SI 622 – Assignment #5 Survey Report Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access February 17, 2005
Noor Ali-Hasan Amy Anderson David Choi Rasika Ramesh SI Mailbox #5
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access
Table of Contents Executive Summary 4 Introduction 5 Overview of Wolverine Access 5 User Population 5 Project Background 6 Survey Objectives 6 Data Collection Methods 7 Sampling Method 7 Data Collection Instrument 8 Analysis Methods 9 Analysis Tools 9 Data Cleaning Procedures 9 Data Analysis 9 Key Findings 10 Sample Description – Demographics 10 Wolverine Access Usage 11 Assessment of Overall Usability, Functionality, and Aesthetics 11 Overall Satisfaction with Course Registration 12 Significant Differences between Undergraduate and Graduate Students’ Attitudes towards Wolverine Access 12 Open-Ended Response 13 Research Limitations and Biases 14 Summary 14 References 15 Appendix A: Sampling Frame 16 Appendix B: Respondent Recruitment Email 17 Appendix C: Online Survey 18 Page 1 – Introduction to Survey 18 Page 2 – Demographics 19 Page 3 – Wolverine Access Usage 20 Page 4 – User Attitudes about Usability, Functionality, and Aesthetics 21 Page 5 – Assessment of User Satisfaction in Terms of Usability, Functionality, and Aesthetics 22 Page 6 – Open-Ended Responses 23 Page 7 – Survey Conclusion 24 Appendix D: Frequency Tabulation of Major or Area of Study Open Response 25 Appendix E: Raw Data Spreadsheets from Survey Monkey (Full Data Set and Summary Statistics) 26 Appendix F: Coded Open Response Questions 27 Appendix G: Collective Means for Dimensions of Usability, Functionality, and Aesthetics 28 Appendix H: T-test 29
2
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access Appendix I: Data Analysis of Demographics Appendix J: Data Analysis of Question 9 Appendix K: Data Analysis of Question 10 Appendix L: Data Analysis of Wolverine Access Usage Appendix M: Male/Female Distribution of Sample Population Appendix N: Distribution of Academic Units Across Sample Population
29 29 29 29 30 30
3
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access
Executive Summary Wolverine Access is the University of Michigan’s primary administrative system used by students, faculty, and staff. As part of SI 622: Evaluation of Systems and Services at the University of Michigan School of Information, a group of graduate students conducted a small study assessing the usability, functionality, and aesthetic appeal of the enrollment component of Wolverine Access. Due to time constraints and the inability to reach the entire campus population, the study relied on convenience sampling techniques. The students emailed a list of over 140 student email groups inviting members to participate in an online survey. The survey was administered through the popular online survey web site Survey Monkey. The survey was available for approximately one week. Over 400 graduate and undergraduate students from across the University’s various academic units responded. The survey included both quantitative and qualitative elements. The survey results indicate that students overall find Wolverine Access to be an easy, fast, and efficient way to register for courses at the University of Michigan. They appreciate the fact that it is online and that it accessible from anywhere. However, in both the quantitative and qualitative measures, students expressed concerns with the class search feature and the look and feel and navigation of the interface. Further data analysis was conducted by the group to reveal that there was a significant difference between the way undergraduate and graduate students perceived the system. Graduate students were more likely to have issues with the class search features, while undergraduate students experienced more problems with the registration process itself. The survey represents a number of biases that are not reflective of the overall University of Michigan student population. Over 70% of the respondents were female when only 50% of the student population is composed of women. Furthermore, the vast majority of respondents were graduate students and the average age of the sample was around 25 years old. However, most students at the University of Michigan are undergraduate students between the ages of 17 and 21. Being that convenience sampling techniques were used to conduct this survey, further research encompassing the entire campus student community is recommended for affirmative conclusions.
