The Usability of Three Given Accessible Websites - Essay Example

EVALUATION OF THE USABILITY OF SELECTED WEBSITES School This paper seeks to assess the usability of three given accessible websites, namely: a) usability.gov.com. b) transparencynow.com and c) useit.com. Usability refers to a quality attribute that assesses how well users learn and experience interfacing on the web page design with ease-of- use (DHHS,n.d.). J. Nielsen explained that “if a website is difficult to use, people leave. If the homepage fails to clearly state what a company offers and what users can do on the site, people leave. If users get lost on a website, they leave. If a websites information is hard to read or doesnt answer users key questions, they leave. Therefore, for the Web, usability is a necessary condition for survival.” (Nielsen, 2010). Five basic criteria were selected from a number of criteria provided by other comparable websites for this purpose. Each criterion was compared or correlated with other criteria used by other websites. If parameters of a criterion were found encompassing with the other sites’ criteria on a more broad range, then this was taken as a major criterion. Each criterion was applied while doing actual access and navigation of the given sites. The five chosen and listed criteria for this purpose were: a) aesthetic page design; b) organization and functionality; c) content coverage and accuracy; d) effectiveness and relevance and finally, e) client satisfaction. Given these criteria, the three cited websites were assessed accordingly indicating their areas with low or high usability and the corresponding recommendations how to improve their usability, if found low. The succeeding process of evaluation was also based on first hand experience on actual navigation, exploration and access of the given sites. It is expected that with this exercise, this study can provide an initial assessment whether these sites have high or low usability and if low, what are the best recommendations to improve their usability. KEYWORDS: usability of webs, ease-of-use, utility, interfacing ASSESSMENT OF THE USABILITY OF THREE SELECTED WEBSITES THE CRITERIA (Benbunan-Fich, 2001) defined the concept of usability as “how well and how easily a user, without formal training, can interact with an information system of a website” (Wang, J. and Senecal, S. 2007). Succeeding discussion delves on brief descriptions of each selected criterion and how each was related to the evaluation. As the user opens the website, his visuals land first with its homepage and the first that are stimulated is his aesthetic senses. The first criterion relates to the impact of the aesthetic page design. The strength of the visual design usually adds value to the users’ aesthetic preferences ( Criteria, 2007). Tone and color blending is one aspect that must be considered in designing a web page. Are the background and text font and colors used within the site appropriate? Does the overall color and tone enhancement blend with the other features of the site? Was it done in good taste_ giving a good aesthetic impact to the user? Second criterion is b) organization (criteria, 2005) and functionality (Nielsen, 2010). Organization addresses the overall page layout or its coherent order of presentation. Functionality, on the other hand, refers to the installed navigating mechanisms, whether they will make it easy for different people to use the website including those with disabilities. Website functionality determines how effective and how fast the user can navigate with ease-of-use and accomplish his task in a given period of time. The functionality ensures that all installed or imbedded functional mechanisms work such as its hyperlinks, other links, expanded and collapsible sections, and internal search engines, among others. Nielsen also explained that “Utility is another key feature that should go together with functionality since both are equally important. Utility refers to the design’s functionality or that which answers the questions: Does it do what the users need? For example, it matters little that something is easy if its not what you want. Its also not good if the system can hypothetically do what you want, but you cant make it happen because the user interface is too difficult”. Third is criterion c) content coverage and accuracy (SERB, n.d.). When it comes to content, it covers scope, accuracy and appropriateness. It should simply answer questions like: is the information comprehensive enough to adequately cover the topic(s) intended for the users? Does it also present validated innovative and strength of ideas? On Accuracy, is everything on site error-free? Is the information accurate? Are the current information and links regularly updated? Does it allow bias-free viewpoints? It must also include built-in sections on: Authority, Expertise, Reputation of author/designer; Contact information address of author/designer; Expertise/reputation of host site. It should also abide by the W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines rules and legalities to include no feature of porn, obscenities and violence. The fourth criterion relates to d) effectiveness and relevance. Effectiveness would refer to the fulfillment of the websites purpose (criteria, 2007.). For example, if a website is selling real estate, how does it attract potential buyers and show off its properties? (Criteria, 2007). Relevance refers to updates or keeping information updated or current (SERB, n.d.). The last criterion deals with e) client satisfaction which simply answers the question: How much did the user like using the system? (DHHS, n.d.) EVALUATION 1. http://www.usability.gov./ The site areas with low usability are cited as the follows: First, its aesthetic page design needs a little improvement. Aesthetically, the visual perception of a first time user can become a determinant of the user’s preferences later. Combination of colors in the site appears to be not as exciting as other contemporary websites. More combination of colors could make it more exciting to stimulate the user to explore. Page layout or presentation is another feature that lowers the site’s usability. A first time user may not be able to