Knowbility, Inc. Internship Report

Final Project

ANTH 4390

Anthropology at Work

Dr. Neill Hadder

Jason M. Hester

15 Oct 2009

Introduction

Prior to the summer of 2009, I began considering internship opportunities for anthropolo-

gy majors. With an express interest in cognitive science and the role of technology in society, I

began to look at usability research and the work of anthropologists within the field. Usability

engineers examine products and systems with end-users to ensure task efficiency and to improve

the productivity, ease-of-use, and satisfaction in an iterative testing and development environ-

ment. Web usability focuses on making websites simple, intuitive, and robust while user

centered design involves development that focuses on the needs of the end-user. After doing

extensive individual research and speaking with my internship advisor, I decided to apply at

Knowbility, inc. as an intern.

Knowbility is a non-profit 501(c)3 based out of Austin, Texas that advocates for web

accessibility. Its mission is to “support the independence of children and adults with disabilities

by promoting the use and improving the availability of accessible information technology. Our

goal is to create a barrier-free world of information technology so children, youth, and adults

with disabilities can fully participate in the information marketplace.” Knowbility accomplishes

its goal through a variety of programs geared toward research, training, and IT consulting

services. Accessibility Internet Rally (AIR) was the program that initially constituted Knowbili-

ty’s formation. Steve Geungrich, with the help of accessibility experts such as John Slatin,

started AIR in 1999 as an annual contest held in Austin that paired web developers and program-

mers with non-profit organizations, state agencies, and corporations. AIR helps these businesses

make their websites accessible to the disabled while improving the quality of their on-line

content.

Web accessibility empowers the lives of those with disabilities by granting access to

technological resources and accessibility remediation is the process by which IT experts, web

developers, and programmers convert electronic information resources into an accessible format

for users of assistive technologies (AT). The expansiveness of the internet and improved

assistive technologies have been empowering advances for persons with a wide range of

disabilities. Screen readers, refreshable Braille displays, and video captioning are just a few

examples of AT that have dramatically increased access to vital information and resources for the

disabled community.

Since Knowbility’s inception, several other programs have been introduced including

Assistive Technology, Strategies, Tools, Accommodations, and Resources (ATSTAR) and

AccessWorks. ATSTAR provides web-based assistive technology training models designed to

prepare instructional staff at the campus level to conduct assessments, collect data, and integrate

assistive technology into the instructional setting. AccessWorks provides consulting and

remediation services and employs many Texans with disabilities, giving them technology skills

and experience to establish good careers and achieve independence.

My interest in Knowbility was fostered by the increasing technological divide I noticed

while working in the IT community. As a previous electronics technician in the military and as a

tech support agent for an internet service provider, I was exposed to calls from all across the

nation concerning internet access, email, and website issues from a wide range of people of

diverse backgrounds. One thing I consistently noticed was that feedback from customers

actually using our services was inefficiently incorporated into new developments within the

organization. I would receive calls each day with customer recommendations, concerns, and

complaints for our IT services and website. When I would express these concerns to my

employer or offer solutions derived from customer feedback, I was met with resistance, and often

little to nothing was changed. This “digital divide” between the purveyors of technology and the

general populous became a growing point of concern. As an anthropology major, I was

interested in the process by which consumer feedback was integrated into company policy and

used in design anthropology. Through my anthropological coursework and independent research

I was introduced to design anthropologists such as Najko Jahn and Christina Wasson who

employ ethnographic methods in their usability studies. Their research also involved accessibili-

ty for people with disabilities and held the philosophy that designing for the extremes in human

variation is beneficial to all. Knowbility gave me an opportunity to explore the application of

these concepts in the workplace.

Interning  with  Knowbility

At Knowbility, the first thing I noticed about our organizational structure was that it

wasn’t hierarchical in the traditional sense. Our staff members, while mediated by the executive

director Sharron Rush, hold positions on more of an ad-hoc basis. Everyone “wears many hats”

and policy is shaped by the organization as a whole with input from each member’s respective

specialties; final approval is given by our executive director. This organizational construct, while

more loosely defined, allowed for policy changes and considerations to be taken into account

without excess bureaucracy. I was able to affect policy shaping in a more independent fashion

than most of my previous employment experiences and have been working with our business

development manager to increase our organizational efficiency and standardize our remediation

and testing methods.

