MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296700420 · doi:10.18280/isi.270407

User-Centered/User Experience Uc/Ux Design Thinking Approach for Designing a University Information Management System

2022· article· en· W4296700420 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIngénierie des systèmes d information · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPersona Design and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman–computer interactionUsabilityUser interfaceComputer scienceUser experience designUSableLearnabilityInterface (matter)User-centered designUser interface designMultimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

University Management Information Systems (UMIS) are a very essential part of a school’s ecosystem. Trying to build a functional UMIS is no longer a serious issue, these days as students interact with this system to perform tasks such as course registration, school fee payment, etc., the ease at which they do these activities is extremely important, any error or confusing experience they come in contact with can make the process dreadful for these users and demotivate them. This study would be centered on designing the User Interface (UI) and improving the UX of University Management Information Systems for web-based interfaces. User-Centered Design processes and system design thinking methodology were employed to solve the problem. Questionnaires were used to obtain the users' pain points as it relates to the existing UMIS in their schools, the responses were analyzed to understand the users’ pain and issues they face with their current UMIS and then decipher the right features to create a more usable interface. User personas and wireframes were used to make sense of the data obtained from user research. Figma, a visual design and prototyping tool was used for the prototype and interface design. The newly created interfaces were subjected to user testing using a platform called Maze. Users were able to interact with the platform and then answer certain questions as it relates to the developed system. Test data was used to measure usability parameters such as efficiency, effectiveness, learnability, ease of use and simplicity. From the testing phase, the developed system has a System Usability Score (SUS) of 87, it shows that users enjoyed using the system and could navigate through a platform they are interacting with for the first time, with little to no help. it was discovered that users prefer a simpler, responsive, and more interactive interface. Also, users were able to successfully complete tasks even though it is an interface they had never interacted with before. This study would address the usability issues students face while interacting with the UMIS platform provided for them by their institutions and also proposed a responsive and user-centered design which if implemented would improve students engagement on the platform and also reduce the constant problems that may arise from using the UMIS platform.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.794
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.008
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it