4
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access
Introduction Overview of Wolverine Access Wolverine Access (WA) is a web-based administration system at the University of Michigan. Managed by the University of Michigan Administrative Information Services (MAIS), the system is accessed by students, faculty, and staff. The Student Business interface is used by both undergraduate and graduate students at the University of Michigan. This interface allows students to conduct a number of tasks online including viewing their account statements, viewing their financial aid status, viewing and printing their class schedules, viewing their final grades, downloading their unofficial transcripts, and registering for classes. User Population Wolverine Access’ user Figure 1: Fall 2004 Enrollment Statistics population includes all at the University of Michigan enrolled students at the University of Michigan Ann Arbor campus. This First Professional group of approximately 9% 39,500 individuals includes Graduate undergraduate, graduate 28% (masters and doctoral), and first professional1 students 63% from the University’s twenty schools. For the Undergraduate Fall 2004 semester, undergraduate enrollment at the University of Michigan totaled 24,828 students (63%), graduate enrollment added another 11,219 students (28%), and first professional enrollment was composed of 3,486 (9%) (Electronic Fact Pages – University of Michigan, 2004). Figure 1 provides a graphical representation of these enrollment statistics. In terms of age, 88.9% of undergraduate students enrolled for Fall 2004 were between the ages of 17 to 21 (Electronic Fact Pages – University of Michigan, 2004). Furthermore, the gender distribution among the student population is roughly equivalent with males representing 51.75% of students and females making up the remaining 48.25% (Electronic Fact Pages – University of Michigan, 2004).
1
We were unable to obtain a clear definition of first professional programs. However, the University’s Electronic Fact Pages indicate that first professional degrees include dentistry, medicine, pharmacy, and law.
5
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access Project Background Our group’s semester long project focuses on assessing and evaluating the Enrollment component of Student Business, which includes the following tasks: • • • •
View Enrollment Appointment2 Backpack3/Registration View Class Schedule Disenrollment Information
To better understand students’ user experience and level of satisfaction with the system from a wide range of perspectives, we recently conducted an online survey of University of Michigan students. This document reviews our survey objectives, data collection methods, analysis methods, sample population, key findings, and research limitations and biases.
Survey Objectives Earlier in the semester, our group collectively conducted interviews with six students whom we personally knew. These interviews were designed to collect some preliminary qualitative data about students’ overall opinions of Wolverine Access. Although we found the interviews to be rather insightful, the results cannot be used to make inferences about the overall student population. Thus, we decided to conduct an online survey to gather a wider range of feedback from students about their satisfaction with and attitudes towards Wolverine Access. Guided by our initial interview findings, we established the following primary survey objectives: 1. Evaluate the overall usability of Wolverine Access 2. Evaluate the overall functionality of Wolverine Access 3. Assess students’ satisfaction with specific enrollment functions of Wolverine Access 4. Assess students’ attitudes towards the aesthetics of Wolverine Access 5. Measure students’ overall satisfaction with the registration process in Wolverine Access 6. Identify usability issues within specific functions of Wolverine Access
2
At the University of Michigan, students can only register after a specific time and date known as the enrollment appointment, which is automatically assigned by Wolverine Access. 3 The Backpack is a course planner that allows students to save the specific classes and sections that they would like to enroll in for an upcoming semester. This feature allows students to quickly register for classes once they are allowed to register, which is determined by the time and date of the enrollment appointment.
6
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access
Data Collection Methods Sampling Method To fulfill the aforementioned survey objectives, the survey’s population of interest included both undergraduate and graduate students at the University of Michigan who utilize Wolverine Access for course registration. The data collection method that we used was an online survey that we created through Survey Monkey, a popular online surveying service. We recruited participants through an email message that described our project, offered survey instructions, and provided a hyperlink to the survey (see Appendix B for the recruitment email). Due to strict university policies and our limited time frame to conduct the study, we were unable to send our survey to the entire University of Michigan student population. Instead, we compiled a list of over 140 email groups of student organizations, clubs, and academic departments by browsing the University of Michigan online directory. Thus, our sampling frame consisted of students who subscribed to at least one of these email groups. Appendix A provides the complete set of email groups whose members were invited to participate. We have estimated that this list of groups includes approximately 12,635 student email addresses. Nonetheless, we cannot confirm this number with a prescribed level of certainty because some students may be members of several email groups. Furthermore, some email groups do not publicly list their members in the University directory so we could not determine the number of students who were subscribed to each of them. Starting at approximately 12:00 AM EST on Sunday, February 6, 2005, we sent an email to each of these groups recruiting their members to take part in our survey. On Thursday, February 10, 2005, we resent the recruitment email as a reminder. At approximately 12:59 AM EST on Saturday, February 12, 2005, we closed the survey and stopped collecting responses. Due to our student budget constraints, we could not offer participants a monetary incentive to complete the survey. Nonetheless, our recruitment email motivated students to participate by asking for their valuable feedback, promising them that their feedback will help improve future versions of Wolverine Access, and appealing to them to help fellow students with a class project. In total, we initially collected 451 responses. However, after applying some standard data cleaning practices4, we analyzed and tabulated 424 responses. Based on our rough estimate of the sampling frame’s size of 12,635 students, we achieved an estimated response rate of approximately 3.36%.
