PGA Co-Design Meeting Notes: 2015-02-13

Attendees

Anastasia Cheetham
Kate Katz
Mari Langas
Kathy McKoy
Jess Mitchell
Emily Moore
Madeleine Rothberg
Kirsten Schroeder
Rich Schwertdfegger
Sepideh Shahi
Shari Trewin

Agenda/Notes

Deliverables:

First technical implementation: due this weekend. Will be provided to NIDRR later today. An explanation of what we have implemented.
Anastasia sending out an email today with the working prototype.

Action items

Kate & Cynthia

Follow up with Whitney about the Anywhere Ballot project - technical implementation?
Ask Sheney about Juan Gilbert, Climpson. Accessible voting: Prime three.
Ask Jim about senior setting. Do we have access for testing? Can stakeholders make any recommendations?
Create a recommendation about which setting to build for in this task and send to the group.

Anastasia and Dana

Sending link for working demo. yay!
Add design options for use to “opt out” of setting a preference
Which preferences would this apply to?

Discussion:

How do we record non-preference?

** Suggestion - ask, “do you want to set this preference.” Then allow user to skip those screens.

*If they say, “I don’t care” about font size? - should we reduce the size? It seems like yes.

What if the user selects no-preference…
Since we are starting with larger size
Tech usually saves “No preference”
Could we add a checkbox - that
Can we make the I don’t care option is the default… then if they skip it it’s recorded as a non reply.
A user who doesn’t care could say “no thanks”
User test the wording of the statement.
Rather than
“I don’t have trouble reading text?”

Can one of the options be “use the default”?

Is a two-step option an option? - a verification. Do you want to be able to make visual adjustments? -- right now everything is set to very large, would you like to be able to reduce or adjust the font size?

**Having a web-page that would be appropriate** -- the ability to support preview. The context adjusted the page. Preview would be helpful… then if they select “I don’t care” - then they see the preview, and they see that this doesn’t make sense to them. “Preview button”? flip to a preview and flip back?

**This may lead to refinements… first discovery is about first - and then refinements would need to be implemented. -- would be good to see preview.

In the next few weeks: Start thinking about the ecosystem of tools.

Criteria Discussion:

Emily: What is the most challenging? How are we defining that?

Voting is challenge around security, it ends up exploring significant technical issues… but there are fewer preference that can be selected based on the constraints in that setting. Is what we might learn there applicable to other settings?

Assessment: Covers a lot of preference, but it

-- if we could build up following activities… but we know that for this task we need more

Senior setting runs the gamut, but the tasks that people are trying to define are different for each person.

But would be a place to include lots of perform of different combinations of preferences and devices.

We could identify some popular applications for Seniors to uses: Email, face-time, mostly tablet, which doesn’t fit as well.

We haven’t eliminated tablets as a possibility.

From a tech perspective, tablets are in.

We should not rule out the senior setting because of tablets.

Perhaps senior approach - OER might overlap, -- invite the possible digital literacy.

Do we have access to enough seniors?? - Ask, JIM????

Shari’s group age 20 - 60: Adult rehabilitation center - could do user testing for OER setting, Voting setting - they have a broad range of needs

Voting setting:
It’s narrowly scope in the wrong area:

but technical challenges are big, but prefernce settings are small.

An area with broader set of preference, might teach us more

Senior setting:
A lot of diversity of people, diversity of literacy levels, diversity of desired

Draw users from both application areas for one setting- ask seniors to engage with OER

(Perfect!)