Usability Evaluation of a Digital Textbook E-Reader
Turning usability issues into actionable design improvements
Goal
Evaluate the ease of use of Gutenberg Technology’s digital textbook platform, identify usability problems, and discover opportunities for improvement.
Duration
4 weeks
Team
Claire Paisley
Sisira Mondreti
Lanting Ko
Skills
Moderated Usability Testing
Tools
Figma
Zoom
Panelfox
Role
My Role
I collaborated with a team to evaluate the usability of Gutenberg Technology’s e-reader. I was responsible for planning and conducting the usability testing based on the project scope. This included designing the task flows, facilitating moderated sessions, and collecting both behavioral and verbal feedback. After analyzing the data, I synthesized key findings and provided actionable recommendations to address the usability issues we identified.
Why?
Evaluate a Beta-Stage E-Reader Experience
Gutenberg Technology is a French-American company that provides software solutions for educational publishers and institutions. One of its core products is a web-based e-reader that serves over 6 million active users, primarily college students. The company is currently undergoing a major redesign of its e-reader platform. As the new version remains in beta and under active development, Gutenberg Technology partnered with our team to conduct a usability testing study. The purpose of this collaboration was to evaluate the platform’s functionality, usability, and discoverability.
How?
Understand Client Needs
We began with a kickoff meeting to clarify Gutenberg Technology’s goals and expectations for the usability testing. During this session, we asked key questions to better understand the scope of the project, including their target audience, the testing materials, and the specific aspects of the e-reader they wanted to evaluate. This helped us ensure that our testing plan was closely aligned with their priorities.
How?
Define the Target Audience
After consulting with stakeholders from Gutenberg Technology, we defined our target users as undergraduate students currently studying in the United States. We recruited a total of six participants to evaluate the beta version of the e-reader through moderated usability testing.
Participants Demographic
Occupation: Undergraduate students
Residence: United States.
Age: 18 ~ 27
Gender: 5 Female & 1 Male
How?
The Process That Shaped Our Findings
Screener Survey
Consent Form
Usability Test
Debrief &
Analysis
How?
How We Tested
We conducted moderated usability testing using the Think-Aloud protocol to evaluate the beta version of Gutenberg Technology’s redesigned e-reader, as well as the new text-to-speech (TTS) feature presented in a Figma prototype.
During each session, participants verbalized their thoughts and actions while completing the tasks. Each session lasted 30–45 minutes. A total of six sessions were conducted — five remotely via Zoom, and one in person. All sessions were recorded and analyzed to identify behavioral patterns across participants.
Feature Tested
Each participant was asked to complete 5 tasks covering core features:
Highlighting (both saving and deleting)
Note-taking
Page navigation
Bookmarking
Read-aloud (text-to-speech)
Overall Finding
Clear and Intuitive, with Space to Improve
Overall, participants responded very positively, describing the product as intuitive and easy to use. Most were able to navigate the interface and complete key tasks smoothly.
5/6
Participants found the bookmark feature quickly and intuitively with little to no issues
1.63
easy
difficult
The average participant found the reading experience easy while using the e-reader
1.58
easy
difficult
The average participant found returning to information easy while using the e-reader
While feedback was overwhelmingly positive, a few usability issues did emerge across multiple sessions.
Finding
Participants felt lost when attempting to remove a highlight
When asked to delete a highlight, 4 out of 6 participants initially navigated to the main content area of the page in search of a delete or trash icon, rather than accessing the side notebook where the delete function is currently located.
“...If this textbook were in front of me, I'd like to be able to highlight, whatever I'm studying in the sentence.” -Participant 5
Recommendation
Add a delete button where participants were expecting to remove their highlight
We recommend adding a delete option directly within the highlight dropdown menu. This would align more closely with user expectations and reduce friction in managing highlights.
Finding
Participants confused with the page navigation
3 out of 6 Participants confused the Back/Next Page buttons with the Undo/Redo buttons. They tried to click on the undo button, but ended up finding that the button would take them back to previous action rather than previous page.