4
Data cleaning methods will be described in complete detail in the forthcoming Analysis Methods section.
7
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access Data Collection Instrument Our survey used both quantitative and qualitative data collection methods. We initially drafted the survey in a Microsoft Word document and made several revisions to ensure clarity and a logical flow. We reviewed a rough draft of the survey with several MAIS team members and implemented some changes based on their feedback. To facilitate data collection, we created an online survey through Survey Monkey (http://www.surveymonkey.com), a popular online surveying service. Once the survey was available online, we tested the survey with fellow students not involved in this study. This pretest allowed us to address any unclear questions or instructions and to confirm our target survey completion time of ten minutes or less. We made a few minor revisions based on the pretest feedback. We divided the survey into seven pages (see Appendix C for screenshots of the online survey). The first page served as an introduction to the survey, providing some general instructions. The second page gathered demographic data about the respondents including age, gender, year in school, academic unit, major, and type of Internet connection. Although we usually prefer to ask demographic data at the conclusion of a survey5, we felt that in this survey the demographic questions were the easiest to complete and would help ease respondents into the survey. This demographic data was collected to compare our sample population with the actual user population. Moreover, it was collected to help us compare differences between different sets of user populations. The third page gathered data regarding respondents’ Wolverine Access usage in terms of frequency of logins and features used. The fourth page utilized a standard five-point Likert scale to assess user attitudes about usability, functionality, and aesthetics. Respondents were presented with a set of statements, with which they were asked to judge their level of agreement or disagreement (strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, or strongly disagree). Utilizing a five point satisfaction scale (extremely satisfied, somewhat satisfied, neutral, somewhat dissatisfied, and extremely dissatisfied) the fifth page assessed user satisfaction in terms of usability, functionality, and aesthetics by asking respondents to evaluate how satisfied they were with various functions or aspects of Wolverine Access. The sixth page included three optional open response questions designed to gather student concerns and needs that our other questions may have missed. Finally, the seventh page concluded our survey and thanked the respondents for their time and participation. It should be noted that in scaled questions such as those presented in pages four and five of our survey, we usually prefer a “Don’t Know” or “Unsure” option. However, in this survey, we decided to not include this option due to limitations in the way that Survey Monkey displays the “Don’t Know” response. Survey Monkey places the “Don’t Know” on the same line as the rest of the scaled responses. In our pretests, we found that some individuals were accidentally marking “Don’t Know” instead of their intended response at the extremity of the scale (i.e. extremely dissatisfied or strongly agree).
5
This practice is often used to prevent respondents who may feel uncomfortable revealing personal information from immediately abandoning the questionnaire.
