December 10, 2007
Executive Summary
This is the executive summary for our final report. My goal in writing this section of the report was to briefly summarize the usability testing procedure and findings for our client, the IRB.
To do this I began with a statement about our mission. I explained that we were researchers evaluating the site and making recommendations about usability. Then I explained generally how we conducted our research.
I went in to a little more detail concerning the different parts of the site we evaluated, but I tried to keep everything concise because our audience cares more about our recommendations than the process of our usability testing. They are not technical communicators. They are administrative personel. The text explaining each bolded key word is written in interogative form to appeal to their concerns as administration. They want to know how these parts of the site affect them.
I also included a list of key findings and recommendations for the client. Bulleted lists are easier for them to scan and since all of these topics will be dicussed in detail later on in the report, I thought it best to keep everything simple, straitforward, and brief.
December 5, 2007
Conclusion Slide
This document contains the text for the conclusion slide in our Dec. 12 presentation to the IRB. I wanted to recap the most significant information that our presentation went over for the audience. Because this particular audience is our client, I considered what they would be most interested in. Since their interest is in human subjects research they would be more likely to want to know our purpose, a general summary of how we found our data, and most importantly: our recommendations.
To accomodate their expectations, I divided the slide into four parts. The first section clearly and briefly states our project mission. The second lists the ways we obtained our data. The third lists the specific parts of the site we tested, and the fourth contains our recommendations. I chose to list these in chronological order (according to the rest of the powerpoint) so that it would be clearer to the audience.
Lastly, I tried to keep my text concise. I used bullet points and lists. Lots of words just clutter up a power point slide.
November 8, 2007
Email to Testing Group
The purpose of this email was to inform the Testing Group that two people had volunteered to participate in our study, and to ask the Testing Group to contact them.
I began the email by stating the names and education status of the volunteers. I did this so that Testing could identify the gentlemen in question and test them as graduate students rather than faculty.
Then I listed their email addresses so that Testing could contact them. I closed the email with a call to action, by requesting that Testing contact the volunteers and schedule them for testing.
Revised Faculty Testing Instructions
Revised Faculty Testing Instructions
This document is the final draft of the Faculty Testing Instructions. After the initial copy was written, the testing group reviewed the document and made a few suggestions. I took these comments into account and revised the document to include the following changes:
1.) I added a senario concerning IRB approval exemptions to test whether or not the website clearly conveyed the circumstanes that warrented IRB approval. Not every type of research needs IRB approval. If researchers don’t need it, then it’s a waste of time, but if they do need it and do not file for approval they will not be allowed to publish their findings.
2.) I added a senario concerning consent forms to test whether or not users could easily find nescessary consent form information on the IRB website. This is a vital question because without proper human subjects consent forms, researchers cannot perform their studies.
3.) I removed questions concerning the location of obscure documents like the Belmont Report and the TTU Audit Report. This keeps the testing instructions brief and leaves out data that will not aid our research.
October 26, 2007
IRB Meeting Notes
This is a report I wrote for our Usability Testing Team concerning the TTU Institutional Review Board Meeting Kyle, Allison, and I sat in on.
These notes were not intended to be a formal record of the meeting’s minutes, but rather a concise summary of its contents. So it is written in an informal style, and also uses lots of bullets and white space to break up the document. This makes the notes easier and quicker to read.
The reason these notes were not intended to formally record the minutes is that the IRB asked the three of us not to release any information that was discussed during the meeting. So I limited my notes to describing the procedure, attitudes, and general concerns of members. This allows the members of our team to understand the IRB’s attitude and position, without revealing any classified information.
October 25, 2007
Email to Donna
The purpose of this email was to update Donna Peters about our progress in the IRB Usability Testing project. I wanted her to feel comfortable and excited about the project.
To do this, I began by breaking the email down into three major sections, one for each team in our testing group: Testing, Participant/Sponsor Managment, and Editing. I briefly summarized what each group was currently working on and what they hoped to accomplish in the near future. I made sure to include statements explaining the relevance of their tasks to Donna. I knew that my email would mean nothing to her if she did not understand how our work would affect her.
Also, I tried to use lots of positive and excited statements to create a sense of enthusiasm. Usability Testing is not the most exciting subject to read about if you’re not a Technical Communicator, so I wanted to secure her support by exciting her about our project. Statements like “we look forward to…” and “anticipating” are enthusiasitic and display a positive tone.
I included a statement inviting her to contact me with any questions at the end so that she would feel welcome to inquire about the process.
October 17, 2007
Testing Instructions: Faculty
This document is my draft of the IRB Usability Testing Instructions for faculty particpants. It will be given to users when they begin testing the IRB website and they will follow its instructions in order to perform the nescessary tasks. All senarios and tasks are included in this document.
The first portion of the instructions is a cover page. Here I included our Usability Testing logo for branding purposes. This graphic rests on the top left corner of the page and is balanced by the bolded title (“IRB Usability: Faculty Testing Instructions“) on the lower right, nearly half way down the page. This layout serves two purposes: 1.) To brand the document and 2.) To provide a clear contrast with the text which begins after a line break and follows in block format across the page.