“It's not a 'back' page. It just takes me to the last page I visited.” - Participant 3
“Didn't understand how to turn page initially. Thought that the bottom arrows (previous/next page button) look like next chapter or a jump ahead.” - Participant 4
Recommendation
Relocate undo/redo button and add page number
To reduce the confusion of the page turning button, we suggested to:
Move the undo and redo button to the top-left corner to avoid confusion.
Add the page number instead of page title.
This adjustment will help increase the discoverability of the page turning buttons for better page navigation experience.
Finding
Unclear structure of units and chapters
When testing the table of contents, all 6 participants found themselves spending extra time trying to find a particular chapter as the order of contents in the table was confusing to them.
“...would like to see the chapters be a little more visible, the units seemed irrelevant and confusing” - Participant 3
Recommendation
Reorganize chapter and unit Structure
To overcome this confusion, we recommend adjusting the chapters and units order as well as make the labeling clearer to the reader in the table of contents so that users are more aware and can visibly see where exactly the content is listed.
Reflection
Next Steps
We have handed our recommendations to Gutenberg Technology and received positive feedback from the client. However, several important areas remain to be evaluated. Below are the recommended next steps to further enhance the product’s usability and accessibility.
Cross-Platform Testing
Survey results showed that participants often use mobile phones to read digital textbooks. Testing the mobile e-reader is a key next step to ensure cross-platform usability.
Accessibility testing
A participant with a cognitive or neurological impairment highlighted the need for better keyboard navigation and simpler task flows to reduce mental effort.
More Diverse Participants
Consider conducting follow-up testing with non-native English speakers to evaluate language accessibility and cross-cultural usability.
© 2025 by Lanting Ko. All rights reserved.
© 2025 by Lanting Ko. All rights reserved.
© 2025 by Lanting Ko. All rights reserved.
Usability Evaluation of a Digital Textbook E-Reader
Turning usability issues into actionable design improvements
Goal
Evaluate the ease of use of Gutenberg Technology’s digital textbook platform, identify usability problems, and discover opportunities for improvement.
Duration
4 weeks
Team
Claire Paisley
Sisira Mondreti
Lanting Ko
Skills
Moderated Usability Testing
Tools
Figma
Zoom
Panelfox
Goal
Evaluate the ease of use of Gutenberg Technology’s digital textbook platform, identify usability problems, and discover opportunities for improvement.
Duration
4 weeks
Team
Claire Paisley
Sisira Mondreti
Lanting Ko
Skills
Moderated Usability Testing
Tools
Figma
Zoom
Panelfox
Role
My Role
I collaborated with a team to evaluate the usability of Gutenberg Technology’s e-reader. I was responsible for planning and conducting the usability testing based on the project scope. This included designing the task flows, facilitating moderated sessions, and collecting both behavioral and verbal feedback. After analyzing the data, I synthesized key findings and provided actionable recommendations to address the usability issues we identified.
Why?
Evaluate a Beta-Stage E-Reader Experience
Gutenberg Technology is a French-American company that provides software solutions for educational publishers and institutions. One of its core products is a web-based e-reader that serves over 6 million active users, primarily college students. The company is currently undergoing a major redesign of its e-reader platform. As the new version remains in beta and under active development, Gutenberg Technology partnered with our team to conduct a usability testing study. The purpose of this collaboration was to evaluate the platform’s functionality, usability, and discoverability.
How?
Define the Target Audience
After consulting with stakeholders from Gutenberg Technology, we defined our target users as undergraduate students currently studying in the United States. We recruited a total of six participants to evaluate the beta version of the e-reader through moderated usability testing.
Participants Demographic
Occupation: Undergraduate students
Residence: United States.
Age: 18 ~ 27
Gender: 5 Female & 1 Male
How?
The Process That Shaped Our Findings
Screener Survey
Consent Form
Usability Test
Debrief &
Analysis
How?