8
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access
Analysis Methods Analysis Tools After closing the survey to new respondents, we exported our raw data files, representing both the full data set and summary statistics, from Survey Monkey into spreadsheets (see Appendix E). Utilizing Microsoft Excel 2003, we conducted data cleaning, tabulated frequencies, calculated sample means, ran a t-test, and coded the qualitative responses. We also created charts and tables using both Microsoft Excel 2003 and Microsoft Word 2003. Data Cleaning Procedures As we mentioned earlier, we initially had a total of 451 submitted questionnaires. After reviewing the data, we deleted two records where respondents had selected 99 for their age. We felt that the validity of either of these responses were questionable. Furthermore, 27 respondents only completed the demographic information and did not provide any responses to the questions assessing usability, functionality, and aesthetics. By not responding to these questions regarding their attitudes and satisfaction levels, we felt that including their demographic data would unfavorably skew our results. Another twelve responses were partially incomplete. Nonetheless, we kept these responses in the survey sample since they completed a significant portion of the questionnaire. The final set of data cleaning procedures involved open responses in the demographic data section. When asking respondents about their Internet connectivity, we provided them with a “Don’t Know” and “Other – Please Specify” option. By reviewing the few “Other” responses, we were able to recode these responses into our standard categories. Respondents that listed “wireless” or “home wireless” were clustered into the DSL/Cable category since the download speeds of residential wireless connections tend to coincide with those of residential DSL and Cable connections. Furthermore, students who entered “Ethernet,” “school wireless,” or “whatever they have in the dorms” were clustered into the T1 or higher category. Finally, in coding respondents’ answers to their major or area of study, we cleaned up abbreviations and recoded some responses to a consistent term. For instance, a response of HCI was recoded as Human-Computer Interaction, while a response of Library, & Information Science was recorded as Library, & Information Services. Data Analysis For quantitative data, we tabulated frequencies of responses and calculated sample means, medians, and modes as applicable to the specific data set. We also made sure to utilize the same scale for all attitude and satisfaction questions. For instance, some questions may have posed a negative statement. For these questions, we inverted the scales to ensure that comparisons to other measures were appropriate.
9
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access For the open-ended qualitative responses, we reviewed the data and clustered similar response patterns. We then tabulated the number of response instances in each cluster (see Appendices D and F). To arrive at overall usability, functionality, and aesthetic means, we arranged individual attitude and satisfaction measures into one of these three dimensions and averaged their mean scores (see Appendix G). Finally, we conducted a ttest to determine if differences in attitude and satisfaction ratings between undergraduate and graduate students were significant (see Appendix H).
Key Findings Sample Description – Demographics Our survey respondents ranged in age from 18 to 59, with an average age of 25 years old. Female respondents represented 74% of the sample population (see Appendix M). Furthermore, as indicated by the chart, graduate and doctoral students represented 71% of the study’s participants. Students from a wide range of academic units participated in the survey, with the majority coming from Literature, Science, and the Arts (25.47%), the School of Information (16.75%), Social Work (13.44%), and Public Health (12.03%) (see Appendix N). Not surprisingly, a wide range of majors/areas of study were reported but Social Work and Human-Computer Interaction were the two most frequently cited, each making up about
Year in School Freshman 6%
Doctoral Student 12%
Sophomore 6% Junior 8% Senior 9%
Graduate Student 59%
Internet Connectivity
Don't know 1%
Dial Up 6%
T1 or higher 30%
DSL/Cable 63%
10
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access 7% of the survey population (see Appendix D). Moreover, as the figure above indicates, the vast majority of the survey respondents were broadband Internet users, making up 94% of the sample. Wolverine Access Usage Most of the survey respondents were regular users of Wolverine Access. Approximately 68% listed that they access the system several times a semester, 28% use the system on a weekly basis, and 3% use it on a daily basis. Moreover, most respondents have used a variety of Wolverine Access functions. Furthermore, a majority of the surveyed students used Wolverine Access to accomplish the primary tasks that we are evaluating.
