0% found this document useful (0 votes)
59 views

Project 2 Report - Final

This report analyzes the usability and accessibility of course materials for Writing 3306. It identifies several issues with the current materials, including heavy blocks of text, unclear headings, repetitive content, and a lack of visuals. The report provides recommendations to address these issues, such as using sidebars and boxes to feature important information prominently, reorganizing content into a more logical flow, and adding symbols, images and visual breaks. Changes are proposed for individual projects and sections to improve the clarity and ease of navigating the materials.

Uploaded by

api-273206443
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
59 views

Project 2 Report - Final

This report analyzes the usability and accessibility of course materials for Writing 3306. It identifies several issues with the current materials, including heavy blocks of text, unclear headings, repetitive content, and a lack of visuals. The report provides recommendations to address these issues, such as using sidebars and boxes to feature important information prominently, reorganizing content into a more logical flow, and adding symbols, images and visual breaks. Changes are proposed for individual projects and sections to improve the clarity and ease of navigating the materials.

Uploaded by

api-273206443
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Usability and Accessibility of Course Materials

Project Two

Briana Stuepfert
Professional Writing
University of Central Arkansas
Conway, USA
[email protected]
This report addresses the effectiveness of the Writing 3306
course materials through usability and accessibility attributes.
Recommendations are based on testing administered to students
enrolled in the current course, who represent the user audience.

I.

INTRODUCTION

The course materials for Writing 3306 are intended to


inform students about the course as a whole, and provide
information on the course projects. Usability and accessibility
are highly emphasized in the coursework so it makes sense for
the materials to abide by the same goals of creating usercentered design. The essential objective is to focus on making
important information easy to locate and clear to understand.
The aspects to pay attention to are:

Professor contact information

University policies

Course description, guidelines and schedule

Project outlines, details and reminders

Making these elements the most important the main focus


will be centered on what the user wants most, basing the design
on the user experience. Further, certain issues need to be
avoided throughout the new design to make the material easy
to navigate, visually appealing, and ultimately achieve the
purpose in the easiest manner. Issues of concern are:

Text heavy passages

Unclear headings/difficulty with navigation

Repetitive content

Unnecessary or irrelevant content

Indirect language

Lack of images and visuals


II. COURSE SYLLABUS

A. Selecting a Template (Heading 2)


Main aspects of the course syllabus for users are professor
contact information, course details, requirements, grading and
schedule. A sidebar can be inserted on the first page to feature

important information that users frequently reference. This


will eliminate a text heavy first page, create visual interest in
the layout, and add a clear hierarchy. Three sections of info is
enough to be useful without cluttering the available space. The
current heading Class Time/Location should come first,
required textbooks would be the second section; other required
resources will be the third section. Text to eliminate is: the
Professionalism: We Work! section, course description in
the undergraduate bulletin, coursework introduction, course
objectives, assessment, and the attached rubrics. Sections to
create as a visually prominent and in proximity to each other
are, required resources and final exam; coursework
introduction; clearer project and participation need a clearer
visual break down. Clearer hierarchies are necessary for
coursework and attendance. Addition of the schedules would
be a helpful reference. Perhaps university policies can be
attached in a pdf or link in a digital format.
B. Maintaining the Integrity of the Specifications
The template is used to format your paper and style the
text. All margins, column widths, line spaces, and text fonts are
prescribed; please do not alter them. You may note
peculiarities. For example, the head margin in this template
measures proportionately more than is customary. This
measurement and others are deliberate, using specifications
that anticipate your paper as one part of the entire proceedings,
and not as an independent document. Please do not revise any
of the current designations.
III. PROJECT ONE
The main change that will be prevalent for the project one
will be the layout, as in order of content and the visible
hierarchy. A more sensible order of sections would be:
Introduction
Deliverables
Protocol Specifications
All required items
Reminders (such as saving drafts and word count)
References
Schedule
This makes the most coherent sense when approaching a
project as a student, limits repetition, cuts down on text,

and provides a clear path for navigable hierarchy to


appear. Each header should be prominent visible and an
added flowchart can illustrate the projects process.
IV.

PROJECT TWO

The course material for project two is already concise, so


the main aspect to concentrate on is adding visuals to the page.
Perhaps the heading of information can be contained in a box,
symbols can mark headings, and a clearer layout inserted for
the required items list. If used digitally, IEEE should have a
marked area with a small explanation and direct links.
V.

PROJECT THREE

Project three contains many instructions for going about


the process of creating the project, because much of content is
relate but separate, it is important to have clearly defined
areas. The introduction is helpful but needs to be tired in
proximity to the musts. The variables can be shortened in
word count, moved away from the musts section, and
represented visually or add visual interest. After all of these
introductory elements the required items list can come
which needs to be revised from its cluttered state. This should
be followed by the style guide (which needs emphasis because
its important to users), section on teams creating a
collaborative protocol, and word count. Teamwork is essential
element of this project but its explanation will not be as highly

referenced as the other content, so placing it last makes sense.


With teamwork as a clear heading, and the description
underneath, there will only be two connecting element. The
policy affecting non-productive team members was originally
placed in the course syllabus but will be moved here as this is
where it is applicable.
VI.

PROJECT FOUR

Has a specific description and example for what genre


ecology is. That description could be presented with images or
in a visual box. Further, the EVA air website links are only
clickable from a digital format, so assuming we are using such
a medium, a pop-up box could contain the explanation and all
associated links. So then after the project is introduced we can
jump straight into the details of it. The header is not necessary
on the front page can become a sidebar, and is not necessary
on the second page. The items required seem squishedneeds
to be clearer to see all the different aspects. A section
reminding to use the protocols does not seem necessary at this
point in the semester. Finally the style guide and word count
can be presented in an image as a note instead of a section.
REFERENCES
[1]

S. Krug, Dont Make Me Think Revisited: A Common Sense Approach


to Web and Mobile Usability. United States of America, 2014.

You might also like