knowbility, inc. internship report final project anth 4390 ...€¦ · knowbility, inc. internship...
TRANSCRIPT
Knowbility, Inc. Internship Report
Final Project
ANTH 4390
Anthropology at Work
Dr. Neill Hadder
Jason M. Hester
15 Oct 2009
Introduction
Prior to the summer of 2009, I began considering internship opportunities for anthropolo-
gy majors. With an express interest in cognitive science and the role of technology in society, I
began to look at usability research and the work of anthropologists within the field. Usability
engineers examine products and systems with end-users to ensure task efficiency and to improve
the productivity, ease-of-use, and satisfaction in an iterative testing and development environ-
ment. Web usability focuses on making websites simple, intuitive, and robust while user
centered design involves development that focuses on the needs of the end-user. After doing
extensive individual research and speaking with my internship advisor, I decided to apply at
Knowbility, inc. as an intern.
Knowbility is a non-profit 501(c)3 based out of Austin, Texas that advocates for web
accessibility. Its mission is to “support the independence of children and adults with disabilities
by promoting the use and improving the availability of accessible information technology. Our
goal is to create a barrier-free world of information technology so children, youth, and adults
with disabilities can fully participate in the information marketplace.” Knowbility accomplishes
its goal through a variety of programs geared toward research, training, and IT consulting
services. Accessibility Internet Rally (AIR) was the program that initially constituted Knowbili-
ty’s formation. Steve Geungrich, with the help of accessibility experts such as John Slatin,
started AIR in 1999 as an annual contest held in Austin that paired web developers and program-
mers with non-profit organizations, state agencies, and corporations. AIR helps these businesses
make their websites accessible to the disabled while improving the quality of their on-line
content.
Web accessibility empowers the lives of those with disabilities by granting access to
technological resources and accessibility remediation is the process by which IT experts, web
developers, and programmers convert electronic information resources into an accessible format
for users of assistive technologies (AT). The expansiveness of the internet and improved
assistive technologies have been empowering advances for persons with a wide range of
disabilities. Screen readers, refreshable Braille displays, and video captioning are just a few
examples of AT that have dramatically increased access to vital information and resources for the
disabled community.
Since Knowbility’s inception, several other programs have been introduced including
Assistive Technology, Strategies, Tools, Accommodations, and Resources (ATSTAR) and
AccessWorks. ATSTAR provides web-based assistive technology training models designed to
prepare instructional staff at the campus level to conduct assessments, collect data, and integrate
assistive technology into the instructional setting. AccessWorks provides consulting and
remediation services and employs many Texans with disabilities, giving them technology skills
and experience to establish good careers and achieve independence.
My interest in Knowbility was fostered by the increasing technological divide I noticed
while working in the IT community. As a previous electronics technician in the military and as a
tech support agent for an internet service provider, I was exposed to calls from all across the
nation concerning internet access, email, and website issues from a wide range of people of
diverse backgrounds. One thing I consistently noticed was that feedback from customers
actually using our services was inefficiently incorporated into new developments within the
organization. I would receive calls each day with customer recommendations, concerns, and
complaints for our IT services and website. When I would express these concerns to my
employer or offer solutions derived from customer feedback, I was met with resistance, and often
little to nothing was changed. This “digital divide” between the purveyors of technology and the
general populous became a growing point of concern. As an anthropology major, I was
interested in the process by which consumer feedback was integrated into company policy and
used in design anthropology. Through my anthropological coursework and independent research
I was introduced to design anthropologists such as Najko Jahn and Christina Wasson who
employ ethnographic methods in their usability studies. Their research also involved accessibili-
ty for people with disabilities and held the philosophy that designing for the extremes in human
variation is beneficial to all. Knowbility gave me an opportunity to explore the application of
these concepts in the workplace.
Interning with Knowbility
At Knowbility, the first thing I noticed about our organizational structure was that it
wasn’t hierarchical in the traditional sense. Our staff members, while mediated by the executive
director Sharron Rush, hold positions on more of an ad-hoc basis. Everyone “wears many hats”
and policy is shaped by the organization as a whole with input from each member’s respective
specialties; final approval is given by our executive director. This organizational construct, while
more loosely defined, allowed for policy changes and considerations to be taken into account
without excess bureaucracy. I was able to affect policy shaping in a more independent fashion
than most of my previous employment experiences and have been working with our business
development manager to increase our organizational efficiency and standardize our remediation
and testing methods.