Tasks Used in Wolverine Access Class Registration, 95.28%
View Class Schedule, Class Search, Backpack, 90.09% Print Class 85.38% 84.67% Schedule, 73.58%
Assessment of Overall Usability, Functionality, and Aesthetics The overall measurements of usability, functionality, and aesthetics were fairly close to each other ranging from a mean of 3.30 to 3.56. Nonetheless, users in our sample appear to be most satisfied with the functionality of Wolverine Access and least satisfied with its usability (see Appendix G). In terms of specific features and aspects of using Wolverine Access, the following findings were most prominent: ƒ ƒ
Respondents required little outside help in using the system Respondents were most satisfied with the ability to drop classes, register for classes, and print their schedule
11
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access
Interface (quality of the look and feel of the application and navigation) and information architecture (clarity and understandability of vocabulary terms, headings, labels, and messages) issues appear to hindering usability Respondents consistently rated aspects of class search and finding class information the lowest of all features
Overall Satisfaction with Course Registration With a mean of 3.52 and a top two box score of 54.77%, the students surveyed in our sample were fairly evenly distributed, with a slight majority favoring the application. Significant Differences between Undergraduate and Graduate Students’ Attitudes towards Wolverine Access To determine if there were any significant differences between the way undergraduate and graduate students perceive Wolverine Access, we ran a t-test on the means of the attitude and satisfaction measures of both populations (see Appendix H). Our results indicate that there were not any significant differences in the way both populations perceived overall usability, functionality, and aesthetics of Wolverine Access. However, there were significant differences between the two in terms of the following specific attitude and satisfaction measurements:
Graduate students appear to be experiencing slightly more difficulties in locating classes in Wolverine Access. Undergraduate students appear to be experiencing slighting more difficulties in registering for classes in Wolverine Access. Graduate students appear to be making slightly more mistakes or running into errors when using Wolverine Access. Undergraduate students find the class search tools on Wolverine Access be more difficult to use than do graduate students. Graduate students are more satisfied with the speed of registration process on Wolverine Access. Undergraduate students are less satisfied with the ability to search and find classes using Wolverine Access. Graduate students are more satisfied with the ability to plan their schedule using Wolverine Access.
When considering the needs of these two different populations, these results appear to be valid. Graduate students are more likely to experience problems searching for classes because they do not register for as many different types of classes as undergraduates. Thus, graduate students may not be aware of all of the department codes while undergraduates may have been conditioned to them through experience and practice. Moreover, undergraduates are more likely to experience issues with classes being closed or waitlisted. Thus, they may incorrectly perceive these issues to be technical problems within Wolverine Access and not procedural issues at the University. Furthermore, graduate students are likely to be more satisfied with the ability to plan their schedule
12
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access within the system because their class scheduling needs are probably not as complex or diverse as undergraduates. Open-Ended Response We asked the following three optional open-ended questions on the survey: 1. What do you like the most about registering for classes through Wolverine Access? 2. What do you like the least about registering for classes through Wolverine Access? 3. Do you have any comments or suggestions for improving course registration through Wolverine Access? The number of actual responses we received for these questions varied from 280 for question 1, 283 for question 2, and 231 for question 3. The following table summarizes the results. Question 1 Accessibility Speed & Ease of Use
Question 2 Class Search Poor Interface
Question 3 Improve class search Improve the interface
For the first question, most respondents commented on their satisfaction with being able to conveniently access and register online through Wolverine Access from any computer. Many of them (105 instances) mentioned that Wolverine Access is a major improvement over the past telephone and in-person registration processes. To a lesser extent, many respondents (88 instances) commented on the ease of use and quick response time of Wolverine Access. For the second question, the overwhelming number of responses (141 instances) expressed dissatisfaction with the class search functionality in Wolverine Access. These responses comprised over half the total. Many users felt it was difficult to search for classes if they did not know the exact class number, subject code, or title of the class. They also expressed displeasure with the lack of course information available in Wolverine Access compared to their department course guides. To a far lesser extent, a number of users (39 instances) expressed displeasure with the user interface. These complaints centered on poor navigation and a general lack of visual appeal. The third question was a far more open ended question than the previous two. Responses varied greatly. However, the largest categories of responses reinforced what was reported in question two. Namely, that the class search and the user interface needed to be improved.
13
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access
Research Limitations and Biases Due to time constraints and our inability to access a University-wide student email list, our research utilized convenience sampling techniques is therefore not a representative sample of the entire University population. For instance, Women made up 74% of our sample population, but only about 50% of students at the University of Michigan are women. Composing about 71% of the sample, graduate, doctoral, and first professional students are also overrepresented within our sample. The vast majority of University of Michigan students are actually undergraduates between the ages of 17 to 21. On the other hand, the average age of our sample population was approximately 25 years old. Additionally, individuals who are willing to answer an Internet survey may not necessarily represent the general student population. They may, for instance, be more likely to spend time on the Internet, which could impact their opinions of Wolverine Access. This inference is corroborated by the large percentage of broadband users in our sample.
