You are here:

Evaluating a Re-evaluation Request Web Application at the University of Missouri School of Medicine
PROCEEDINGS

, , University of Missouri School of Medicine, United States

E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Kona, Hawaii, United States Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), San Diego, CA

Abstract

University of Missouri School of Medicine recently launched a re-evaluation request system that moved an idiosyncratic paper process to a streamlined online system. A situated action approach to design was used in which the designer actively participated in the re-evaluation request process for one year to identify the “embodied actions” of the actors facilitating the process. The purpose of this study was to: 1) evaluate the usability of the most complex interface of the web application—the administrative interface and 2) pilot faculty and student satisfaction surveys. Five potential users participated in the usability study and faculty (n = 5) and student (n = 3) stakeholders completed pilot surveys. Usability study results were categorized as content to include in a training tutorial and/or program enhancements. Survey analysis indicates faculty users are satisfied with the application and student users have confusion regarding the re-evaluation process.

Citation

Royse, L. & Myers, D. (2015). Evaluating a Re-evaluation Request Web Application at the University of Missouri School of Medicine. In Proceedings of E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 903-908). Kona, Hawaii, United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved December 17, 2018 from .

Keywords

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Bell, P. (2004). On the Theoretical Breadth of Design-Based Research in Education. Educational Psychologist, 39(4), 243–253.
  2. Dourish, P. (2001). Where the Action Is: The Foundations of Embodied Interaction. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press.
  3. Dumas, J.S., & Redish, J. (1999). A Practical Guide to Usability Testing. Intellect Books.
  4. Krug, S. (2009). Rocket Surgery Made Easy: The Do-It-Yourself Guide to Finding and Fixing Usability Problems. New Riders.
  5. Suchman, L.A. (1983). Office Procedure As Practical Action: Models of Work and System Design. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst., 1(4), 320–328. Http://doi.org/10.1145/357442.357445Suchman,L.(1995).MakingWork Visible. Commun. ACM, 38(9), 56–64.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.