As a research intern, I was in charge of developing new projects that would benefit both
the company and my individual needs as an anthropology intern. This task was much more
difficult than I could have imagined, but I learned much in the process. Over the course of
several months working part-time for Knowbility I came up with several ideas for usability
research projects, including an accessibility survey and user experience testing and modeling.
Some of my ideas never fully panned out, due to limited funding, time, and resources, but by
setting my sights high I was able to overcome limitations and won the respect of my colleagues.
My persistence to make a valuable contribution to web accessibility was commended, and I was
able to affect internal policies that will shape the future of Knowbility.
Working from the fundamentals up, I learned about the wide array of techniques used in
web accessibility. As I grew more familiar with the basics, document remediation work became
my primary responsibility. Document remediation primarily consists of organizing the structure
and layout of MS Word, PowerPoint, and PDF documents in order to enable accessibility by
various assistive technologies to disabled end-users. For instance, images that contain informa-
tion vital to a document’s content must be transcribed using alternate text fields to denote the
information contained within. Audio files must include text alternatives, video requires
captioning, and the layout and flow of a document must be setup so that people with visual
impairments, colorblindness, hearing impairment, mobility impairment, or any of a wide range of
disabilities can access the information. Screen reader programs such as Jaws® from Freedom
Scientific allow written text to be read out loud to users with visual impairment. Independent
keyboard access is a requirement for the mobility impaired and those who use single-switch or
sip and puff devices to navigate a document. Characters that are not recognized by screen
readers must be substituted, and color contrast must be sufficient for red-green colorblind
deficiencies such as my own. All the aspects of document remediation also enable the average
user to access the same information in a variety of formats, increasing the productivity of the
information contained within. Section 508 and WCAG standards for web accessibility provide
guidelines for making content accessible and robust, but most of the work is done by trial and
error and independent quality assurance with usability testing by disabled users (Section 508
adherence is a guideline for all federal agencies that produce or disseminate electronic resources
to provide comparable access to persons with disabilities while WCAG standards are internation-
ally recognized accessibility guidelines that are not enforced by federal law).
Among my many hats as a Knowbility intern, I have also re-written policy documents
concerning best practices for PDF remediations, and was privileged to write the Usability Test
Plan for a potential client. This document helped win us a sizable contract that may include
future in-depth usability studies as part of an overall accessibility policy for our client. As an
advocate for accessibility, I have also attended numerous Austin tech-lunch events and been
given speaking privileges to advocate for web accessibility.
A particular event that was a first-rate learning experience was my work with a Usability
Engineer on a cognitive walk-through for a local banking company. Cognitive walk-throughs are
generally conducted in the initial analysis of a design prototype and can provide beneficial
insight into the progress of basic web development. They can be conducted with usability and
accessibility experts alone or, ideally, with the focus group. While they are considered “discount
usability” techniques they should be part of an iterative development process. Aside from the
Non-Disclosure Agreement signed as a precursor to participation in this project, I can say that the
methods we used were similar to interview techniques used in ethnography.
Other experiences at Knowbility have been fruitful as well. When I arrived at
Knowbility, our Access Works program was in the process of being revamped. My initial
internship mentor wanted to include disabled veterans in the program. Together, we contacted
numerous veterans’ advocate groups including Disabled American Veterans (DAV), Paralyzed
Veterans of America (PVA), The Wounded Warrior Project, and VA hospitals within the Austin-
San Antonio corridor to recruit participants. Collectively, we were able to recruit 8 people with
disabilities, 6 document remediation specialists (including 2 veterans) and 2 blind Quality
Assurance specialists (user-experience testers). Together with our project manager, we trained
these new participants, developing a team of remediation experts to ensure the accessibility of
hundreds of government documents so far.