finish his task on time with the kind of existing layout the site has. For example, it was noted that a description about the author was inserted within The Blog section. If your first intent was to look for the author’s background, you will not be able to find it in its rightful place like either at Home Page or integrated within the feature on “About Us”. It would be more appropriate if this item about the author was relocated as one of the main features of its Home page or About Us. It is also observed that the item on “About Us” is located at the end of the top menu bar when instead it must come next to “HOME” which is now done in several contemporary websites. The introduction about Blog section is further recommended to be placed as a separate item to click on the top menu bar instead of having it at the Home Page. Another observable missing feature which relates to the criteria on relevance is a provision of its update. Contemporary websites usually display their copyright year at the bottom of home page. This site does not have one except when you go to its blog and Articles & Discussion where you will discover that its contents are current. Context-wise, its scope coverage is adequate. However, the layout must have really confused a first time user. Thus, it would be appreciated if some guide explanation or some sort of an additional FQA (frequently asked questions) section be added on top of the menu bar to support a first time navigating user. 2. http://www.transparencynow.com/index.html Web usability advocates stress the importance of clarity, simplicity, and consistency in web design so that users can perform desired operations efficiently and effectively (Cappell and Huang, 2009). This site was noted to have received several awards from Britannica Internet Guide Award, Internet Brothers Elite Site Award, Helpware Award and NetMagicks Master of Content Award. This site contains more materials about Literature and Arts. Viewing the home page of the site, initially gives the impression that its page layout, organization, goal and overall impact was customized and designed for a specific purpose that would cater only to specific users only. Hence, its usability can only be effective and satisfactory to these specific users, the teachers and students. But to other users of different interests and backgrounds, the site may not be that effective and satisfactory. However, if the five criteria are to be applied against this site, then there is much room for improvement particularly in the area of page layout, organization and functionality, effectiveness and relevance. If it intends to cater to other types of clientele, then it would be appreciated if it reformats itself to adopt the standard formatting applied to other contemporary websites. 3. http://www.useit.com/jakob/ This site contains all the information about Jakob Nielsen who holds a Ph.D. in human-computer interaction from the Technical University of Denmark in Copenhagen (Nielsen, Alertbox). Nielsen has also earned the title “Guru of Web Page Usability” or Web’s Foremost “Usability” Gurus (Ritchel, M. 1998). At first glance, the site may look like overcrowded, though with not much graphics. Nielsen emphasized that it intended to have no or minimal graphics for this site. Although the site may have its own peculiarities, having it personalized or a customized site, the author–designer made it a point to have its own purpose and to cater only to specific clientele. Nielsen, being a Guru of Web Page Usability, knows his domain. Thus, even if this web undergoes assessment applying the five given criteria, examining the functionality of the site’s mechanisms, organization, interactivity and overall user impact, it still gave the impression of it’s simplicity, very forward style, accuracy, organization and effective delivery of its purpose, making the user satisfied with the system’s site. This exercise has its own limitations, though. Since results have no statistical basis, some areas of its evaluation may have to come out very subjective. However, it is recommended that the given sites be subjected to further evaluation like heuristic evaluation, among others. WORKS CITED Cappel. J and Huang, Z. (2009). A Usability Analysis of Company Websites. [Abstract] Central Michigan University. Retrieved from http://kuo.bm.nsysu.edu.tw/2009/tlin999/references/A%20usability%20analysis%20of%20company%20websites.pdf Criteria For Evaluating Websites. (n.d) Southern Regional Education Board (SREB), SERB Educational Technology Cooperative: EvaluTech. Recommending Criteria For Evaluating Websites. Retrived from http://www.evalutech.sreb.org/criteria/web.asp General Website Evaluation Criteria (2005) . Access To Electronic Legal Information Committee set their own criteria. (Anonymous). Retrieved from http://www.aallnet.org/committee/aelic/criteria.html Nielsen, J. Usability 101: Introduction to Usability. Alertbox. Retrieved from http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20030825.html Nielsen, J., Pernice, K. and Loranger, H. (2010) Fundamental Guidelines for Web Usability. Usability Week. Ritchell, M. Making Web Sites More Usable Is Former Sun Engineers Goal. Web. 13 July 1998 . Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/98/07/cyber/articles/13usability.html United States. Department of Health and Human Services. (DHHS). n.d. Usability Basics. Retrieved from Your Guide for Developing Usable and Useful Websites: http://www.usability.gov/basics/index.html. Accessed 09 Sept. 2010 Wang, J. and Senecal,S.(n.d.) Measuring Perceived Website Usability. Retrieved from https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=sample+of+an+assessed+usability+of+a+website&aq=f&aqi=&oq=&gs_rfai= Website Criteria (2007.) Great Idea Design . Soleil Web Solutions. Retrieved from http://greatideadesign.com/Website-Awards/index.htm REFERENCES Hlodan, O. (2007). Criteria for web site evaluation [PowerPointslides] Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/scilit/criteria-for-web-site-evaluation Lang, Tania. (2003) Comparing website accessibility evaluation methods and learnings from usability evaluation methods. Retrieved from http://www.peakusability.com.au/pdf/website_accessibility.pdf Read More