As a research intern, I was in charge of developing new projects that would benefit both

the company and my individual needs as an anthropology intern. This task was much more

difficult than I could have imagined, but I learned much in the process. Over the course of

several months working part-time for Knowbility I came up with several ideas for usability

research projects, including an accessibility survey and user experience testing and modeling.

Some of my ideas never fully panned out, due to limited funding, time, and resources, but by

setting my sights high I was able to overcome limitations and won the respect of my colleagues.

My persistence to make a valuable contribution to web accessibility was commended, and I was

able to affect internal policies that will shape the future of Knowbility.

Working from the fundamentals up, I learned about the wide array of techniques used in

web accessibility. As I grew more familiar with the basics, document remediation work became

my primary responsibility. Document remediation primarily consists of organizing the structure

and layout of MS Word, PowerPoint, and PDF documents in order to enable accessibility by

various assistive technologies to disabled end-users. For instance, images that contain informa-

tion vital to a document’s content must be transcribed using alternate text fields to denote the

information contained within. Audio files must include text alternatives, video requires

captioning, and the layout and flow of a document must be setup so that people with visual

impairments, colorblindness, hearing impairment, mobility impairment, or any of a wide range of

disabilities can access the information. Screen reader programs such as Jaws® from Freedom

Scientific allow written text to be read out loud to users with visual impairment. Independent

keyboard access is a requirement for the mobility impaired and those who use single-switch or

sip and puff devices to navigate a document. Characters that are not recognized by screen

readers must be substituted, and color contrast must be sufficient for red-green colorblind

deficiencies such as my own. All the aspects of document remediation also enable the average

user to access the same information in a variety of formats, increasing the productivity of the

information contained within. Section 508 and WCAG standards for web accessibility provide

guidelines for making content accessible and robust, but most of the work is done by trial and

error and independent quality assurance with usability testing by disabled users (Section 508

adherence is a guideline for all federal agencies that produce or disseminate electronic resources

to provide comparable access to persons with disabilities while WCAG standards are internation-

ally recognized accessibility guidelines that are not enforced by federal law).

Among my many hats as a Knowbility intern, I have also re-written policy documents

concerning best practices for PDF remediations, and was privileged to write the Usability Test

Plan for a potential client. This document helped win us a sizable contract that may include

future in-depth usability studies as part of an overall accessibility policy for our client. As an

advocate for accessibility, I have also attended numerous Austin tech-lunch events and been

given speaking privileges to advocate for web accessibility.

A particular event that was a first-rate learning experience was my work with a Usability

Engineer on a cognitive walk-through for a local banking company. Cognitive walk-throughs are

generally conducted in the initial analysis of a design prototype and can provide beneficial

insight into the progress of basic web development. They can be conducted with usability and

accessibility experts alone or, ideally, with the focus group. While they are considered “discount

usability” techniques they should be part of an iterative development process. Aside from the

Non-Disclosure Agreement signed as a precursor to participation in this project, I can say that the

methods we used were similar to interview techniques used in ethnography.

Other experiences at Knowbility have been fruitful as well. When I arrived at

Knowbility, our Access Works program was in the process of being revamped. My initial

internship mentor wanted to include disabled veterans in the program. Together, we contacted

numerous veterans’ advocate groups including Disabled American Veterans (DAV), Paralyzed

Veterans of America (PVA), The Wounded Warrior Project, and VA hospitals within the Austin-

San Antonio corridor to recruit participants. Collectively, we were able to recruit 8 people with

disabilities, 6 document remediation specialists (including 2 veterans) and 2 blind Quality

Assurance specialists (user-experience testers). Together with our project manager, we trained

these new participants, developing a team of remediation experts to ensure the accessibility of

hundreds of government documents so far.

