Short Report

Usability and Accessibility Testing

Kristina Palmer
WRTG 3306
University of Central Arkansas
Conway, Arkansas
Kpalmer3@uca.edu
Abstract A series of tests were conducted in order to
understand how users interact with the course syllabus for
WRTG 3306.
Keywordsusability; accessibility; convention; user

7.

Final Exam Details

Similarly, users also had information which they tended to

refer back to throughout the semester including:

I. INTRODUCTION

Page 1

Usability and accessibility tests were conducted in order

find difficulties students may encounter when using the course
syllabus. Studies found that students struggled with several
aspects of the syllabus. High word count and density was the
most notable problem.

Contact Information

Coursework

Assessment

II. TEST FINDINGS

Summary of User Opinion
User A

User B

Content

High word count and

density interferes with
comprehensibility

High word count and density

interferes with comprehensibility

Formatting

Consistent.

Inconsistent. Ex. Font size and

bullet points

Convention

Word density masks

convention

Sections of syllabus are

unconventional. It is difficult to
find them.

Visuals

Inconsequential

Ineffective

A. User Needs
It was found that users initially sought the following items:
1.

Course Purpose

2.

Contact Information (i.e. email, office hours)

3.

Absence Information

4.

Required Books

5.

Minimum Points for an A

6.

Project information

B. User Navigation
All users stated that they either tended to or preferred to
skim through the syllabus. All users stated that they were able
to find the information they needed. However, one student
stated that he had not yet read the entire syllabus, while another
claimed she had to spend extended periods of time finding the
information she sought.
Users had especial difficulty finding or noticing the
following:

Other Required Resources

Requirements that all projects necessary to pass

course

Definitions for usability and accessibility

Users felt that some of the headings did not adequately

describe the content beneath them or were misleading in some
way. These titles include:

Other Required Resources

Assessment

Coursework

Process for dropping the course

Professionalism: We Work!

C. Accessibility
Vision problems and reading comprehension were noted as
the most likely disabilities other students might struggle with.

Vision: Users thought text in some parts of the

syllabus was too small

Reading comprehension: Users felt ESL students

would likely struggle to understand the syllabus.
III. RECOMMENDATIONS

A. Content

Word count: Reduce word count by 50% where

possible [3]
In sections where high word count is necessary,
format so that paragraphs are smaller and important
information is clear.

Titles: Ensure that all related information is grouped

together under one title. (Similar ideas in different
sections can make referring back to the syllabus
difficult).

formatted and given greater clarity and hierarchal

importance within the syllabus.
C. Convention
If any parts of the syllabus are not consistent with
conventional syllabus placement then they need to be easily
found by the reader.
D. Visuals
If you want to include visuals they need to contribute to
users ease of understanding. When using a visual try to use
less words and use the visual to explain your point.
E. Accessibility
The syllabus can be changed to meet the needs of disabled
individuals.
Vision Impairments

Ensure that the title clearly describes the content

beneath it. (Title clarity is especially important since
students tend to skim).
B. Format

Consider increasing overall font size

Increase size of smallest font (located in visual)

Ensure that syllabus can be enlarged online and

printed with changes

ESL Students

Consistency: Formatting should be consistent

throughout the syllabus. Items that need to be
checked for consistency: Bullet points, Font size,
Style and Grammar.
Online Version: An online version of the syllabus may
offer greater flexibility with formatting. Color variety,
drop down menus, and hyperlinks are a few examples
of options you would have online. These options
would allow you more hierarchal freedom and create
a more interactive experience for users.

Simplify complicated sentence structures

Reduce reading level or provide definitions to terms

that are specific to the subject matter.
IV. SUMMARY
Overall, users were able to find the information they
sought. However, they felt the syllabus was difficult
and time-consuming to navigate. Changes to content,
format, and visuals can help reduce user problems.
Similarly, changes can be made that will help disabled
users better understand the syllabus.

User Needs: Items that users look for first and refer
back to throughout the semester should be placed in
conventional sections of the syllabus or formatted so
that they are easily found. (See Section IIA of the
short report for examples).
Your Needs: It may help to consider any important
information you feel students are missing. These
sections or pieces of information should be re-

REFERENCES
[1]

Krug, S. (2014). Don't make me think!: Revisited (2nd ed., pp. 61-83).
Berkeley: New Riders Pub.