At the time of publication, "A Method of Improving Library Information Literacy Teaching With Usability Testing Data" by Catherine Baird and Tiffany Soares (Weave, 2018, Vol. 1, No. 8, DOI 10.3998/weave.12535642.0001.802) contained a sentence stating that it had been published under a CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license. This contradicted the CC BY 3.0 license that was actually applied to the published piece. As of December 2025, the inaccurate statement has been removed.

In this study, I applied the User Experience Questionnaire Short Version and the Visual Aesthetics of Website Inventory: Short Version to assess and improve the user experience of four online information literacy tutorials. I compared non-gamified tutorials with revised tutorials that incorporated user feedback improvements and gamification elements. The subsequent versions provided a more positive user experience. With a larger participant pool, overall UEQ-S mean values indicated neutral user experiences for three tutorials, while one showed a positive user experience. Given university students’ familiarity with digital technology, neutral user experience results are reasonable, considering the comprehensive academic content of these tutorials. The UEQ-S and VisAWI-S were valuable for developing information literacy tutorials to provide an improved user experience.

In 2020, Weave published my research article, “Structuring and Supporting UX Work in Academic Libraries” (https://doi.org/10.3998/weave.12535642.0003.202). In it, I examined various ways that academic libraries structure and support user experience (UX) work, and I identified some structures and supports that seemed to have a positive impact on both users and UX workers. Two years after applying those findings to restructure my own position, I did not feel I was having a positive impact. I wondered if I had misunderstood or misrepresented my research participants. I decided to check in with some of them to see where I might have gone wrong.

While much of the literature regarding usability testing in libraries focuses on library websites, this article describes an approach that evaluates the usability of learning artifacts, such as learning objects and print materials, as well as learning experiences. In three case studies, we describe our approach to testing these materials and experiences, the results and improvements we made, and the lessons we learned that have informed our approach. We argue that librarians should incorporate usability testing into instruction, from testing learning objects in development to testing complex learning activities and print materials. This approach to usability testing and evaluation will give educators an evidence-based way to develop more effective learning materials and experiences, making them better for our learners.

This paper was refereed by Weave's peer reviewers. Usability testing is a commonplace practice in many academic libraries, but the data produced during the course of usability testing have many more stories to tell if given the chance. Not only can the data help us improve our users’ online experience as they engage with our website and search tools, but it can tell us about how our students search and research, and what motivates those choices. That kind of data can guide our information literacy practices to be even more successful. This article describes the methodology used to analyze usability testing data for insights into information literacy teaching under the auspice of an IRB-approved study. It concludes that usability testing data can be analyzed and re-used to help bridge gaps and make connections between different library departments and roles and to motivate change in teaching practices that are informed by observations of local user behavior. Please see Correction Notice issued in December 2025: 10.3998/weaveux.9161