After several months of training and development of our Access Works program, our

contract consulting agency had us submit a new proposal for a potential client. The proposal

included a Usability Test Plan which I wrote based on my previous research in User Centered

Design. The test plan included provisions for the inclusion of persons with various disabilities,

summative and formative evaluations, and internal policy development within an iterative testing

framework. My background in anthropology helped me formulate a workable plan that included

heuristics, anthropological screening techniques, and context relevant factors to guide the testing

phases and analysis of a prototype. Understanding anthropological design methodology helped

me convince the prospective client of our ability to conduct effective analysis of qualitative and

quantitative data trends and come up with solutions to fit their needs. While I haven’t been able

to employ all of these methods yet, my formulation of the requirements helped us win the

contract. If they decide to include usability testing in any of their future development projects,

we will undoubtedly be well prepared to accommodate them.

Anthropology?

Anthropologists conduct ethnographic research in order to understand how society works

from both a micro and macrocosmic perspective; i.e. as a self-interested individual working

within a cultural system and as a member of the whole of a given social context. Conducting

ethnographic research allows the anthropologist to get at the deeper meaning in social interac-

tions through scientific inquiry, and make qualitative judgments based on the analysis. Anthro-

pologists routinely do geographic and historic research; collate databases of demographic

information; and use random sampling, participant observation, and interview techniques to

develop and test hypotheses about socio-cultural phenomena. Further, anthropologists use this

data to create explanatory theories.

Perhaps the most important quality an anthropologist brings to the table, however, is his/

her ability to constantly re-evaluate his/her contextual environment and adapt to or implement

change. Anthropologists study humanity because it intrigues them, partly because of the

subjective identification of themselves within their subjects and wholly for the pursuit of

empirical knowledge. Anthropologists’ holistic outlook on the world enables them to understand

that their preconceptions can be hindrances in an ever changing world.

Anthropologists understand that their knowledge is changing and they must create better,

more accurate models of the world around them to be able to explain why biology, society,

language, or cultures behave the way they do. As Rice and O’Brian state in the article, “Using

Science to Think Anthropologically”: If truth and proof are finite and non-changing, knowledge is changeable and fluid. Today’s knowledge is yesterday’s antiquated myth, and tomorrow’s knowledge will show that half of what we think is wrong. Scientists look for change in knowledge, and it is healthy to be skeptical about one’s own work as well as others.

This constant pursuit of understanding is what drives anthropologists and the work they

do, and in a manner directly relevant to usability design.

As Knowbility continues to strive for universal design, our methods for evaluating and

remediating information technology must include usability testing from a variety of perspectives.

Some contemporary usability professionals mentioned above provide insight into these methods

and the role of anthropology within the field. To understand the benefits anthropologists can

bring to user-centered design, it’s important to note some of the successful methods employed in

usability research that include ethnographic approaches. Three articles that explore some of

these practical implications of applied anthropology in interdisciplinary usability research are

Christina Wasson’s “Ethnography in the Field of Design,” Najko Jahn’s “Anthropological

Motivated Usability Evaluation,” and Faiola and Macdorman’s “The Influence of Holistic and

Analytic Cognitive Styles on Online Information Design.” These articles tie together some of

the methodology of cultural anthropology and usability research design.

Ethnography has been very popular among design firms in recent years, because it not

only investigates what consumers say they do, but what they actually do. The importance of a

theoretical approach requires the use of anthropologists to conduct self-reflexive research within

a heuristic device or theory. Self-reflexivity in research is a circular process that allows the

researcher insight into how their own biases and assumptions affect their theoretical perspectives.

In other words, self-reflexivity is an acknowledgement of the affects of the observer on the

observed and vice versa. Heuristic devices provide a common sense filter through which to base

the theoretical analysis of an ethnographic approach. Heuristics are the preliminary assumptions

and analyses that guide the research development process.

In the case of Lucy Suchman’s work at the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) the

group used ethnomethodology, an approach combining conversation analysis (a method for

identifying patterns in everyday social interactions) and activity theory derived from the Russian

psychologist Lev Vygotsky. A heuristic device named the “AEIOU framework”—which

interpreted and coded the observations of Activities, Environments, Interactions, Objects, and

Users—framed the two-pronged approach of conversation analysis and activity theory. Video-

taping was used extensively throughout the research at PARC while participant observation and

various interview techniques were also employed (Wasson 2000: 381-385).

