When the first prototype was ready a first user evaluation was performed. Before the verification test phase began, intense expert and laboratory tests took place. The purpose of the evaluation was to test the functionality and usability of the first prototype of FASTY. Not only the prediction was evaluated, but also the interface of the system into which it is intergtrated.
The prototype was tested by 20 voluntary test users: five from each of the involved language areas. They all had various kinds of physically or linguistically disabilities. The test users recieved FASTY for eight weeks, starting in April 2003 and used FASTY for their every-day typing and communication tasks. The tests started with version 1.02.05 and were continued with the subsequent releases of the FASTY prototype.
All relevant events, such as keystrokes made by the user, selection events, changes in parameter settings etc. were written to a log file. The result of the evaluation was partly based on these log files and partly on a questionnaire that the users were asked to fill in.
The hardware keyboards were not tested by the corresponding user site but only at FTB.
During the verification phase, a special password protected web site was provided, to give users and the user partners the possibility to retrieve the latest full versions and patches of PT1. A Discussion Board was also established for the users to discuss with other users about FASTY.
The log files were calculated using the keystroke saving rate (KSR) formula. KSR is the percentage number of keystrokes that a user saves by using a word predictor to type, compared to the total number of keystrokes that are required to generate the same text without a predictor. The averaged user statistics over the different test weeks was 11.24 KSR.
The users think that it is easy to use the system and that the functions seem to be well integrated. Nevertheless, it seems that the opinions are divided concering the use the system in every day life.
The opinions are divided about the adaptation of the system but most of the users think the personal adaptation is well supported by the system. A majority of the users thinks that the different functions and settings are clearly arranged in the menus, the vocabulary easy to understand and the support of a technical unnecessary. On the other hand, they think that te system is unnecessarily complex. For the next investigation, we will have to emphasize on theses three points in order to make it sure that the statements are well understood.
Because few people have answered these two questions, we will not analyse. These documentations were not completely finished at that time.
The system seems fun to use even though the users do not feel confident in using it. For the training part, they approve that they didn't have to learn a lot of things before using it and that lots of people would learn to use it quickly. Even if the opinions about the inconsistency of the system are divided, they think that it is not cumbersome to use Fasty. The users' opinions are divided concerning the fact that FASTY can improve the quality of their text and their text generation rate.