Understanding that many participants may be uneasy about being observed, I wanted to make this document as friendly and reassuring as possible. To do this I began with the bolded title, “Welcome!” as a warm salutation. Then I opened my text with an expression of thanks for their participation.
Participants also need some basic information before they can begin testing. I briefly informed them of the purpose of this usability test, the duration of time they could expect to spend in the observation room, and described the kinds of tasks they would be asked to perform.
For additional advice on composition I refered to the SPU report. In their appendix they included a copy of the general instructions given oraly to all participants. I wanted to include some of the most important portions in my text to reinforce their importance to participants. Also, people learn in different ways. Some people may be better visual learners or have a hearing impairment. Including some of the most important instructions in text improves the chacnes that participants will remember and perform these actions.
So on the cover page, I included reminders about “thinking out loud” and providing feedback about their experience with the IRB site. I also explained how they can do this.
I tried to break the senarios and tasks down into a visually distinguishable format. Senarios written as declarative statements open with a roman numeral, followed by imperative instructions. Then below each instruction are questions designed to evaluate how well the participant was able to complete each task. Thus, the participant will read a sentence or two describing a situation or senario. Then they will read a simple instructive statement asking them to perform a task. After they have completed the task, they will read a question or two which ask for brief, simple answers concerning the task they have just completed. I composed questions with simple answers to ensure that there is no confusion in staff interpretation after testing.
I took all of the senarios/tasks from the Usability Goals/Testing Matrix. Some I edited or reordered for clarity. Occasionally I added evaluative questions to ensure that we could document users’ work.
October 2, 2007
Persona Description
Having identitied that the primary users of the TTU IRB website are grauate students and faculty members, I elected to write a description of a potential graduate user.This is a description of the graduate student persona, Emily Valdez, for the IRB Usability Testing project.
For this assignment, my task was to create a fictional person whose characteristics would encompas the majority of the TTU IRB graduate users. To do this, I reflected on common traits graduate student users share.
1.) Graduate students have all earned at least one higher education degree. This means that they have all done some type of research in libraries and online. Many have even studied human subjects. Having completed at least 4 years of higher education, they are usually at youngest in their mid-twenties.
To reflect this trait, I gave Ms. Valdez two advanced degrees and moderate experience in research. Then I enrolled her as a PhD student at TTU. I set her age at 27.
2.) Users of the IRB Human Subjects site research in areas that deal with…people!
Though some fields like computer science or forgien language may occasionally delve into human subjects research to enhance their work, I elected for Ms. Valdez to major in Sociology with a specialization in Women’s Studies. These are both classic examples of academic fields with a major emphasis on human subjects research.
3.) Researchers often have special or sensitive subjects.
Researchers want to know how all people behave, not just the average person. This means that they will test prison inmates, the mentally ill, and children just to name a few. Because this is a common occurance, I elected for Ms. Valdez to study a subject that would pose some challenges to meeting the ethical standards required for researchers of human subjects, and would require her to seek special dispensation from the IRB. She will study how pregnant women are treated in the workplace.
4.) Many graduate students have experience in the workforce.
Either while in school or after earning a degree, most graduate students have earned work experience. Here they learn valuable skills like computer fluency. I sent Ms. Valdez to work for the University of Texas library during her undergraduate years. Like many students, she has experience working on-campus, for the educational instituion. Also like many students, she has experience working off-campus. Ms. Valdez spent three years working as a grant writer for a company in her women’s studies field, Planned Parenthood.
In both of these jobs she learned computer skills since it is nescessary to use the computer cataloging system for the library and common word processing tools in writing. Also, in her position as a grant writer, Ms. Valdez learned to write well, and also developed her research skills.
5.) Many graduate students either have, or will soon have a family.
Because they are getting older, many students in their late twenties and early thirties begin to get married and have children. I chose to reflect this through Ms. Valdez’s engagement to Henri. This enables her to share characteristics with both unmarried students and married ones. She is not married yet, but she will soon be, and is planning her future life as a partner.
6.) Most graduate students have financial strain.
I loaded Ms. Valdez with a moderate amount of student debt and gave her an expensive wedding to plan so that she would work under the same financial constraints that most graduate students face. These are also very common types of financial stress. This is the age (27) that many people begin to marry, so weddings are a typical cost. Also, very few students can graduate college with no debt.
7.) Graduate students live off-campus.
After completing their undergraduate degrees, students tend to leave the noisy dorm rooms behind. Then they all enter the joyous era of non-community living. So that Ms. Valdez would experience the same commuting pressures of other graduate students I leased her and her fiance an apartment in the city. Ms. Valdez will have to struggle with long hours away from her home priorities like Henri and her cat Pickles. And she won’t be able to visit staff members after she has come home, so she will need to get most of her information from the internet.
To introduce the audience to Emily Valdez, I chose to write my persona description in chronological format. I began by introducing Ms. Valdez in her current state, and then skipping backwards to her undergraduate studies. From there, I moved forward bringing the audience back to the original image of Ms. Valdez. I feel that this approach focuses the audience’s attention on Ms. Valdez’s current state. Not only do we open and close viewing this image of her at present (the way she will use our site) but we understand why she has the characteristics she does. The chronological approach explains how she developed into this state.
Usability Testing Portfolio 