Another research specialist doing a usability study on the IREON library database, Najko

Jahn, employed summative and formative evaluations in his research. Formative evaluations can

be used for future design improvements while summative evaluations are comparative. Jahn

describes a process in which formative and summative evaluations can be combined to work

together to elicit proposals to be compared. His methods also included having the participant

users think out loud while accessing material, as well as interview methods (Jahn: 2008:

610-612).

A study by Faiola and Macdorman illustrates the profound impact that culture has on

cognition and the way we see the world. Their research points psychological and cognitive

anthropological theories toward usability research and describes a study in which cognitive styles

were linked to enculturation. Through this explanatory theory, the authors develop a model for

web interface development using cultural cognitive design (CCD). Based on the idea that culture

shapes cognition, web design takes into account cultural cognitive styles. They rely on Vygot-

sky’s view that our perception of reality is a product of knowledge grounded in culture (Faoiola

and Macdorman 2008: 350-352).

These three case studies present some of the applications of the theories and methods of

cognitive science, cognitive anthropology, and usability research. The practical application

based on various cognitive, psychological, and heuristic theories as well as ethnographic

methods and experiments provide a point of demarcation for the productive discourse of the role

of anthropology within the field.

Usability  Testing  and  the  Web

The emergence of the internet and the subsequent information revolution has brought

about associated technologies that convey new insights into the future of education. Assistive

devices were developed to allow access to the vast resources of the internet to the disabled and

require us to reflect on the responsibilities inherent in their implementation. The appropriate

development and use of these new technologies not only enhances our human experience, but

deepens it.

What is User Centered Design (UCD) and how can it benefit from an interdisciplinary

approach that includes anthropology? How does universal access enhance usability and allow for

a system that is self-promoting? These questions are at the heart of an accessible design, which

strives to mitigate the affects of user marginalization in a technologically advanced society. It is

my intention to describe an approach to UCD that incorporates not only the guidelines for

accessible design, but a comprehensive usability study that incorporates anthropological

methods, which are essential in the case of e-learning. When education is the key to becoming

independent in a society that values self-sufficiency as well as personal and professional

development, universal access to the artifacts of e-learning is vital.

As diverse user groups, including the disabled, interact with e-learning and web interface

software, special accommodations that enable various distinct communication strategies must be

considered. It is possible to make these accommodations without changing the framework of a

given e-learning artifact by augmenting documents, video, and audio with accessible tools;

however, incorporating these considerations into the initial design process, instead of waiting to

retrofit accessibility once isolated problems are brought to developers’ attention, can create a

synergistic approach that is not only universally accessible, but also inclusively usable and

seamless in its integration.

What is WCAG and how does it pertain to accessibility? WCAG is the Web Content

Accessibility Guidelines developed by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Web Accessibili-

ty Initiative (WAI). It describes how to make web sites accessible for disabled and marginalized

user groups. ATAG is the Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines used by designers to create

web authoring software for accessible content. User Agent Accessibility Guidelines (UAAG)

explain how to make browsers and media accessible for disabled users. These formats help

ensure that websites adhere to laws pertaining to accessibility and avoid unintended conse-

quences of designing solely for the so-called “average” user.

WCAG 1.0 was released in 1999 and has been adopted as an international standard. The

requirements of WCAG 1.0 include the provisioning for alternate means of accessing online

information. The ability for users to access information from a variety of input devices creates

the need for a structure that encompasses orientation information, site maps, navigational bars,

etc., that can be accessed using auditory or visual cues independently or interdependently. The

guidelines used create a series of checkpoints to determine a web site’s conformance to accessi-

bility standards. These checkpoints provide feedback to the designer for modification of their

web sites to remove barriers to information for disabled user groups.

WCAG 2.0 is the revised version of earlier accessibility guidelines designed to encom-

pass a wider audience. This newer standard provides provisions to allow for less-technically-

inclined users to access the same information as technical experts. Newer developments in

technology have created a larger “digital-divide” amongst developers and users which WCAG

2.0 strives to mitigate by making the guidelines more precisely testable and easier to implement.

