The purpose of this research was to develop essential tools to guide the ‘Children’s online contents
designing,’ and verify its compatibility. Interface Design is important essential to be evaluated from
the ‘Children’s on-line contents designing’, which is mainly focused on Children Education. Up to now,
most of the software and websites designed for Children’s Education was mainly evaluated on its
contents. Therefore this research was done to include characteristics of its Communication Media, which
directly affects children’s education, into the Interface Design Evaluation.
The following are the process of the research and its result.
First, I developed a tentative plan by reviewers of literatures and existing early childhood educational
software evaluation and children’s website evaluations. Also, after interviewing professionals and after
two examinations of the Delphi research I developed a tentative plan for an 'Evaluation Tool for Interface
Designing of Children’s On-line Contents' containing 3 categories, 9 sub categories, 59 items. The 3
categories are divided in to ‘Compatibility of Supporting Action’, ‘Convenience of Using Structure’ and
‘Efficiency of Expressional Media’. The 9 sub categories are, ‘self-direction of action’, ‘supporting of
learning objectives’ and ‘Compatibility of technique’ in Compatibility of Supporting Action’,
‘Consistency’, ‘Navigation’, and ‘Supporting User’ in ‘Convenience of Using Structure’ and ‘Shape of
Screen Composition’ and ‘Function of Visual Elements’, of ‘Interest of Multimedia Elements’ in
‘Efficiency of Expressional Media’.
Secondly, to understand the compatibility of 'Evaluation Tool for Interface Desining of Children’s
On-line Contents' I proceeded with a third examination of the Delphi research and verified its
reasonability, reliability, and satisfactory.
In the third research, the final evaluation tool was applied to evaluation real contents and asked the
panels and developer as directional evaluator of the evaluation tool who were involved in the first two
examinations to answer our survey of its compatibility. Their answers were the following. To verify
the 'content validity' we analyzed each item's distributions of answers, averages and standard deviations,
The purpose of this research was to develop essential tools to guide the ‘Children’s online contents
designing,’ and verify its compatibility. Interface Design is important essential to be evaluated from
the ‘Children’s on-line contents designing’, which is mainly focused on Children Education. Up to now,
most of the software and websites designed for Children’s Education was mainly evaluated on its
contents. Therefore this research was done to include characteristics of its Communication Media, which
directly affects children’s education, into the Interface Design Evaluation.
The following are the process of the research and its result.
First, I developed a tentative plan by reviewers of literatures and existing early childhood educational
software evaluation and children’s website evaluations. Also, after interviewing professionals and after
two examinations of the Delphi research I developed a tentative plan for an 'Evaluation Tool for Interface
Designing of Children’s On-line Contents' containing 3 categories, 9 sub categories, 59 items. The 3
categories are divided in to ‘Compatibility of Supporting Action’, ‘Convenience of Using Structure’ and
‘Efficiency of Expressional Media’. The 9 sub categories are, ‘self-direction of action’, ‘supporting of
learning objectives’ and ‘Compatibility of technique’ in Compatibility of Supporting Action’,
‘Consistency’, ‘Navigation’, and ‘Supporting User’ in ‘Convenience of Using Structure’ and ‘Shape of
Screen Composition’ and ‘Function of Visual Elements’, of ‘Interest of Multimedia Elements’ in
‘Efficiency of Expressional Media’.
Secondly, to understand the compatibility of 'Evaluation Tool for Interface Desining of Children’s
On-line Contents' I proceeded with a third examination of the Delphi research and verified its
reasonability, reliability, and satisfactory.
In the third research, the final evaluation tool was applied to evaluation real contents and asked the
panels and developer as directional evaluator of the evaluation tool who were involved in the first two
examinations to answer our survey of its compatibility. Their answers were the following. To verify
the 'content validity' we analyzed each item's distributions of answers, averages and standard deviations,