How We Tested
We conducted moderated usability testing using the Think-Aloud protocol to evaluate the beta version of Gutenberg Technology’s redesigned e-reader, as well as the new text-to-speech (TTS) feature presented in a Figma prototype.
During each session, participants verbalized their thoughts and actions while completing the tasks. Each session lasted 30–45 minutes. A total of six sessions were conducted — five remotely via Zoom, and one in person. All sessions were recorded and analyzed to identify behavioral patterns across participants.
Feature Tested
Each participant was asked to complete 5 tasks covering core features:
Highlighting (both saving and deleting)
Note-taking
Page navigation
Bookmarking
Read-aloud (text-to-speech)
Reflection
Next Steps
We have handed our recommendations to Gutenberg Technology and received positive feedback from the client. However, several important areas remain to be evaluated. Below are the recommended next steps to further enhance the product’s usability and accessibility.
Cross-Platform Testing
Survey results showed that participants often use mobile phones to read digital textbooks. Testing the mobile e-reader is a key next step to ensure cross-platform usability.
Accessibility testing
A participant with a cognitive or neurological impairment highlighted the need for better keyboard navigation and simpler task flows to reduce mental effort.
More Diverse Participants
Consider conducting follow-up testing with non-native English speakers to evaluate language accessibility and cross-cultural usability.
Finding
Participants felt lost when attempting to remove a highlight
When asked to delete a highlight, 4 out of 6 participants initially navigated to the main content area of the page in search of a delete or trash icon, rather than accessing the side notebook where the delete function is currently located.
“...If this textbook were in front of me, I'd like to be able to highlight, whatever I'm studying in the sentence.” -Participant 5
Recommendation
Add a delete button where participants were expecting to remove their highlight
We recommend adding a delete option directly within the highlight dropdown menu. This would align more closely with user expectations and reduce friction in managing highlights.
Finding
Participants confused with the page navigation
3 out of 6 Participants confused the Back/Next Page buttons with the Undo/Redo buttons. They tried to click on the undo button, but ended up finding that the button would take them back to previous action rather than previous page.
“It's not a 'back' page. It just takes me to the last page I visited.” - Participant 3
“Didn't understand how to turn page initially. Thought that the bottom arrows (previous/next page button) look like next chapter or a jump ahead.” - Participant 4
Recommendation
Relocate undo/redo button and add page number
To reduce the confusion of the page turning button, we suggested to:
Move the undo and redo button to the top-left corner to avoid confusion.
Add the page number instead of page title.
This adjustment will help increase the discoverability of the page turning buttons for better page navigation experience.
Finding
Unclear structure of units and chapters
When testing the table of contents, all 6 participants found themselves spending extra time trying to find a particular chapter as the order of contents in the table was confusing to them.
“...would like to see the chapters be a little more visible, the units seemed irrelevant and confusing” - Participant 3
Recommendation
Reorganize chapter and unit Structure
To overcome this confusion, we recommend adjusting the chapters and units order as well as make the labeling clearer to the reader in the table of contents so that users are more aware and can visibly see where exactly the content is listed.
Overall Finding
Clear and Intuitive, with Space to Improve
Overall, participants responded very positively, describing the product as intuitive and easy to use. Most were able to navigate the interface and complete key tasks smoothly.
5/6
Participants found the bookmark feature quickly and intuitively with little to no issues
1.63
easy
difficult
The average participant found the reading experience easy while using the e-reader
1.58
easy
difficult
The average participant found returning to information easy while using the e-reader
While feedback was overwhelmingly positive, a few usability issues did emerge across multiple sessions.
How?
Understand Client Needs
We began with a kickoff meeting to clarify Gutenberg Technology’s goals and expectations for the usability testing. During this session, we asked key questions to better understand the scope of the project, including their target audience, the testing materials, and the specific aspects of the e-reader they wanted to evaluate. This helped us ensure that our testing plan was closely aligned with their priorities.