WRTG 3306 Syllabus Report:

Usability Test Results

Ernest Goldwood
Writing Department
WRTG 3306 Writing for Digital Media II
Conwar AR, USA
eegoldwood@gmail.com
I. INTRODUCTION
This document summarizes the changes that need to be
made to the syllabus for the class WRTG 3306: Writing for
Digital Media II. The following aspects where focused on in
usability tests
Alter the methods of emphasis to make the document
more uniform and student friendly.
Format the document in a manner that balances
needed information and wanted information.
Explore whether the use of multiple listing methods is
distracting.
Test the order in which information is given to see if it
promotes maximum information intake.
II. USER PREFERENCES
Most users searched for the same items on the syllabus and
ignored many of the same aspects. The three most searched
aspects where the professors contact information, the class
requirements, and some form of class schedule. The most
ignored aspects tended to be Professionalism: We Work! and
the legal section at the end of the document.

mentioned that the Coursework and Course Evaluation section

are too far apart. All testers found that they wanted a course
calander. One user also mentioned his distaste for the fact that
an academic dishonesty and plagiarism section is needed in a
document targeting junior level college students.
V. SUGGESTED CHANGES
Given the findings of usability test and the suggestions
made by testers the following changes need to be made to the
syllabus for WRTG 3306.
A: Organizational Changes
From the results of the usability test, I would suggest using
the hanging indent used for major headings on all minor
headings. This wouldnt increase document size and it would
utilize the fact that most users scan the document. Furthermore,
altering the box around participation to include the entire
section would make it far more cohesive. I dont think that the
bullets should be removed despite that fact that they were often
ignored. They should be uniform though since they all appear
on the same organizational level. I also suggest breaking up
the text near the back of the document in order to increase
readability.

III. ORGANIZATIONAL FEATURES

An aspect of the document that was tested most thoroughly
was its overall navigability, readability, and the organizational
features that aid these. The most effective organizational
features where found to be major headings and the boxes found
around PROJECTS and PARTICIPATION on the second page
of the document. On the opposite end of the spectrum, all those
tested found that subheadings are missed when the document is
scanned. Other organizational features that seemed to have
little effect are bullets found throughout the document. Outside
of these users also mentioned the chunkiness of some major
headings expressly mentioned is Cass Time/ Location/ etc,.
IV. SECTIONAL ANALYSIS
Testers noted a number of sections they find to be
mislabeled, redundant, or unneeded. The first is
Professionalism: We Work! because a number of its features
are mentioned latter in more depth. Users also found the
Course description section to be annoying in that the
description of the class is in the course catalogue. It is also

B: Sectional Changes
As for sectional changes, I suggest the removal of
Professionalism: We Work. the simplification of the Course
Description and the merging of Coursework and Course
Evaluation. I also suggest the inclusion of a more in-depth
tentative schedule found on the syllabus itself.
VI. CONCLUSION
In conclusion I find that the document is mostly in need of
a more user-friendly layout to aid in readability and
comprehension.

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
1989.
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa