Author: kmanshahia

What I did last week:

Last week, I worked on a new set of team commitments alongside a task board. I also had a meeting with the instructor + the client for feedback.

What I’m going to do this week:

This weekend, specifically on the weekend, I am going to finish the LoFi wireframe and have it ready to present by next week. I also need to wrap up usability reports.

Any roadblocks:

Team communication can still use some work – otherwise, everything is fine.

What was my role?

Observer: Cesaria

Observations I made during the testing:

• In the beginning the maker was quite confused on what to do with each piece as she was unfamiliar with the terminology
• The more description the maker got from the instructor the easier it got for them to put the pieces together
• As the test progressed the maker got more and more comfortable with the terminology and started working faster as it became more intuitive for her.
• The instructor started breaking down the instructions to a level that the maker could understand so it’s easier for her to find each piece and put them together.
• Intuitiveness grew because the instructor shaped He’s instructions to the level that the maker could understand.

Observations made about my role in the test:

• My role was basically a stand by that looks at all the interactions and how they progress with time. 
• As the observer my role became more prevalent in the beginning and end of the test as i was able to see how efficiency improved when the maker and instructor started to understand each other’s terminology
• I was able to see through visuals and out loud thoughts what the maker was feeling and thinking.

Observations made about the testing process:

• The testing process is quite progressive especially for someone that is new to the test item itself.
• The process involves both the instructor and the shaper being in the same level of understanding to make it flow more efficiently.
• The process involved a lot of trial and error in the beginning because the terminology that the instructor knew was not the same as the maker’s terminology. As it progressed they became more synced  and flowed better.

---

Lego Usability Test Session

What was my role?

Instructor: Kunwar

Observations I made during the testing:

• Everything was fresh for the maker in the beginning therefore it was quite confusing as to which piece was the one the facilitator was referring to.
• Through repetition the maker understood how to put certain pieces together and the orientation of those pieces.
• However, the maker still struggled to know what they were working on until the piece or segment was completed.

Observations made about my role in the test:

• Have to be very specific in terms of how to place pieces, the orientation and rotation of them.
• Be specific! I realized that naming pieces differently each from each other allowed the maker to work concisely. I chose certain characteristics from the pieces and named them those. Such as slope, cylinder, etc.
• Learning the names of the pieces helped quite a bit.
• Even though I had to be specific; I also had to simplify my language. There are many English speakers who are non-native. Therefore, it was important to reiterate my wording if it didn’t make sense to the maker.

Observations made about the testing process:

• The testing setup worked quite well. The participants followed their respective roles effectively which allowed the process to be efficient. The instructor was able to give clear and concise instructions which in turn allowed the maker to be efficient and work at a fast pace; the observer tracked these actions and made notes. The biggest observation from this test was that vague or non-direct instructions can affect the maker’s efficiency; which proves that being very specific and clear allows users to understand their tasks with clarity.

---

Lego Usability Test Session

What was my role?

Maker: Bruna Guarizo

Observations I made during the testing:

The main difficulty during the testing was finding the right way to describe the pieces so everyone could understand them, considering participants’ different backgrounds and main languages.  

Observations made about my role in the test:

As an international student, my main language is Portuguese, I so foundnd the testing kind of difficult because I did not know a few words used by the Instructor. However, it was a good opportunity to learn some words and definitions, and since I understood it for the first time it was easier to understand the rest of the instructions.

Observations made about the testing process:

The testing process was simple and straight forward. Kunwar, the instructor, gave verbally all the necessary instructions to build the train, describing the pieces and how they should be positioned. He had some difficulty describing the “weird” pieces, but since he got it, I, as the maker, could also figure out what he was saying. 

I, the maker, don’t have English as my main language, so because of that, I had some problems understanding the descriptions since I did not know a few words that he used to describe the pieces. However, after I understood it for the first time, it was easier to finish it. Also, I was allowed to ask questions, so I could confirm if I was taking the correct piece and its position.

While the train was being built, Cesaria, the observer, was taking some notes about the whole process until the end of it. 

At the end, we discover that there was two extra pieces left, that we are not sure why they were there.