A Framework for Evaluating the Quality of Academic Websites
- 14 Downloads
The main goal of this paper is to design a tool for the evaluation of academic website, taking into account perspectives of different user groups. A literature review was conducted on the existing models, and a list of the factors affecting the quality of academic websites was identified. A framework was developed based on the identified quality factors, to evaluate the new framework, a questionnaire was devised, and a survey was conducted on the reliability of this questionnaire. To assess the effectiveness of the framework, an experiment was conducted, considering six academic websites and 6300 people from different user groups. The threats encountered during the study were also discussed with recommendations for future work.
KeywordsWebsite quality Academic website Framework Quality evaluation
We thank all the numerous participants who participated in evaluating the different websites, and thank those reviewers for suggesting changes to the questionnaires. No data was collected regarding the details of participants for website evaluations and all of the participants were anonymous.
- 2.Alexander, J., and M. Tale. 1999. Web Wisdom: How to Evaluate and Create Information Quality in the Web. Lawrence Erlbaum Associate Inc.Google Scholar
- 3.Dragulenscu, Nicolae-George. 2002. Website Quality Evaluations: Criteria and Tools. The International Information & Library Review 34 (3): 247–254. ISSN 1057-2317. https://doi.org/10.1006/iilr.2002.0205.
- 4.Wu, Y., and J. Offutt. 2002. Modeling and Testing Web-based Applications. George Mason University.Google Scholar
- 5.Krug, S. 2006. Don’t Make Me Think: A Common Sense Approach to Web Usability, 2nd ed. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.Google Scholar
- 7.Dyba, Tore, Erik Arisholm, Dag I. K. Sjoberg, and Jo E. Hannay. Are Two Heads Better than One? On the Effectiveness of Pair Programming. IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar
- 8.Kitchen ham, B.A., and S. Charters. 2007. Procedures for Performing Systematic Literature Reviews in Software Engineering. In EBSE Technical Report, Software Engineering Group, School of Computer Science and Mathematics, Keele University, UK and Department of Computer Science, University of Durham, UK. Google Scholar
- 9.Web link to Social Research. www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/concthre.php.
- 10.Creswell, John W. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. Sage Publications, Second.Google Scholar
- 11.Olsina, L., and G. Rossi. 2002 Measuring Web application quality with WebQEM, vol. 9, no. 4, 20–29. Multimedia, IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/mmul.2002.1041945.
- 12.Longstreet, P. 2010. Evaluating Website Quality: Applying Cue Utilization Theory to WebQual. In: 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS). vol. no., 1–7, 5–8 Jan. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1109/hicss.2010.191.
- 14.Yip, C.L., and E. Mendes. 2005. Web Usability Measurement: Comparing Logic Scoring Preference to Subjective Assessment. In ICWE: International Conference on Web Engineering, vol. 3579, 53–62. Sydney, Australia: Springer.Google Scholar
- 16.Nielsen, J. 2000. Is Navigation useful?. In Jakob Nielsen’s Alert Box.Google Scholar
- 17.Nielsen, J. 2002. Introduction to Usability.Google Scholar
- 18.Micali, F., and S. Cimino. 2008. Web Q-Model: A New Approach to the Quality. In The 26th Annual CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Florence, Italy.Google Scholar
- 19.Burris, E. 2007. Software Quality Management.Google Scholar
- 20.Web link to IIT- D http://www.iitd.ac.in/.
- 21.Web link to MST http://www.mst.edu/.
- 22.Web link to AUT http://www.rwth-aachen.de/go/id/bdz/.
- 23.Web link to UVP http://www.cs.up.ac.za/.
- 24.Web link to UNSW http://www.unsw.edu.au/.
- 25.Web link to Times Higher Education Rankings. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/.
- 26.Web link to KTH. http://www.kth.se/en.
- 27.Web link to Mc Calls. http://www.sqa.net/softwarequalityattributes.html.
- 28.Trochim, W. 2000. The Research Methods Knowledge Base, 2nd ed. Cincinnati OH: Atomic Dog Publishing.Google Scholar