After several months of training and development of our Access Works program, our
contract consulting agency had us submit a new proposal for a potential client. The proposal
included a Usability Test Plan which I wrote based on my previous research in User Centered
Design. The test plan included provisions for the inclusion of persons with various disabilities,
summative and formative evaluations, and internal policy development within an iterative testing
framework. My background in anthropology helped me formulate a workable plan that included
heuristics, anthropological screening techniques, and context relevant factors to guide the testing
phases and analysis of a prototype. Understanding anthropological design methodology helped
me convince the prospective client of our ability to conduct effective analysis of qualitative and
quantitative data trends and come up with solutions to fit their needs. While I haven’t been able
to employ all of these methods yet, my formulation of the requirements helped us win the
contract. If they decide to include usability testing in any of their future development projects,
we will undoubtedly be well prepared to accommodate them.
Anthropology?
Anthropologists conduct ethnographic research in order to understand how society works
from both a micro and macrocosmic perspective; i.e. as a self-interested individual working
within a cultural system and as a member of the whole of a given social context. Conducting
ethnographic research allows the anthropologist to get at the deeper meaning in social interac-
tions through scientific inquiry, and make qualitative judgments based on the analysis. Anthro-
pologists routinely do geographic and historic research; collate databases of demographic
information; and use random sampling, participant observation, and interview techniques to
develop and test hypotheses about socio-cultural phenomena. Further, anthropologists use this
data to create explanatory theories.
Perhaps the most important quality an anthropologist brings to the table, however, is his/
her ability to constantly re-evaluate his/her contextual environment and adapt to or implement
change. Anthropologists study humanity because it intrigues them, partly because of the
subjective identification of themselves within their subjects and wholly for the pursuit of
empirical knowledge. Anthropologists’ holistic outlook on the world enables them to understand
that their preconceptions can be hindrances in an ever changing world.
Anthropologists understand that their knowledge is changing and they must create better,
more accurate models of the world around them to be able to explain why biology, society,
language, or cultures behave the way they do. As Rice and O’Brian state in the article, “Using
Science to Think Anthropologically”: If truth and proof are finite and non-changing, knowledge is changeable and fluid. Today’s knowledge is yesterday’s antiquated myth, and tomorrow’s knowledge will show that half of what we think is wrong. Scientists look for change in knowledge, and it is healthy to be skeptical about one’s own work as well as others.
This constant pursuit of understanding is what drives anthropologists and the work they
do, and in a manner directly relevant to usability design.
As Knowbility continues to strive for universal design, our methods for evaluating and
remediating information technology must include usability testing from a variety of perspectives.
Some contemporary usability professionals mentioned above provide insight into these methods
and the role of anthropology within the field. To understand the benefits anthropologists can
bring to user-centered design, it’s important to note some of the successful methods employed in
usability research that include ethnographic approaches. Three articles that explore some of
these practical implications of applied anthropology in interdisciplinary usability research are
Christina Wasson’s “Ethnography in the Field of Design,” Najko Jahn’s “Anthropological
Motivated Usability Evaluation,” and Faiola and Macdorman’s “The Influence of Holistic and
Analytic Cognitive Styles on Online Information Design.” These articles tie together some of
the methodology of cultural anthropology and usability research design.
Ethnography has been very popular among design firms in recent years, because it not
only investigates what consumers say they do, but what they actually do. The importance of a
theoretical approach requires the use of anthropologists to conduct self-reflexive research within
a heuristic device or theory. Self-reflexivity in research is a circular process that allows the
researcher insight into how their own biases and assumptions affect their theoretical perspectives.
In other words, self-reflexivity is an acknowledgement of the affects of the observer on the
observed and vice versa. Heuristic devices provide a common sense filter through which to base
the theoretical analysis of an ethnographic approach. Heuristics are the preliminary assumptions
and analyses that guide the research development process.
In the case of Lucy Suchman’s work at the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) the
group used ethnomethodology, an approach combining conversation analysis (a method for
identifying patterns in everyday social interactions) and activity theory derived from the Russian
psychologist Lev Vygotsky. A heuristic device named the “AEIOU framework”—which
interpreted and coded the observations of Activities, Environments, Interactions, Objects, and
Users—framed the two-pronged approach of conversation analysis and activity theory. Video-
taping was used extensively throughout the research at PARC while participant observation and
various interview techniques were also employed (Wasson 2000: 381-385).
