A USABILITY STUDY WITH CHILDREN AND SMARTBOARD TECHNOLOGY
FOR DATA COLLECTING AND GATHERING TECHNIQUE
FROM EXPERT POINT OF VIEW
Laili Farhana Md Ibharim & Maizatul Hayati Mohamad Yatim
Faculty of Arts, Computing and Creative Industry
Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris
35900, Tanjong Malim
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
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.
Development Of Smartboard
• Refer to DDD-E model
• Using SMART Notebook 10
• The application is mainly about to introduce
icon design and its function to early age
• The combination of drill & practice and game
approach implemented in 6 activities. (fun
and interest element injected)
• Participant : 4 lecturers from Department of
• Location : Lecturer’s room
• Instrument : Group & individual interview (semi-
structural questions) with audio recorder.
• Strategy :
Session 1: Expert
experience in doing
1. They use the most appropriate and effective methods that have been
implemented against children
2. Types of provided data are clear and information is absolutely accurate for
3. Difficulties are faced by researchers when gathering and collecting data
4. Alternative way to overcome the risk of data loss and damage.
Session 2: Expert’s
Smartboard as data
1. Suitable and effective activity to collect and gather data from children
2. Function and tools that Smartboard provides are suitable for children.
3. Things that should be avoided during collect and gather data while using
4. Do they agree if Smartboard is used as new instrument to replace the
conventional instruments and methods? Why?
Researchers played the tape recorder again and transcribed all the
information based on established criteria to evaluate the findings of the
interview using discussion of analytical method (Piaw,2006) 7
Result 1 : Efficiency
• Expert’s observation on the video which they
have to put number from 1 (represent most
enjoyable) to 6 (represent most difficult)
Summary: Overall, all the experts have agreed that the activities in the form
of direct interaction is more fun and easier rather than the activity in a form
of indirect interaction and a multi-use activities which require much more
movements. Besides that, skills and creativity as well as factors would affect
the ease or difficulty of this activity.
Result 2 : Effectiveness
• Expert’s opinion and recommendation in the
video about the effectiveness of features and
tools provided on Smartboard.
Summary: Overall, the experts have proposed the use of the Smartboard’s
functions and tools which are simple and easy. In addition, it should have
closure and engagement elements so that, the children will feel more
comfortable, secure and confident with what they do.
Result 3 : Satisfaction
• Expert’s personal opinion on usability of
Smartboard to replace conventional methods
in doing research to collect and data from
Summary: Smartboard technology can be accepted as an alternative
method to collect and gather data, especially for those studies that involve
with a large number of samples such as the whole students in a class.
No.1 : Direct interaction makes children feel
enjoyable and comfortable
No.2 : Collecting and gathering data from children
can be easy using Smartboard application.
No.3 : Smartboard meets the needs of researchers
in conducting research
No.4 : Multimodal interaction enhances children
performance in giving idea and information.
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
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
Ackermann, E. (2004). Constructing Knowledge and Transforming the World. M. Tokoro and L. Steels (Eds.). A Learning Zone of One’s 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 June 28, 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 Children’s Computer Products. In: The Design of
Children’s 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.
Piaw, C.Y. (2006). Asas Statistik Penyelidikan. Kuala Lumpur: McGraw-Hill.
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.). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Rubin, J. & Chisnell, D. (2008). Handbook of Usability Testing: How to Plan, Design and Conduct Effectiveness Tests (2nd Ed.).Indianapolis: Wiley Publishing.
Yatim, M.H. (2009). Children, Computer and Creativity: Usability Guidelines for Designing A Game Authoring Tool for Children. Otto-Von-Guericke University
of Magdeburg. Germany.
Researcher: “Berdasarkan pemerhatian terhadap video tadi, aktiviti yang manakah
paling menyeronokkan dan paling selesa untuk mengutip dan mengumpul data
daripada kanak-kanak? Sila letakkan ranking 1 (mewakili paling menyeronokkan)
sehingga 6 (mewakili paling sukar)”
(Researcher: “Based on your observation from the video, which activity is more
enjoyable and comfortable to collect and gatherdata from children? Please put in rank
1(represent most enjoyable) to 6 (represent most difficult)”).
Expert 1: “Drag & Drop tadi payah kan? Tapi sebenarnya Drag & Drop tu bergantung pada kat
mana sebenarnya sebab kalau dekat komputer senang kalau pakai mouse. Drag and Drop tu yang
paling payah la kot, Yang Most Like ni yang mana?... Owh, tu pun payah juga, second payah.
Hehehe..Drawing first and then Pairing, kemudian tu Matching, aa… Smilyometer tu mudah..”
(Expert 1: "Drag & Drop had some trouble right? But usually, the Drag & Drop depends on where
exactly…if it is use on the computer, it would be easier when a mouse. Maybe the Drag & Drop is
the most difficult one, which is the Most Like? ... Owh, that too is difficult also, second hard.
Hehehe… Drawing first and then Pairing, followed by Matching, aa ... The Smilyometer is too
simple .. ")
Efficiency Transcription (cont)
Expert 2: “Paling seronok dan senang Pairing lah.”
(Expert 2: “The most exciting and easy one is the Pairing ”)
Expert 3: “Yang Matching tu ada yang macam susah nak garis”
(Expert 3: “The Matching seems hard to make a line”)
Expert 2: “Yang paling susah Drawing lah sebab interaction dia multi…multi use, multi dimension,
multi use lah yang kena buat banyak benda.”