UAAG 1.0 is the standard set forth by the W3C web consortium that guides developers in

the design of software used to access the web such as browsers, media players, and messaging

tools. UAAG 1.0 compliance consists of documentation of accessibility features within the

programs and a variety of means for navigation—e.g. sequential navigation, direct navigation,

search bars, and structured navigation. Compatibility with multiple operating systems, assistive

interface devices, and plug-in compatibility is also essential for UAAG 1.0 compliance. While

UAAG is not practiced by all software developers, it is becoming increasingly main-stream as

the needs of disabled users are realized.

ATAG 1.0 is the guideline for accessible web authoring tools. Web authoring tools are

software programs that allow users to add, edit, and organize web content. They allow for the

conversion of documents, text, audio, and video into HTML, XHTML, XML, CSS, PHP,

JavaScript, Flash and other formats for compatible web site creation. The ATAG 1.0 guidelines

ensure that web authoring tools provide accessibility features as alternatives, such as text for

images, captioning for audio, and description of video to enable the disabled user to create and

manage web content (Brewer, 2004: 53).

The aforementioned accessibility guidelines are a step forward in making valuable

information available to diverse user groups, but they are only one aspect of user-centered

design. The processes used to determine web accessibility compliance only confront the

functional issues of compatibility and interoperability with web assistive devices. The currently

predominant method of running a web site through an adherence program to determine confor-

mance to these guidelines can guarantee the functional ability of access to the desired informa-

tion, but cannot fully describe the ways in which diverse user sets actually interface with these

systems in real-life situations. While WCAG and the guidelines set forth by the W3C provide

useful quantitative data for web accessibility design, a two-pronged approach that includes a

qualitative usability study along with a quantitative time-on-task functional evaluation may

prove more beneficial to website development. Using ethnographic methods to re-incorporate

empirical field data from the users themselves into WCAG will strengthen its efficacy by not

only making web sites and programs accessible to the disabled, but also usable.

WCAG 2.0 sets the standard for web accessibility but fails to effectively evaluate e-

learning tools, programs, and web-sites from a qualitative perspective when it comes to disabled

or marginalized user groups. Adhering to the standards is just one aspect of successful design.

The quality of the user’s experience must be considered when it comes to making electronic

modes of education universally viable, and it is in this context that a synergistic approach to

design research becomes feasible. By including experts in an interdisciplinary approach, along

with teachers and the disabled, important feedback and insight into the design process can be

rendered, eliminating the need for costly re-design later. Technical specialists are needed to

encode and create functional aspects of web and e-learning design, while disability experts,

pedagogical experts, and domain experts are needed, along with both unimpaired and impaired

teachers and students (who will be the ultimate end-users) ,for a successful approach to universal

access and user centered design.

This approach was initially espoused in “A Proposal Toward the Development of

Accessible E-learning Content by Human Involvement,” an integrated effort by DeMarisco,

Kimani, Mirabella, Norman, and Catarci. However, the emphatic importance of an ethnographer

to record and analyze empirical data from the set of end users was lacking. Withstanding this

particular deficiency, their methodology included Participatory Design (PD), which involves end

users as agents in the design process. PD includes contextual inquiry, work modeling, consolida-

tion, work redesign, user environment design, and mockup-tests. Also through user centered

design, personal learning strategies, different cognitive styles, cultural backgrounds, and

motivations were considered.

The inclusion of disabled users in the design process of e-learning programs and

websites, in addition to the compatible interface with accessibility devices, ensures the success or

failure of a given prototype. In the aforementioned proposal for the development of a user-

centered design approach, wrappers that adapt the underlying functional aspects of a program to

the needs of various disabilities are introduced. Wrappers are conceptual models that act to

duplicate strategies used by the disabled from multiple points of view. Wrappers that take into

account each type of disability or cognitive style can be used to map the functionality of an

underlying program that allows for preliminary usability testing by end-users. Wrappers can

then be mapped onto the underlying functional structure and tested for compatibility with the e-

learning program or website. This process of trying on different wrappers and extracting

empirical data from end-users trying to access the same information can allow the coding

requirements for accessible e-learning technology to be refined before final implementation and

a costly system overhaul is required. While learning modules and their functions make up the

core of e-learning software, wrappers encode the information to be utilized by the interface for

various input/output devices.

In a successful user-centered design approach, each developmental stage is assessed in an

intra-phase evaluation that tests for accessibility, usability, and functionality. WCAG compliance

is checked between each phase and further usability and functionality testing is done manually

through human inspection. Once the context mapping for wrapper development has been

completed and integrated within the e-learning program, and once participatory design and all

other preliminary methods have been exhausted, a summative evaluation should be administered.

The summative evaluation determines the effectiveness of the e-learning tools within the whole

of the system and the ability to deliver the information in a relative context for all users. This

determines the “effects with” the software as it pertains to the way learners engage with the

software aside from traditional learning and the “effects of the software” as it pertains to content

and understanding of the educational material presented (DeMarisco, Kimani, Mirabella,

Norman, and Catarci, 2006:150-169).

It is in the design of the conceptually modeled wrappers that ethnographic analysis can be

most useful. The ability to adapt research methods to determine the needs of diverse user-sets for

inclusion in wrapper development is especially relevant when unconventional interaction

paradigms are considered. For instance, a certain amount of self-reflexivity is required when

dealing with previously unrepresented user groups. An ethnographer’s ability to use inductive

approaches, formulate heuristic theories that are self-reflexive, and qualitatively evaluate the

theoretical foundations of their research allows for an inclusion of empirical data in a contextual-

ly relevant manner. In other words an ethnographer may hold a heuristic theory that the

functional needs of persons with acute sight impairment are similar to those with developmental

sight impairment. By gathering inductively the patterns in communication strategies used by

those with developmental impairment and using comparative analysis with non-impaired users,

the ethnographer can further deduce what strategies may or may not be applicable for the latter

group, given their developmental and cognitive style differences. The ethnographer can then test

his/her hypothesis with the acutely disabled focus group, resulting in empirical evidence for or

against his/her original stance. The ethnographer’s initial preconceptions would probably be

usefully transformed in this situation, as this holistic approach not only takes into account his/her

assumptions and biases, but also frames them in a contextually relevant way that allows for self-

reflexive evaluation. By using interviews, surveys, recordings, context relevant inquiry, and

participant observation within a testable theoretical framework, the ethnographer is better suited

to extract the patterns of behavior necessary for wrapper development and testing.

The methods for a user-centered design approach to e-learning incorporate accessibility,

usability, and functionality to enhance productivity and content richness. An ethnographer on the

team can be useful in obtaining and evaluating empirical data from end-users themselves, and

can be an integral part of the interdisciplinary approach of UCD. The knowledge gained through

these methods can increase a web site or e-learning system’s universal access while focusing on

the quality of the end-user experience. While the research may be expensive, it can help convey

the meaning of a design’s use to consumers who are increasingly separated by the technological

divide between technical experts and themselves. In this way, the methods of user/learner-

centered design may help self-promote a program, website, or informational system, while

enhancing its usability for both diverse and average user sets.

Conclusion

My background in anthropology has benefited my position here at Knowbility and given

me the resources to continue my career interests while working in a closely related field. Much

of my coursework at Texas State University was focused on the cultural and societal impacts of

science and technology. Classes such as the philosophy of technology, the philosophy of

science, archaeology, anthropological theory, field methods in cultural anthropology, logic, and

human speech have given me the tools necessary to begin a career in human factors research. At

Knowbility, I have used my anthropological background to develop marketing strategies,

interview program participants, setup surveys, reform internal policy, and consult development

professionals on the accessibility of their websites and the needs of their constituents. Knowl-

edge of web usability methods to enhance accessibility in a constantly changing field has helped

me advocate for their inclusion within our own programs and those of local developers working

within the community. Speaking with usability professionals, they were surprised when I

understood the methods used in their approach. When I first met usability engineer Jayne

Schurick, for example, she was working on a contract for a UAE based company and had been

using a heuristic framework to perform preliminary analysis of their site. The ability to have a

discussion on the applicability of a particular heuristic model enabled me to be included in

another research project of hers for a local banking institution, developing the GUI (Graphical

User Interface) of their ATM machines. My college education has helped develop my interests

in a manner that will be useful for the rest of my adult life. The ability to use critical thinking

skills based on a strong philosophical grounding, knowledge of history, and the social sciences

will continue to play an important role in decision making throughout my career.