Another research specialist doing a usability study on the IREON library database, Najko
Jahn, employed summative and formative evaluations in his research. Formative evaluations can
be used for future design improvements while summative evaluations are comparative. Jahn
describes a process in which formative and summative evaluations can be combined to work
together to elicit proposals to be compared. His methods also included having the participant
users think out loud while accessing material, as well as interview methods (Jahn: 2008:
610-612).
A study by Faiola and Macdorman illustrates the profound impact that culture has on
cognition and the way we see the world. Their research points psychological and cognitive
anthropological theories toward usability research and describes a study in which cognitive styles
were linked to enculturation. Through this explanatory theory, the authors develop a model for
web interface development using cultural cognitive design (CCD). Based on the idea that culture
shapes cognition, web design takes into account cultural cognitive styles. They rely on Vygot-
sky’s view that our perception of reality is a product of knowledge grounded in culture (Faoiola
and Macdorman 2008: 350-352).
These three case studies present some of the applications of the theories and methods of
cognitive science, cognitive anthropology, and usability research. The practical application
based on various cognitive, psychological, and heuristic theories as well as ethnographic
methods and experiments provide a point of demarcation for the productive discourse of the role
of anthropology within the field.
Usability Testing and the Web
The emergence of the internet and the subsequent information revolution has brought
about associated technologies that convey new insights into the future of education. Assistive
devices were developed to allow access to the vast resources of the internet to the disabled and
require us to reflect on the responsibilities inherent in their implementation. The appropriate
development and use of these new technologies not only enhances our human experience, but
deepens it.
What is User Centered Design (UCD) and how can it benefit from an interdisciplinary
approach that includes anthropology? How does universal access enhance usability and allow for
a system that is self-promoting? These questions are at the heart of an accessible design, which
strives to mitigate the affects of user marginalization in a technologically advanced society. It is
my intention to describe an approach to UCD that incorporates not only the guidelines for
accessible design, but a comprehensive usability study that incorporates anthropological
methods, which are essential in the case of e-learning. When education is the key to becoming
independent in a society that values self-sufficiency as well as personal and professional
development, universal access to the artifacts of e-learning is vital.
As diverse user groups, including the disabled, interact with e-learning and web interface
software, special accommodations that enable various distinct communication strategies must be
considered. It is possible to make these accommodations without changing the framework of a
given e-learning artifact by augmenting documents, video, and audio with accessible tools;
however, incorporating these considerations into the initial design process, instead of waiting to
retrofit accessibility once isolated problems are brought to developers’ attention, can create a
synergistic approach that is not only universally accessible, but also inclusively usable and
seamless in its integration.
What is WCAG and how does it pertain to accessibility? WCAG is the Web Content
Accessibility Guidelines developed by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Web Accessibili-
ty Initiative (WAI). It describes how to make web sites accessible for disabled and marginalized
user groups. ATAG is the Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines used by designers to create
web authoring software for accessible content. User Agent Accessibility Guidelines (UAAG)
explain how to make browsers and media accessible for disabled users. These formats help
ensure that websites adhere to laws pertaining to accessibility and avoid unintended conse-
quences of designing solely for the so-called “average” user.
WCAG 1.0 was released in 1999 and has been adopted as an international standard. The
requirements of WCAG 1.0 include the provisioning for alternate means of accessing online
information. The ability for users to access information from a variety of input devices creates
the need for a structure that encompasses orientation information, site maps, navigational bars,
etc., that can be accessed using auditory or visual cues independently or interdependently. The
guidelines used create a series of checkpoints to determine a web site’s conformance to accessi-
bility standards. These checkpoints provide feedback to the designer for modification of their
web sites to remove barriers to information for disabled user groups.
WCAG 2.0 is the revised version of earlier accessibility guidelines designed to encom-
pass a wider audience. This newer standard provides provisions to allow for less-technically-
inclined users to access the same information as technical experts. Newer developments in
technology have created a larger “digital-divide” amongst developers and users which WCAG
2.0 strives to mitigate by making the guidelines more precisely testable and easier to implement.
