Page 133 - LanGuide Project: Research and Professional Insights
P. 133
LanGuide Content Manager
Figure 6.22
Valuation Rule for the s u s Scale
Table 6.2 Results of the Content Manager Evaluation
Participant s s s s s s s s s s () () ()
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
Average , , ,
Notes Column headings are as follows: (1) s u s, (2) usability, (3) learnability.
result is a number between 0 and 100, whose meaning is shown in Figure
6.22. The results of the assessment are shown in Table 6.2, which lists the
scores of the ten statements of the questionnaire. In the last columns, the
overall s u s score (s u s), the Usability factor score (Us.), and the Learn-
ability factor score (Le.) are listed separately. The s u s score is 75.2 which
is considered between ‘good’ and ‘excellent’ according to the adjective rat-
ings (Bangor et al., 2009) defined for the s u s scale (see Figure 6.22). The
su s results for the 12 participants are shown in Figure 6.23.
We have also investigated the assessment of usability and ease of learn-
ing based on two sets of factors. Statements 4 and 10 of the sus question-
naire (Table 6.1), contribute to the evaluation of the ease of learning, while
the remaining statements of the questionnaire contribute to the evalua-
tion of the usability (Lewis, 2009). Adding the scores of statements 4 and
10 and multiplying by 12.5 we can evaluate the system learnability, which
is shown in the last column of Table 6.2. The average score regarding learn-
ability is 75.0 out of 100, which means that this tool has a high degree of
learnability, requiring just a little bit of time and help. The usability score
is calculated by adding the score of the other statements and then multi-
133
Figure 6.22
Valuation Rule for the s u s Scale
Table 6.2 Results of the Content Manager Evaluation
Participant s s s s s s s s s s () () ()
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
Average , , ,
Notes Column headings are as follows: (1) s u s, (2) usability, (3) learnability.
result is a number between 0 and 100, whose meaning is shown in Figure
6.22. The results of the assessment are shown in Table 6.2, which lists the
scores of the ten statements of the questionnaire. In the last columns, the
overall s u s score (s u s), the Usability factor score (Us.), and the Learn-
ability factor score (Le.) are listed separately. The s u s score is 75.2 which
is considered between ‘good’ and ‘excellent’ according to the adjective rat-
ings (Bangor et al., 2009) defined for the s u s scale (see Figure 6.22). The
su s results for the 12 participants are shown in Figure 6.23.
We have also investigated the assessment of usability and ease of learn-
ing based on two sets of factors. Statements 4 and 10 of the sus question-
naire (Table 6.1), contribute to the evaluation of the ease of learning, while
the remaining statements of the questionnaire contribute to the evalua-
tion of the usability (Lewis, 2009). Adding the scores of statements 4 and
10 and multiplying by 12.5 we can evaluate the system learnability, which
is shown in the last column of Table 6.2. The average score regarding learn-
ability is 75.0 out of 100, which means that this tool has a high degree of
learnability, requiring just a little bit of time and help. The usability score
is calculated by adding the score of the other statements and then multi-
133
