Here in WIT-Lab (Work and interaction technology laboratory) TUDelft, we are doing usability testings which are beyond traditional usability testing. Following the discussions of last 10 years in Human-Computer Interaction field, we observe that HCI field is need of theories for research, besides cognitive psychology theories. Limits of cognitive psychology were already seen in the begining of 80's but there was no appearent effort for a new theory. But in the begining of nineties Activity Theory is seen as an alternative comprehensive theory for HCI research (see especially work of Bennon and Bodker). Activity Theory is very well known in psychology, education, CSCW and CSCL as well. Based on activity theory the tool (in our case the computer) is not the goal but only the mediator to achieve the goal within the activity. And the user can not be considered isolated. Rather the community that the user is a member of, the rules of that community and the roles of that community should also be considered for HCI design and evaluation. (I think Activity Theory is quite well known in CSCL field and everybody knows the triangle developed by Engestrom, 1995). Following this shift in HCI research it is also important to reconsider usability testings. Of course I am mentioning testings in a laboratory environment. Making testings in a lab environment is also criticised because of its isolated environment but by choosing the right participants and scenarios you can achieve obtaining quite valuable data for formative or summative evaluation. Therefore, here in WITLab we are working on methods to make usability testings as effective, efficient and satisfactory as possible. We are experienced in HCI and partly in CSCW and we want to extend our experience on CSCL as well.

If anyone is willing to cooperate with us based on usability, usability testing for CSCL environment, it will provide quite valuable input for our research.

Regards,

Evren ----------------------------------------

Hi,

In addition to traditional usability testing (is it easy to learn and use), the CSCL environment might need more advanced "pedagogical" testing about the appropriateness of the tools: e.g., is there all necessary tools and supporting structures available, is it possible to co-author documents easily so that real knowledge building is possible, is it possible to arrange the common working space flexibly to meet the requirements of collaborative inquiry process, etc.

These kind of requirements are not very easy to formulate, and depends partly on the pedagogical approach. There are some interesting ideas in the following paper from Euro-CSCL 2001 conference (all presentations of the conference can be found in http://www.mmi.unimaas.nl/euro-cscl/presentations.htm):

Klaas Sikkel, Lisa Gommer, Jan van der Veen: A cross-case comparison of BSCW in different educational settings http://www.mmi.unimaas.nl/euro-cscl/Papers/146.doc

Regards,

Minna Lakkala