UAAG 1.0 is the standard set forth by the W3C web consortium that guides developers in
the design of software used to access the web such as browsers, media players, and messaging
tools. UAAG 1.0 compliance consists of documentation of accessibility features within the
programs and a variety of means for navigation—e.g. sequential navigation, direct navigation,
search bars, and structured navigation. Compatibility with multiple operating systems, assistive
interface devices, and plug-in compatibility is also essential for UAAG 1.0 compliance. While
UAAG is not practiced by all software developers, it is becoming increasingly main-stream as
the needs of disabled users are realized.
ATAG 1.0 is the guideline for accessible web authoring tools. Web authoring tools are
software programs that allow users to add, edit, and organize web content. They allow for the
conversion of documents, text, audio, and video into HTML, XHTML, XML, CSS, PHP,
JavaScript, Flash and other formats for compatible web site creation. The ATAG 1.0 guidelines
ensure that web authoring tools provide accessibility features as alternatives, such as text for
images, captioning for audio, and description of video to enable the disabled user to create and
manage web content (Brewer, 2004: 53).
The aforementioned accessibility guidelines are a step forward in making valuable
information available to diverse user groups, but they are only one aspect of user-centered
design. The processes used to determine web accessibility compliance only confront the
functional issues of compatibility and interoperability with web assistive devices. The currently
predominant method of running a web site through an adherence program to determine confor-
mance to these guidelines can guarantee the functional ability of access to the desired informa-
tion, but cannot fully describe the ways in which diverse user sets actually interface with these
systems in real-life situations. While WCAG and the guidelines set forth by the W3C provide
useful quantitative data for web accessibility design, a two-pronged approach that includes a
qualitative usability study along with a quantitative time-on-task functional evaluation may
prove more beneficial to website development. Using ethnographic methods to re-incorporate
empirical field data from the users themselves into WCAG will strengthen its efficacy by not
only making web sites and programs accessible to the disabled, but also usable.
WCAG 2.0 sets the standard for web accessibility but fails to effectively evaluate e-
learning tools, programs, and web-sites from a qualitative perspective when it comes to disabled
or marginalized user groups. Adhering to the standards is just one aspect of successful design.
The quality of the user’s experience must be considered when it comes to making electronic
modes of education universally viable, and it is in this context that a synergistic approach to
design research becomes feasible. By including experts in an interdisciplinary approach, along
with teachers and the disabled, important feedback and insight into the design process can be
rendered, eliminating the need for costly re-design later. Technical specialists are needed to
encode and create functional aspects of web and e-learning design, while disability experts,
pedagogical experts, and domain experts are needed, along with both unimpaired and impaired
teachers and students (who will be the ultimate end-users) ,for a successful approach to universal
access and user centered design.
This approach was initially espoused in “A Proposal Toward the Development of
Accessible E-learning Content by Human Involvement,” an integrated effort by DeMarisco,
Kimani, Mirabella, Norman, and Catarci. However, the emphatic importance of an ethnographer
to record and analyze empirical data from the set of end users was lacking. Withstanding this
particular deficiency, their methodology included Participatory Design (PD), which involves end
users as agents in the design process. PD includes contextual inquiry, work modeling, consolida-
tion, work redesign, user environment design, and mockup-tests. Also through user centered
design, personal learning strategies, different cognitive styles, cultural backgrounds, and
motivations were considered.
The inclusion of disabled users in the design process of e-learning programs and
websites, in addition to the compatible interface with accessibility devices, ensures the success or
failure of a given prototype. In the aforementioned proposal for the development of a user-
centered design approach, wrappers that adapt the underlying functional aspects of a program to
the needs of various disabilities are introduced. Wrappers are conceptual models that act to
duplicate strategies used by the disabled from multiple points of view. Wrappers that take into
account each type of disability or cognitive style can be used to map the functionality of an
underlying program that allows for preliminary usability testing by end-users. Wrappers can
then be mapped onto the underlying functional structure and tested for compatibility with the e-
learning program or website. This process of trying on different wrappers and extracting
empirical data from end-users trying to access the same information can allow the coding
requirements for accessible e-learning technology to be refined before final implementation and
a costly system overhaul is required. While learning modules and their functions make up the
core of e-learning software, wrappers encode the information to be utilized by the interface for
various input/output devices.