Summary In summary, our survey respondents general find Wolverine Access to be an easy, fast, and efficient way to register for courses at the University of Michigan. They appreciate the fact that it is online and that it accessible from anywhere. However, in both the quantitative and qualitative measures, students expressed concerns with the class search feature and the look and feel and navigation of the interface. Being that convenience sampling techniques were used to conduct this survey, further research encompassing the entire campus student community is recommended for affirmative conclusions.
14
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access
References Electronic Fact Pages – University of Michigan. (2004). Retrieved February 13, 2005, from http://www.umich.edu/%7Eoapainfo/contents.html University Profile. (2002). Retrieved February 7, 2005, from http://www.umich.edu/news/index.html?umfacts Wolverine Access. (2005). Retrieved February 7, 2005, from https://wolverineaccess.umich.edu/index.jsp
15
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access
Appendix A: Sampling Frame University of Michigan Email Groups (@umich.edu) 03CGSM 4noir acsstudents africans aiasinfo ALC-Ugrad all_students allure03 allureinterested American_Culture_Graduate _Students arches Asca-info asian_american_association baitsbp Ballroom-exec bangladesh bgreeks bhangrateam blackart blackfolks blackfolx blackhomecoming black-law blackpeople blackstudents BlackVibes blkpremed2004 blsa.member bridge2000 bridge2004 bsumass03 bsumass04 bvnmass canadians caup.students chemistry_undergraduate_pro gram ciaoclub circlek climax COE.grad.students cpa1 csa.board csa cshpe_masters cssacommittee Dance_Marathon dental.students
dentalclass2005 dentalclass2006 dentalclass2007 dentalgradstudents dreamgirls.cast Ensian.um esa-um euroboard fasa-off festifall2003 fordschool_students forensicsteam gospelchorale Groove.info heads hillel-gap hillelleaders04-05 hmp2005 hmp2006 hsspcampus2002 hsspcampus2003 IAS-join illphenom images images_02 images_04 immad internationalstudents iranian_grads jewish_business_students kapsi kgentles lavoz_latina lawofficial lgbtstudentgroups llsa M1 M2 M3 M4 ma_journalism mastersofaccounting math_society mtoast.interest mup.students MusicRackhamMasters mysticboard04-05 naacp naacpmulti
naba ncnw noir2003 noir2004 noircalendar nphc npm.students nuchapter nudeltas Omegapsiphi org.studies Persians.board pharmacy.class.of.2005 pharmacy.class.of.2006 pharmacy.class.of.2007 phsad.sph physicsmasters pisig Psa.board psych.grads psych.undergrad psych_undergrad rushpsp Saan.marketing scholarsofcolor-compact scholarsofcolor-gates si.students sis2sis slavik snre.ms snre.phd socgrad.all Socialexec soe.grads sph.students sph_bio_masters ssw.students ssw_students theeb tusa uea UFS um.latinos um_latinos Umec.exec Usac-ExecBoard z-phi-b-1920
16
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access
Appendix B: Respondent Recruitment Email
17
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access
Appendix C: Online Survey Page 1 – Introduction to Survey
18
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access Page 2 – Demographics
19
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access Page 3 – Wolverine Access Usage
20
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access Page 4 – User Attitudes about Usability, Functionality, and Aesthetics
21
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access Page 5 – Assessment of User Satisfaction in Terms of Usability, Functionality, and Aesthetics
22
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access Page 6 – Open-Ended Responses
23
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access Page 7 – Survey Conclusion
24
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access
Appendix D: Frequency Tabulation of Major or Area of Study Open Response Major or Area of Study Other Social Work Human-Computer Interaction Psychology Library and Information Services Political Science Law Epidemiology Interpersonal Practice Health Management and Policy Higher Education Administration Medicine Architecture Information Undeclared Pharmacy Biostatistics Health Behavior and Health Education Sociology American Culture Business Economics Archives and Records Management Spanish Biology Community Organizing Asian Studies Information Economics, Management, and Policy
