1. A USABILITY STUDY WITH CHILDREN AND SMARTBOARD TECHNOLOGY: IMPROVING OUR METHODS IN DATA COLLECTING AND GATHERING TECHNIQUE Laili Farhana Md Ibharim & Maizatul Hayati Mohamad Yatim Faculty of Arts, Computing and Creative Industry Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris 35900, Tanjong Malim Perak, Malaysia

2. Problem We Face A method of collecting and gathering data used by researcher in their studies against children is sometimes a bit messy and the results are less accurate. Method use not appropriate to the environment and the acceptance of children. Usability issues using technology with children. 3. Solution We Offer A new method how to collect and gather data for children using Smartboard technology. Objective of this paper is : To evaluate the usability of Smartboard application as a new tool to collect and gather data for usability testing with children. 4. Research Process Theoretical Stage Methodology Stage Paper objective 5. Development Of Smartboard Application Refer to DDD-E model Using SMART Notebook 10 The application is mainly about to introduce icon design and its function to early age children. The combination of drill & practice and game approach implemented in 6 activities. (fun and interest element injected) 6. Usability Testing Participant Location Nine children aged 7 to 12 years old. This level of age are concrete operations and formal operational for children's development. (Jean Piaget) Animation Lab of Sultan Idris Education University, Malaysia. Convenient place to conduct usability testing with complete facilities and requirements 7. Usability Testing (cont) Method : Intensive use, fun and creativity test & Usability Testing Guidelines. Instrument : Observation with video recorder. Strategy : Session Time Activity / Test 1 7 minutes X 9 participants Participants play with the application one by one continuously in a separate room. All inputs (child artifact and questionnaire saved in each individual file). Researchers do observation on participants and record it using video recorder. 2 Researchers collect all the data and analyze it 8. Video During Usability Testing 9. Result 1 : Efficiency Efficiency measured based on time taken for each participant to finish the activities. Summary : Six participants have completed each activity were below from the researchers estimated time (7 minutes). 10. Result 2 : Effectiveness Effectiveness measured based on marks or scores for each participants in Matching, Drag and drop and Pairing activity. Summary: Matching activity : All participants got full marks (Very good) Drag & Drop activity : 6 participants got full marks and none got 0 (Good) Pairing : All participants got score above 5 (Very good) 11. Result 3 : Satisfaction Five categories of expression recorded by the researcher for each participant to see their level of satisfaction when handling the activities on Smartboard. Summary: Researchers can see the positive form of expression that was dominating the participants while handling the activities on Smartboard Category Notes Facial Expression Positive: Happy, excited, focus, laugh, confident, eager to try, smile Negative: Confuse, uncomfortable, not sure, not satisfy, frowning Speech Expression Positive: Asking for confirmation (example: buat kat sini?), asking to do again (example: nak buat lagi), feel happy when success (example: Yes!, dah!) Negative: Confuse (example: eh?, aik?), giving up (example: susahnye.., takpelah.., aahhhh!!!), unsatisfied (example: eh..bukanlah.. , nak tukar) Body Language Expression Positive: Face the board confidently, handling tools in the right way, step backward and forward (thinking), finger tap on the board (thinking) Negative:Touch head/nose/eye, eyes always staring at the teacher, body sway gently to left and right, head moving, hand swinging, one hand on the board and other hand to stomach and waist, Movement Expression Positive: Fast, direct, immediately action, free movement around the board, efficient Negative: Hesitate Attitude Expression Positive: Active, motivated, make effort, high confidence level, perfectionist, creative Negative: Too alert, too detail, afraid to try, giving up easily. 12. No.1 : Similarity and familiarity of Smartboard application with real world make it function well. No.2 : Collecting and gathering data from children can be easy using Smartboard application. No.3 : Children show good behavior and attitude while using Smartboard application. No.4 : Multimodal interaction enhances children performance in giving idea and information. Findings 13. Summary Smartboard is very helpful in collecting and gathering data from children through activities that allow them to communicate, give ideas and opinions openly and clearly. Advantage to researchers in the field of children to obtain data for their studies through the Smartboard as compared to the common methods such as questionnaires and interviews. The applicability of this study is to prove that Smartboard as a tool to gather and collect data to create new methods of study in children to be more interesting, effective and accurate. 14. References Ackermann, E. (2004). Constructing Knowledge and Transforming the World. M. Tokoro and L. Steels (Eds.). A Learning Zone of Ones Own: Sharing Representations and Flow in Collaborative Learning Environments. Amsterdam: IOS Press, Pt. 1, Ch. 2, pp. 15-37. Edwards, H. & Benedyk, R. (2007). A Comparison of Usability Evaluation Methods for Child Participants in A School Setting. In proceeding of The 6th International Conference for Interaction Design and Children (pp. 9-15) Aalborg, Denmark. Gage, J. (2005). How to Use an Interactive Whiteboard Really Effectively in Your Primary Classroom. London: David Fulton Publishers Ltd. Ivers, K.S. & Barron, A.E. (2006). Multimedia Projects in Education: Designing, Producing and Assessing (3rd Ed.). USA: British Library. Microsoft. (2011). Icons. Retrieved March 22, 2011 from http://msdn.microsoft.com/en- us/library/aa511280.aspx#guidelines Hanna, L., Risden, K., Czerwinski, M., & Alexander, K.J. (1998). The Role of Usability Study in Designing Childrens Computer Products. In: The Design of Childrens Technology. Druin, A. (Ed.), Morgan Kaufmann Publishers: San Francisco, CA, USA. Masuch, M., Yatim, M., & Gadegast, P. (2007). Developing Software for Children: Experiences from Creating a 3D Drawing Application. In: Gross, T. (ed.). Mensch & Computer 2007: Konferenz fur interactive und cooperative Medien. Munchen: Oldenburg Verlag.pp. 179 188. Preece, J., Rogers, Y. & Sharp, H. (2006). Interaction Design Beyond Human-Computer Interaction (2nd ed.). USA : John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Robson, C. (2002). Real World Study (2nd Ed.). Blackwell Publishing. Rubin, J. & Chisnell, D. (2008). Handbook of Usability Testing: How to Plan, Design and Conduct Effectiveness Tests (2nd Ed.).Indianapolis: Wiley Publishing. 15. Thank You Q & A SESSION