Usability testing

[Marco Pesenti Gritti]

On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 4:23 PM, Carol Lerche <cafl at msbit.com> wrote:
> Your reference  argues not to start with usability tests before doing a
> design.  This is not what I suggested, since sugar as a design is largely
> complete at this point.  The article also. dismisses usability testing as
> worthless (despite backing and filling a bit toward the end).  I don't
> agree.  However, I assume from the supplied reference that you are stating
> that there hasn't been usability testing of sugar.  This is unfortunate.  I
> think it has real problems, some of which could be fixed through careful
> observation of its use by its target community in the context in which it is
> intended, namely classrooms with relatively low adult-student ratios.  This
> is a matter of improving the affordances of the design.  Simply asserting
> that any problems can be overcome by learning how doesn't seem responsive.

Carol,

if you are suggesting to use usability testing as a tool to improve
Sugar, I'm totally with you. As far as I know we have done only
sporadic testing so far, but we are working to fix that issue.

I had the impression you proposed to use usability testing as a way to
objectively declare Sugar as good or as bad design (I might have been
biased by another discussion going on at the same time). And ihmo that
would be a misuse of the tool, as the reference I linked asserts.

Marco