117 30 29 25 21 17 14 13 13 11 11 10 10 10 9 9 9 8 8 7 7 7 6 5 5 5 4
27.59% 7.08% 6.84% 5.90% 4.95% 4.01% 3.30% 3.07% 3.07% 2.59% 2.59% 2.36% 2.36% 2.36% 2.12% 2.12% 2.12% 1.89% 1.89% 1.65% 1.65% 1.65% 1.42% 1.18% 1.18% 1.18% 0.94%
4 424
0.94% 100.00%
25
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access
Appendix E: Raw Data Spreadsheets from Survey Monkey (Full Data Set and Summary Statistics) Available Online at http://www.noor.bz/622/
26
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access
Appendix F: Coded Open Response Questions Available Online at http://www.noor.bz/622/
27
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access
Appendix G: Collective Means for Dimensions of Usability, Functionality, and Aesthetics Usability I am able to locate the classes I want in Wolverine Access with little difficulty. I am able to register for the classes I want in Wolverine Access with little difficulty I do not make many mistakes or run into errors when using Wolverine Access. I understand the instructions, headings, labels, messages and terms that are displayed to me in Wolverine Access. Handling registration tasks (adding, dropping, swapping classes) is easy in Wolverine Access. I find the Backpack feature of Wolverine Access helpful and easy to use. If I make a mistake in Wolverine Access, it is difficult to undo or correct. It is easy to find information about classes in Wolverine Access. It is easy to navigate to the different registration features (class search, backpack) in Wolverine Access. Help is easy to find to Wolverine Access. I know how to find the registration and course information that I need on Wolverine Access. I find the class search tools on Wolverine Access difficult to use. The first time that I used Wolverine Access, I was able to understand the system quickly. I frequently seek help from other students to figure out how to use Wolverine Access. I was able to understand the terms (backpack, modify course, add/drop) without seeking help from outside Wolverine Access. When I encountered an error in Wolverine Access, it was easy to understand what happened. Speed of registration process on Wolverine Access Aesthetics I find the interface (buttons, labels, colors) clear and understandable. Look and feel (graphics, colors) of printed schedule Overall look and feel (graphics, colors) of Wolverine Access
3.14 3.59 3.09 3.59 3.44 3.83 3.11 2.50 3.17 2.93 2.89 3.15 4.08 3.70 2.92 3.74 3.30 3.39 3.31 3.57 3.42
Functionality Wolverine Access is an efficient and easy way to handle registering for classes. Ability to search and find classes Ability to register for classes Ability to drop classes Ability to swap classes Ability to plan your schedule Assignment of enrollment appointment Availability (times of the day, days of the week) of Wolverine Access Ability to print your schedule
3.53 2.98 3.93 4.03 3.67 3.45 3.42 3.08 3.92 3.56
28
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access
Appendix H: T-test Available Online at http://www.noor.bz/622/
Appendix I: Data Analysis of Demographics Available Online at http://www.noor.bz/622/
Appendix J: Data Analysis of Question 9 Available Online at http://www.noor.bz/622/
Appendix K: Data Analysis of Question 10 Available Online at http://www.noor.bz/622/
Appendix L: Data Analysis of Wolverine Access Usage Available Online at http://www.noor.bz/622/
29
Project: University of Michigan Wolverine Access
Appendix M: Male/Female Distribution of Sample Population Male / Female Distribution
Male 26%
Female 74%
Appendix N: Distribution of Academic Units Across Sample Population Academic Units Social Work, 13.44% 2.59% Public Health, 12.03% 1.89% 0.24% 3.77% Literature, Science, and the Arts, 25.47%
Music, 0.24% 2.36% 3.30% Inform ation, 16.75% 1.89% 5.66% 4.48% 0.47% 2.59% Architecture & Urban Planning, 2.83%
30