Advertisement

Software Issues

  • Cynthia G. Parshall
  • Judith A. Spray
  • John C. Kalohn
  • Tim Davey
Part of the Statistics for Social and Behavioral Sciences book series (SSBS)

Abstract

The principles discussed in this chapter should be addressed early in the computerized test development process in order to reap the maximum benefit from them. The test administration software interface defines much of an examinee’s test-taking experience; examinees’ reactions to software programs often are strongly related to the quality of the interface. The user interface (i.e., the visual style of the software, the written instructions and communication, and the means provided for navigating through the test) is of critical concern. Software considerations should not be an afterthought on the part of test developers.

Keywords

Usability Study Computerize Test Software Interface Software Evaluation Test Developer 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alessi. S.M., & Trollip, S.R. (1991). Computer-Based Instruction: Methods and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  2. Apple, Inc. (1995). Human Interface Design and the Development Process. In Macintosh Human Interface Guidelines. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  3. Bennett, R. E., & Bejar, I. I. (1998). Validity and automated scoring: It’s not only the scoring, Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 17, 9–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bias, R. G., & Mayhew, E. J. (1994). Cost-Justifying Usability. Boston: Academic Press. Booth, J. (1991). The key to valid computer-based testing: The user interface. Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée, 41, 281–293.Google Scholar
  5. Bunderson, V. C, Inouye, D. I., & Olsen, J. B. (1989). The four generations of computerized educational measurement In Linn, R. (ed.) Educational Measurement, 3rd edition. New York: American Council on Education and Macmillan Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  6. Ehrlich, K., & Röhn, J. A. (1994). Cost justification of usability engineering: A vendor’s perspective. In Bias, R. G., & Mayhew, D. J. (eds.) Cost-Justifying Usability (pp.73–110). Boston: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  7. Gould, J. D., Boies, F.J., & Ukelson, J. (1997). How to design usable systems. In Heiander, M., Landauer, T. K., & Prabhu, P. (eds.). Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd completely revised edition, (pp. 231–254). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  8. Gould, J. D. & Lewis, C. (1985). Designing for usability: Key principles and what designers think. In Baecker, R., & Buxton, (eds.), Readings in HCL (pp. 528–539). Association for Computing Machinery.Google Scholar
  9. Harmes, J. C, & Parshall, C. G. (2000, November). An Iterative Process For Computerized Test Development: Integrating Usability Methods. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Florida Educational Research Association, Tallahassee.Google Scholar
  10. Harrison, M. C, Henneman, R. L., & Blatt, L. A. (1994). Design of a human factors costjustification tool. In Bias, R. G., & Mayhew, D. J. (eds.) Cost-Justifying Usability (pp. 203–241). Boston: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  11. Heiander, M., Landauer, T. K., & Prabhu, P. (eds.). (1997). Handbook Of Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd completely revised edition. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  12. Karat, C. (1997). Cost-justifying usability engineering in the software life cycle. In Heiander, M., Landauer, T. K., & Prabhu, P. (eds.). Handbook Of Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd completely revised edition, (pp. 767–778). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  13. Kirakowski, J., & Corbett, M. (1990). Effective Methodology for the Study of HCI. New York: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  14. Landauer, T. K. (1995). The Trouble with Computers: Usefulness, Usability, and Productivity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  15. Landauer, T. K. (1997). Behavioral research methods in human-computer interaction. In M. G. Helander, T. K. Landauer, P. Prabhu (eds.) Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd completely revised edition, (203–227). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  16. Mayhew, D. J., & Mantei, M. (1994). A basic framework for cost-justifying usability engineering. In Bias, R. G., & Mayhew, D. J. (eds.) Cost-Justifying Usability (pp. 9–43). Boston: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  17. Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability Engineering. Boston: Academic Press.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Nielsen, J. (1994a) Guerrilla HCl: Using discount usability engineering to penetrate the intimidation barrier. In Bias, R. G. & Mayhew, D. J. (eds.) Cost-justifying usability, (pp. 245–272). Boston: Academic Press, [also online at http://www.useit.com/papers/guerrilla_hci.html]Google Scholar
  19. Nielsen, J. (1994b). Heuristics for User Interface Design. [Online at: http://www.useit.com/papers/heuristic/]Google Scholar
  20. Nielsen, J. (1997a). How Users Read on the Web. [Online at: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/971Oa.html]Google Scholar
  21. Nielsen, J. (1997b). Be succinct! (Writing for the Web). [Online at: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9703b.html]Google Scholar
  22. Nielsen, J. (1999). Differences Between Print Design and Web Design. [Online] at: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/990124.html]Google Scholar
  23. Nielsen, J. (2000). Why You Only Need to Test with 5 Users. [Online at: http://useit.com/alertbox/20000319.html]Google Scholar
  24. Nielsen, J. & Molich, R. (1990). Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces. In Proceedings of ACM CHI’ 90 Conference on Human Factors and Computing Systems (pp. 249–256). Seattle: ACM.Google Scholar
  25. Ravden, S. J., & Johnson, G. I. (1989). Evaluating Usability of Human-Computer Interfaces: A Practical Method. New York: Halstead Press.Google Scholar
  26. Shneiderman, B. (1998). Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction. Reading, MA.: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  27. Tullis, T. S. (1997). Screen Design. In Helander, M. G., Landauer, T. K., & Prabhu P. (eds.) Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd completely revised edition. (pp. 503–531), Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Additional Readings

  1. CTB/McGraw-Hill (1997). Technical bulletin 1: TerraNova. Monterey, CA: Author.Google Scholar
  2. CTB/McGraw-Hill. (1997). Usability: testing the test. In Inform: A Series of Special Reports from CTB/McGraw-Hill. (pp. 1–4). Monterey, CA: Author.Google Scholar
  3. Gould, J. D. (1997). How to design usable systems. In Helander, M. G., Landauer, T. K., & Prabhu, P. (eds.) Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd completely revised edition. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  4. Harmes, J. C, & Kemker, K. (1999, October). Using JavaScript and Livestage to Create Online Assessments. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Conference on Technology and Education, Tampa, FL.Google Scholar
  5. Karat, C. (1994). A business case approach to usability cost justification. In Bias, R. G., & Mayhew, D. J. (eds.) Cost-Justifying Usability (pp. 45–70). Boston: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  6. Nielsen, J. (1998). Severity Ratings for Usability Problems. [Online at: http://www.useit.com/papers/heuristic/severityrating.html]Google Scholar
  7. Nielsen, J. (1995). Technology Transfer of Heuristic Evaluation and Usability Inspection. Keynote address at IFIP INTERACT’ 95, Lillehammer, Norway. [Also online at: http://www.useit.com/papers/heuristic/leaming_inspection.html]Google Scholar
  8. Pressman, R. S. (1992). Software Engineering: A Practitioner’s Approach. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  9. Rubin, J. (1994). Handbook of Usability Testing: How to Plan, Design, and Conduct Effective Tests. New York: Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cynthia G. Parshall
    • 1
  • Judith A. Spray
    • 2
  • John C. Kalohn
    • 2
  • Tim Davey
    • 3
  1. 1.University of South FloridaTampaUSA
  2. 2.ACT, Inc.Iowa CityUSA
  3. 3.Educational Testing ServicePrincetonUSA

Personalised recommendations