W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org > August 2022

Re: survey for research sub group

From: Rain Michaels <rainb@google.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 15:56:44 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJO5Huudmc+T8fhYPT2Zn=YkWu9wYq89WCekQ6PwJau8kpRVrA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julie Rawe <jrawe@understood.org>
Cc: Lisa Seeman <lisa1seeman@gmail.com>, public-cognitive-a11y-tf <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>
Hi Lisa,

Thank you for sharing this draft. I agree with Julie's recommendations. A
few additional suggestions:

*Introduction paragraph 1*

Thank you for taking some of your time to help us learn about how you are
> using - or might use - the base research documents  from the Cognitive
> Accessibility Task Force (COGA).

Consider shortening to:

Thank you for taking time to help us learn about how you are using - or
> might use - research documents from the Cognitive Accessibility Task Force
> (COGA).

*Introduction paragraph 1, list*

Consider adding the dates to the list of documents following this opening

*Introduction survey length*

>    - You will have 2 average size pages of questions.
> This list item may be really difficult to understand. What does "average"
mean in this context? Perhaps,

   - This survey is 2 pages long, and each page has about 8 questions. Most
   questions are optional.

*Question 5: What topics did you / will you use?*

This seems like a very difficult question to answer as a long form
question. Suggest making it a checklist, select all that apply, and listing
the topics. An "other" option can be included as well. This will help with
both memory, and also ensuring that the responses we get are more
consistent and easier to parse.

*Questions 6-8: Importance and does it matter*

We have found that the multiple choice grid questions are very difficult
for both users of assistive technology, and also for users with visual
processing challenges. I suggest breaking each of the sub questions within
these out into separate questions, or finding another way that doesn't
require the grid and multiple selections to ask for the information.

On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 12:12 PM Julie Rawe <jrawe@understood.org> wrote:

> Hi, Lisa, see below for suggested changes to 6 of the questions, plus a
> suggestion for an additional question, thanks:
> *1. How might you use this research?*
> Suggested rewording: How have you used or might you use this research?
> *2. Which documents have you / may you use (select all that apply) *
> Suggested rewording: Which documents have you used or may you use? (Select
> all that apply)
> *3. How important was this research to you?*
> Suggested rewording: How useful was this research to you or how likely is
> this research to be important to you?
> FYI, I'm suggesting:
>    - Changing "important" to "useful" so the question better aligns with
>    the answers and also so the question sounds less similar to the next
>    question ("How important is it to you that this research be updated?")
>    - Expanding the question so it can work for folks who have not yet
>    used the research
> *4. How important is it to you, that this research is updated?*
> I suggest rewording the question, including the year each resource was
> published, and adding a follow-up question:
> How important is it to you [REMOVE COMMA] to update this research?
>    - User research (2015)
>    - Issue papers (2021)
>    - Gap analysis (2018)
> If you answered very important or somewhat important, how often do you
> think this research needs to be updated:
>    - Once a year
>    - Once every three years
>    - Once every five years
>    - Other:
> *5. Are you aware of Making Content Usable
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/coga-usable/> or interested in any other additional
> documents from this group?*
> I suggest either focusing this question solely on awareness of Making
> Content Usable or else specifying what "other additional documents from
> this group" folks might be interested in because:
>    - It's hard to tell what documents are on this wiki page besides three
>    prominent links to parts of Making Content Usable and links to "More Useful
>    Documents" that this survey has already been asking about in detail—user
>    research, issue papers, and gap analysis
>    - I suggest you specify the "other additional documents" in the list
>    of responses or else skip that part so people don't get frustrated looking
>    at a confusing wiki page
>    - Also, this survey mentions Making Content high up in the intro, so
>    survey takers may have heard about the resource for the first time when
>    taking this survey
> Suggested rewording that focuses on Content Usable:
> Before taking this survey, were you aware of our 2021 resource, Making
> Content Usable <https://www.w3.org/TR/coga-usable/>?
>    - Yes, I was aware of and I use / want to use Making Content Usable
>    - Yes, I was aware of but I don't use / want to use Making Content
>    Usable
>    - Yes, I use / want to use the coga wiki for resources  (Such as
>    https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/Main_Page)
>    - No, I was not aware of Making Content Usable until this survey
> *6. Lastly, we are seeking a diverse group...*
> Nothing happens when I answer yes to this question. Should the survey
> provide additional questions? Or do you want to change the wording so folks
> who answer yes will expect some sort of follow-up by email, etc, where they
> will be asked these additional questions?
> On Sun, Aug 14, 2022 at 11:09 AM Lisa Seeman <lisa1seeman@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Hi Folks
>> I made a draft survey for the research plan subgroup.
>> See docs.google.com/forms/
>> <https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1-VdpaYq0qLk0bZYryimWb-VL_tlklX-D1Uvtd2btzrw/edit>
>> Are we happy with it? what changes are needed to send it out.
>> All the best
>> Lisa
> --
> Julie Rawe
> Special Projects Editor, Editorial Content, Understood
> E: jrawe@understood.org
> Pronounced Joo-lee Raw (like 'uncooked')
> She | her
Received on Wednesday, 17 August 2022 19:57:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 17 August 2022 19:57:36 UTC