In a successful user-centered design approach, each developmental stage is assessed in an
intra-phase evaluation that tests for accessibility, usability, and functionality. WCAG compliance
is checked between each phase and further usability and functionality testing is done manually
through human inspection. Once the context mapping for wrapper development has been
completed and integrated within the e-learning program, and once participatory design and all
other preliminary methods have been exhausted, a summative evaluation should be administered.
The summative evaluation determines the effectiveness of the e-learning tools within the whole
of the system and the ability to deliver the information in a relative context for all users. This
determines the “effects with” the software as it pertains to the way learners engage with the
software aside from traditional learning and the “effects of the software” as it pertains to content
and understanding of the educational material presented (DeMarisco, Kimani, Mirabella,
Norman, and Catarci, 2006:150-169).
It is in the design of the conceptually modeled wrappers that ethnographic analysis can be
most useful. The ability to adapt research methods to determine the needs of diverse user-sets for
inclusion in wrapper development is especially relevant when unconventional interaction
paradigms are considered. For instance, a certain amount of self-reflexivity is required when
dealing with previously unrepresented user groups. An ethnographer’s ability to use inductive
approaches, formulate heuristic theories that are self-reflexive, and qualitatively evaluate the
theoretical foundations of their research allows for an inclusion of empirical data in a contextual-
ly relevant manner. In other words an ethnographer may hold a heuristic theory that the
functional needs of persons with acute sight impairment are similar to those with developmental
sight impairment. By gathering inductively the patterns in communication strategies used by
those with developmental impairment and using comparative analysis with non-impaired users,
the ethnographer can further deduce what strategies may or may not be applicable for the latter
group, given their developmental and cognitive style differences. The ethnographer can then test
his/her hypothesis with the acutely disabled focus group, resulting in empirical evidence for or
against his/her original stance. The ethnographer’s initial preconceptions would probably be
usefully transformed in this situation, as this holistic approach not only takes into account his/her
assumptions and biases, but also frames them in a contextually relevant way that allows for self-
reflexive evaluation. By using interviews, surveys, recordings, context relevant inquiry, and
participant observation within a testable theoretical framework, the ethnographer is better suited
to extract the patterns of behavior necessary for wrapper development and testing.
The methods for a user-centered design approach to e-learning incorporate accessibility,
usability, and functionality to enhance productivity and content richness. An ethnographer on the
team can be useful in obtaining and evaluating empirical data from end-users themselves, and
can be an integral part of the interdisciplinary approach of UCD. The knowledge gained through
these methods can increase a web site or e-learning system’s universal access while focusing on
the quality of the end-user experience. While the research may be expensive, it can help convey
the meaning of a design’s use to consumers who are increasingly separated by the technological
divide between technical experts and themselves. In this way, the methods of user/learner-
centered design may help self-promote a program, website, or informational system, while
enhancing its usability for both diverse and average user sets.
Conclusion
My background in anthropology has benefited my position here at Knowbility and given
me the resources to continue my career interests while working in a closely related field. Much
of my coursework at Texas State University was focused on the cultural and societal impacts of
science and technology. Classes such as the philosophy of technology, the philosophy of
science, archaeology, anthropological theory, field methods in cultural anthropology, logic, and
human speech have given me the tools necessary to begin a career in human factors research. At
Knowbility, I have used my anthropological background to develop marketing strategies,
interview program participants, setup surveys, reform internal policy, and consult development
professionals on the accessibility of their websites and the needs of their constituents. Knowl-
edge of web usability methods to enhance accessibility in a constantly changing field has helped
me advocate for their inclusion within our own programs and those of local developers working
within the community. Speaking with usability professionals, they were surprised when I
understood the methods used in their approach. When I first met usability engineer Jayne
Schurick, for example, she was working on a contract for a UAE based company and had been
using a heuristic framework to perform preliminary analysis of their site. The ability to have a
discussion on the applicability of a particular heuristic model enabled me to be included in
another research project of hers for a local banking institution, developing the GUI (Graphical
User Interface) of their ATM machines. My college education has helped develop my interests
in a manner that will be useful for the rest of my adult life. The ability to use critical thinking
skills based on a strong philosophical grounding, knowledge of history, and the social sciences
will continue to play an important role in decision making throughout my career.