(Expert 2: “The hardest activities is the Drawing, because it has multi interaction…multi use, multi
dimension, multi use , that have to do many things”)
Expert 4: “Pairing, yang ke 2, Drag & Drop, Smileyometer ... Dragging tu ambil masa
yang lama sikit la..”
(Expert 4: “Pairing is the second, then Drag & Drop, followed by Smileyometer…Dragging is the one that
requires a longer…”)
Expert 2: “Matching pun senang jugak. Matching nombor 3, lepas tu Most Like, Drag & Drop..”
(Expert 2: “Matching is easy too, Matching will be number 3, then Most Like, followedby Drag &
Researcher: “Berdasarkan pendapat anda, apakah fungsi dan alatan yang disediakan oleh
Smartboard sesuai untuk kanak-kanak?”
(Researcher: “Based on your opinion, what are the functions and tools provided by the
Smartboard are suitable for children?”)
Expert 1: “Untuk children kena guna yang paling simple. Ini bukan saya cakap sahaja, malah dari
kajian saya yang lepas-lepas juga membuktikan begitu. Yang simple dan yang senang. Click. Kalau
drawing untuk kanak-kanak yang dah besar sikit ok la..”
(Expert 1: “For the children, we have to use the simplest method. This not only me who have said
it, but my previous research have also proved this. Simple and easy. Click. If drawing for older
children, then it is ok …”)
Expert 3: “Function yang jenis direct interaction.”
(Expert 3: “The types of direct interaction function”)
Effectiveness Transcription (cont)
Expert 2: “Kanak-kanak suka degree yang jenis ‘tap’ kat situ, simple la.. Dia tak guna banyak
kaedah…. By right, untuk direct interaction kanak-kanak suka keypad tu sebab dia ada closure, tu
sebab dia rasa macam puas. Dia rasa dia tekan tu betul. Perasaan closure tu. Aha..”
(Expert 2: “The children prefer types of degree ‘tap’ just like that, simple … They do not use much
complex method… By right, for direct interaction children, they prefer the keypad as it have
some ‘closure’. That is what makes they feel satisfy. They feel what they have pressed is right.
That ‘closure’ feeling. Aha…”)
Expert 4: “Tapi kanak-kanak suka yang touch tu. Itu based on pengalaman la…dia dah biasa. Atau
pun touch yang ada bunyi tu. Ha… itu feedback lah. Dia bagi feedback.”
(Expert 4: “But children also likes the touch. It based on experience … they familiar with that. Or
touch produce sound. Ha… that is feedback.. It gives feedback..”)
Researcher: “Adakah anda semua setuju jika Smartboard ini digunakan sebagai satu alatan baru
untuk menggunakan alatan dan kaedah yang telah sedia ada? Kenapa?”
(Researcher: “Do you agree if the Smartboard is used as new instrument to replace the
conventional instruments and methods? Why?”)
Expert 1: “Boleh, nampak tadi dari dia punya cara tu ok la Cuma kadang-kadang dia takut ke
depan. Aaa.. tapi bagus you all punya approach maksudnya motivate dia, boleh gelak-gelak ye
kan. Rasa macam home la. Macam dia tak kesah…… Macam anak saya tanya lagi, even dah balik
rumah pun, ada lagi tak Ikon? Maknanya dia berasa seronok di situ.”
(Expert 1: “Sure, from what we have seen, the methods are okay. Just sometimes they are afraid
to go in front. Aaa…but your approach is really good, it means to motivate them, getting them to
laughing. Making them feel like they are in home. They didn’t mind… Just like my son who asked
to do it again, even after reaching home, he asked whether we will have another icon activity?
That proves that they are happy.”)
Satisfaction Transcription (cont)
Expert 4: “Kalau nak gantikan secara keseluruhan tu tak setujulah. Mungkin ada certain part yang
kita gunakan Smartboard untuk aktiviti apa-apa.”
(Expert 4: “I do not agree with the overall replacing method. Maybe there are certain parts that
we can use the Smartboard for any other activities”)
Expert 1: “Kalau sebagai satu alternative lain tu kita boleh buat ayat macam tu.”
(Expert 1: “If there is one other alternative, we can use that sentence”)
Expert 3: “Mungkin ia amat sesuai more kepada benda yang boleh menarik minat macam lepas
dalam kelas lepas cikgu mengajar ada penilaian, evaluation... Yang bersifat eksperimen pun boleh
sesuai. Sebab saya pernah tengoklah dulu kat sekolah menengah , sekolah bestari, bila cikgu
ni ajar kimia ke fizik, macam tu lah… Budak-budak memang sukalah bila buat eksperimen, tak
masuk lab, bila bahan tu campur dan tunjuk melalui Smartboard”
(Expert 3: "Perhaps it is more well suited to the things that would appeal like the last class
teacher to teach will gain assessment, evaluation ... The experimental nature shall be
appropriate. Because I had my experience when observed a high school, an elite school,
when the teachers that teaches chemical or physics, like that... The students are happy to do any
experiment, not in the lab, when the material is mixed and demonstrated by using the 21
Satisfaction Transcription (cont)
Expert 2: “Dia macam aktiviti untuk P&P dalam bilik darjah yang bersifat cooperative dan
collaborative yang melibatkan ramai orang….. Penyelidikan yang melihat kepada collaborative,
cooparative, all those yang communication more than one people ni..”
(Expert 2: It appeared like the P & P activities in the classroom that is cooperative and
collaborative in nature that involves many people ... A research to see the collaborative research,
cooperative, all those that communicate with more than one people…" )