Usability and User Acceptance of University Web Portal Interfaces: A Case of South African Universities

  • Vathiswa M. Booi
  • George E. Ditsa
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 373)

Abstract

There are growing concerns over the user friendliness and other usability issues of South African Universities Web Portal Interfaces (UWPIs), which obviously will negate the user acceptance of the UWPIs. The main objective of this study is to select and use appropriate usability and user acceptance criteria to evaluate South African web portal interfaces for their usability and user acceptance and to suggest improvement on them. The study applied a triangulation of Ubiquitous computing Evaluation Areas (UEAs) and Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) as a theoretical research model for this study. Multiple regression and stepwise regression analysis were used. The results suggest that Interaction and Invisibility of UWPIs are the most important measures, which have a huge impact on user acceptance and usability respectively. The results of the study will provide guidelines for the development and design of UWPIs to meet their usability and user acceptance standards or needs.

Keywords

Technology Acceptance Model Ubiquitous computing Evaluation Areas Usability User Acceptance University Web Portal Interfaces 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Davis, F.D.: Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User acceptance. MIS Quarterly 13(3), 319–340 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dillon, A., Morris, M.G.: User Acceptance of Information Technology. Theories and Models. In: Williams, M. (ed.) Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, Information Today, Medford (1996)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Scholtz, J., Consolvo, S.: Applications towards a framework for evaluating ubiquitous computing applications. Pervasive Computing, 82–88 (April-June 2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Friedman, B., Kahn Jr., P.H., Borning, A.: Value Sensitive Design: Theory and Methods, Tech. report 02-12-01, Univ. Washington (Decmeber 2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bellotti, V., Back, M., Edwards, W.K., Grinter, R.E., Henderson, A., Lopes, C.: Making Sense of Sensing Systems: Five Questions for Designers and Researchers. In: Proc. Conf. Human Factors in Computing Sys. ACM Press (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Babbie, E.: The Practice of Social Research, 9th edn. Wadsworth (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhang, D., Adipat, B.: Challenges, methodologies, and issue in usability testing of mobile applications: I. International Journal of Human Computer Interaction 18(3) (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dillon, A.: User Acceptance of Information Technology. In: Karwoski, W. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Human factors and Ergonomics, Taylor and Francis, London (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vathiswa M. Booi
    • 1
  • George E. Ditsa
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceTshwane University of TechnologyPretoriaSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations