CAL Planning & Scheduling

Research Process

Objectives

• To gain a deeper understanding of how and why Cal students use the existing scheduling and planning systems and interfaces through conducting usability tests on the existing tools.
• To evaluate a potential redesign of the course scheduling and planning tools of the Calcentral portal by validating assumptions about Cal students experience of scheduling and planning courses.

Phase 1: Discount Usability Study

To gain a deeper understanding of Cal student’s course scheduling and planning behaviors, we needed to understand the role existing campus tools have on their experience. To do this, we recruited 3 UC Berkeley students for a one-hour discount usability study. From comments and thoughts shared by those participants, we gleaned common behavioral patterns as follows:

Phase 2: Survey

Based on the tools that participants reported in the discount usability study, a short survey was created to assess Cal student’s opinions on the usability of those tools and the likelihood to recommend. The responses were summarized into the following results:

Phase 3: Contextual Inquiry

As all students must meet with academic advisors when they plan and schedule courses, we thought that conducting contextual inquiries with both students and academic advisors would allow us to dig deeper into the course planning and scheduling processes actually happen.

Insights from academic advisors

• Different techniques (e.g., Excel spreadsheet, laminated paper and paper print-outs) had been developed to support students’ course planning and scheduling.
• Concerns that the available tools were not providing accurate information, since they were explicitly told by the system developer that the system (i.e., CalCentral) sometimes didn’t function properly.
• Ideal tools were described as Visual, Flexible, and Familiar.

Insights from students

• The old system Berkeley Time was valued more than the existing Berkeley Academic Guide as the former system offered usable, legible and friendly course searching functions.
• Spreadsheets either with paper or Excel were used to restore and keep track of the course plans and schedules.
• Synchronized into personal Google calendar to ensure no overlapping between courses and other events.

Phase 4: Synthesizing With Affinity Diagram & User Journey Map

Based on the insights from the contextual inquiries, the affinity diagram was employed to further identify clusters and patterns. A bunch of common clusters was found between the student group and advisor group, which meant that both groups experienced some similar problems when they scheduled and planned courses with the current system.

With the comprehensive insights synthesis, we mapped out a user journey to capture a holistic experience of Cal students during their interaction with the existing tools to schedule and plan their courses. Specifically, this user journey map documented student feelings, points and delights. Also, we created a layer - opportunity of the user journey map to generate ideas for the redesign and improvement.

Phase 5: Cognitive Walkthrough With Paper Prototyping

As one of the objectives was to evaluate potential redesign of the existing course scheduling and planning tools, the paper prototyping was created to visualize and test the ideas drawn from the user research.

All group members performed a cognitive walkthrough of the paper prototypes. Specifically, one person did the walkthrough, one reminded them of questions and goals, and one person took notes. Each person performed the same 5 tasks, but with details changed to keep the activity constrained but allow for some variety in details.

Insights from cognitive walkthroughs

• Redesigning parts of the CalCentral portal is good and useful, but challenging: in some ways it feels as though larger changes are needed, so sticking to our initial scope was a challenge.
• A easy one-click transition between tasks pertaining to scheduling, planning, and enrolling was discovered.