Usability - Intellectual Production - ETEC 511

What is Usability in Education?

Usability can be defined as the degree of friction or ease experienced by users when completing tasks within a system or interface. In a business context, reducing friction is a priority as it allows for smoother sales processes and increased profitability. A notable example of this is Amazon's One-Click feature, which streamlined the purchasing experience by eliminating unnecessary steps and reducing friction, resulting in improved sales and customer satisfaction. A feature so revolutionary at the time that Apple even licensed the technology in 2000 for their own online platforms (Staff, 2017).

However, when considering usability in the realm of education, the concept of friction may differ. The tasks involved in learning often require a certain level of friction to facilitate comprehension and knowledge acquisition. In this context, usability can be redefined as the user's familiarity with the program's setup and structure, as well as the presentation of information, aimed at replicating experiences they have had in traditional educational settings.

In educational usability, replicating familiar experiences helps users navigate the learning environment comfortably and efficiently. This may involve structuring the program in a way that mirrors traditional educational formats, such as organizing content hierarchically, using familiar terminology and iconography, and presenting information in a logical and sequential manner. By aligning the program's setup and information display with the users' prior educational experiences, usability can be enhanced, allowing for smoother learning processes and improved user engagement.

Usability Gone Wrong

Woolgar's 1990 research study shed light on the lack of usability testing during the development of a new computer system within the company. It revealed a prevailing belief that users should adapt to the system, rather than the system adapting to the user. One aspect highlighted was the company's view of the 'user' and their interactions with the new device. The company treated the 'user' as an abstract concept to be identified, rather than considering real individuals with opinions and experiences that could shape and guide product development. This perspective constrained the user's potential and limited what could be achieved, as the company's view defined the users' future requirements (Woolgar, 1990, p. 75).

Another example documented by Woolgar was how the trials were conducted in an environment that was entirely detached from how users would naturally interact with such a device. Observers in the study frequently prompted or commented on the users' actions to ensure they conformed to the observers' preconceived notion of how a 'real user' should perform (Woolgar, 1990, p. 86). This behaviour suggested that the testing focused more on evaluating the subjects themselves as 'real users' rather than assessing usability. In this artificial observed environment, the subjects may have altered their behaviour to align with what they perceived the observers were expecting, leading to unnatural actions and responses.

Comparing Usability

"…the usability evaluation stage is an effective method by which a software development team can establish the positive and negative aspects of its prototype releases, and make the required changes before the system is delivered to the target users" (Issa & Isaias, 2015, p. 29).

“…the design and production of a new entity…amounts to a process of configuring its user, where 'configuring' includes defining the identity of putative users, and setting constraints upon their likely future actions” (Woolgar, 1990).

The two quotes above show contrasting viewpoints on using usability in product and software development. Issa and Isaias (2015) emphasize the significance of receiving feedback from users in order to make the necessary changes before providing a production version to the final users. This perspective views usability as a valuable tool to improve the overall user experience and enhance the quality of the final product.

Woolgar (1990), on the other hand, suggests that the design process involves configuring the user, wherein the focus is on defining the identity of potential users and what their future actions may look like. He sees usability as a means of shaping user behaviour and adapting them to fit within the predefined constraints; configuring the user to adapt to align with the product, rather than adapting the product to the user.

References

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

Staff, Knowledge At Wharton (2017, September 14). Why Amazon’s “1-click” ordering was a game changer. Knowledge at Wharton. https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/podcast/knowledge-at-wharton-podcast/amazons-1-click-goes-off-patent/

Woolgar, S. (1990). Configuring the user: The case of usability trials. The Sociological Review, 38(1, Suppl.), S58-S99.