EVALUATION OF THREE EPORTFOLIO SITES

The University of Colorado Boulder was looking to adopt a campus wide ePortfolio program for students to use for academic, professional, and artistic means. We evaluated three different ePortfolios for ease, beauty, and accessibility.

BACKGROUND:

As online portfolios increase in popularity, we were tasked with identifying an ePortfolio tool for campus-wide adoption at the University of Colorado Boulder. We conducted usability studies for the  following ePortfolio tools:

CHALK & WIRE

CANVAS

DIGICATION

MY ROLE:

• Assist in writing the usability study script 
• Observe in usability tests
• Conduct usability tests 
• Analyze findings

APPROACH:

A user experience study was conducted with five student participants, we asked the participants to complete four tasks in all three ePortfolios: 

• Create a blank online portfolio
• Develop customized resume page
• Ddd content to the ePortfolio
• Share ePortfolio with the public

After completing each task, we asked the participants to rate their experience on a 1 to 5 scale; 1 being very difficult and 5 being very easy. The participants were then asked to answer a 10-item survey after completing all of the tasks in each ePortfolio. The survey was used to calculate a system usability scale (SUS) score for each of the three ePortfolio tools.

FINDINGS:

Our data analysis was informed by both the SUS score and our observations with how the participants interacted with each ePortfolio tool. 

Based on the data we collected we knew that Chalk & Wire provided the most frustrating experience, and as a result we recommended that it should not be considered for campus wide adoption. Our data did not exclusively determine whether Canvas or Digication provided a better user experience. Both ePortfolios had their own challenges which would need to be addressed through adequate documentation, resources, training, and support but they met minimal acceptable user requirements.

Our data is summarised in the tables and figures below: