). Writing

Tools- The Canadian Style. Retrieved from
http://www.btb.termiumplus.gc.ca/tpv2guides/guides/tcdnstyl/indexeng.html?lang=eng&lettr=chap_catlog&page=../srchparbychap
Krug, S. (2014). Dont Make Me Think: Revisited. United States: New
Riders