While my internship exposed me to many new people and allowed me to develop my

own projects, it took perseverance and time to get things moving. Not everything went as

planned. My original internship mentor ended up taking another job offer and a project I was

working on was stalled for several months when one of our partners lost contact. In the non-

profit world much of our work is done on a volunteer basis, so advocating for your constituents

and rallying the masses is a constant struggle. Interns should be aware that it is important to

keep a positive attitude and not be afraid to ask what they can do to help. Internships can be

great networking opportunities, so it is important to leave the best impression no matter what job

you do. Personally, I have met the main players in web development and usability research in

the Austin community and plan to continue these relationships. While I learned many new skills

through my internship, I still have a long road to becoming a human factors expert, but through

perseverance and a willingness to learn, I have no doubt I can achieve my goals and build a

rewarding career.

Bibliography

Brewer, Judy. "Web Accessibility Highlights and Trends." ACM SIGCAPH Computers and the

Physically Handicapped 76 (2003): 15-16. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1036401.1036408

(accessed Apr 26, 2009).

This reference guide to WCAG guidelines set forth by the W3C gives a brief overview of

the domains relevant to content accessibility standards.

Faiola, Anthony and Karl MacDorman. "The Influence of Holistic and Analytic Cognitive Styles

on Online Information Design: Toward a Communication theory of cultural cognitive

design." Information, Communication, and Society 11, no. 3 (2008): 348-374.

Cognitive Cultural Design is introduced in a several case studies that incorporate

Hofstede and Vygotsky into a theoretical framework. The study uses Chinese and

American students in an in lab study and international participants in a web based study

to show how differences in cognitive style can affect the way diverse groups interface

with websites.

Jahn, Najko. "Anthropological Motivated Usability Evaluation: An exploration of IREON –

international relations and area studies gateway." Library Hi Tech 26, no. 4 (2008): 606-

621.

Jahn describes a multi-level approach in which evaluation of the interactions between

people, information resources, and technology can be assessed from a holistic anthropo-

logical point of view. The methodology of usability evaluation is broken down into three

subsets of purpose, user groups, and empirical data gathering methods.

De Marisco, Maria. "A Proposal Toward The Development of Accessible E-learning Content by

Human InvolvementUniversal Access in the Information Society 5. 2 (2006), 150-169,

http://www.springerlink.com/content/w8176092qr655955/fulltext.pdf. (accessed May 2,

2009).

The authors describe an interdisciplinary approach to a learner centered design that

includes accessibility and usability protocols. E-learning development is participated in

by the end-users, and a framework that consists of wrappers to encode data for various

learning domains and disabled users for integration onto the “core” of the e-learning

program. Intra-phase and summative evaluation is conducted and WCAG and usability

protocols are re-incorporated into the design process.

O'Brian,Robin. Thinking Anthroplogically: A Practical Guide for Students. 2nd ed. Using

Science to Think Anthroplogically. Phillip C. Salzman and Patricia C. Rice. Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Pearson, 2008.

An introduction to inductive and deductive science is given in this work. The author

described ways anthropologists from all disciplines use scientific thought. Hypothesis

are shown to be able to be proven false but never proven. Scientific thought is presented

as a process that is self-correcting and the process of data collection and analysis is

illustrated.

Wasson, Christina. "Ethnography in the Field of Design." Human Organization 59, no. 4 (2000):

377-388.

The author talks about her experiences working for E-Lab and the ethnographically

centered approach to design research. She claims that Computer Supported Cooperative

Work (CSCW) which deals with the way humans interact with software in the workplace

spawned the use of ethnography in design. Lucy Suchman’s work is used as a case study

to describe an ethnographic approach to design.