While my internship exposed me to many new people and allowed me to develop my
own projects, it took perseverance and time to get things moving. Not everything went as
planned. My original internship mentor ended up taking another job offer and a project I was
working on was stalled for several months when one of our partners lost contact. In the non-
profit world much of our work is done on a volunteer basis, so advocating for your constituents
and rallying the masses is a constant struggle. Interns should be aware that it is important to
keep a positive attitude and not be afraid to ask what they can do to help. Internships can be
great networking opportunities, so it is important to leave the best impression no matter what job
you do. Personally, I have met the main players in web development and usability research in
the Austin community and plan to continue these relationships. While I learned many new skills
through my internship, I still have a long road to becoming a human factors expert, but through
perseverance and a willingness to learn, I have no doubt I can achieve my goals and build a
rewarding career.
Bibliography
Brewer, Judy. "Web Accessibility Highlights and Trends." ACM SIGCAPH Computers and the
Physically Handicapped 76 (2003): 15-16. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1036401.1036408
(accessed Apr 26, 2009).
This reference guide to WCAG guidelines set forth by the W3C gives a brief overview of
the domains relevant to content accessibility standards.
Faiola, Anthony and Karl MacDorman. "The Influence of Holistic and Analytic Cognitive Styles
on Online Information Design: Toward a Communication theory of cultural cognitive
design." Information, Communication, and Society 11, no. 3 (2008): 348-374.
Cognitive Cultural Design is introduced in a several case studies that incorporate
Hofstede and Vygotsky into a theoretical framework. The study uses Chinese and
American students in an in lab study and international participants in a web based study
to show how differences in cognitive style can affect the way diverse groups interface
with websites.
Jahn, Najko. "Anthropological Motivated Usability Evaluation: An exploration of IREON –
international relations and area studies gateway." Library Hi Tech 26, no. 4 (2008): 606-
621.
Jahn describes a multi-level approach in which evaluation of the interactions between
people, information resources, and technology can be assessed from a holistic anthropo-
logical point of view. The methodology of usability evaluation is broken down into three
subsets of purpose, user groups, and empirical data gathering methods.
De Marisco, Maria. "A Proposal Toward The Development of Accessible E-learning Content by
Human InvolvementUniversal Access in the Information Society 5. 2 (2006), 150-169,
http://www.springerlink.com/content/w8176092qr655955/fulltext.pdf. (accessed May 2,
2009).
The authors describe an interdisciplinary approach to a learner centered design that
includes accessibility and usability protocols. E-learning development is participated in
by the end-users, and a framework that consists of wrappers to encode data for various
learning domains and disabled users for integration onto the “core” of the e-learning
program. Intra-phase and summative evaluation is conducted and WCAG and usability
protocols are re-incorporated into the design process.
O'Brian,Robin. Thinking Anthroplogically: A Practical Guide for Students. 2nd ed. Using
Science to Think Anthroplogically. Phillip C. Salzman and Patricia C. Rice. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Pearson, 2008.
An introduction to inductive and deductive science is given in this work. The author
described ways anthropologists from all disciplines use scientific thought. Hypothesis
are shown to be able to be proven false but never proven. Scientific thought is presented
as a process that is self-correcting and the process of data collection and analysis is
illustrated.
Wasson, Christina. "Ethnography in the Field of Design." Human Organization 59, no. 4 (2000):
377-388.
The author talks about her experiences working for E-Lab and the ethnographically
centered approach to design research. She claims that Computer Supported Cooperative
Work (CSCW) which deals with the way humans interact with software in the workplace
spawned the use of ethnography in design. Lucy Suchman’s work is used as a case study
to describe an ethnographic approach to design.