Penerapan Design Thinking untuk Pengembangan Prototipe Website Komunitas Akademik Is Society UNJANI

Irma Santikarama; Meisya Putri Utami

doi:10.54914/jtt.v12i1.2671

Penulis

Irma Santikarama Universitas Jenderal Achmad Yani
Meisya Putri Utami Universitas Jenderal Achmad Yani

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54914/jtt.v12i1.2671

Kata Kunci:

Design Thinking, Maze, System Usability Scale, Usability Testing, Website Komunitas Akademik

Abstrak

Prototipe website komunitas IS Society saat ini belum mampu memfasilitasi interaksi lintas angkatan maupun dokumentasi akademik secara optimal. Keterbatasan fungsional ini menciptakan kesenjangan signifikan dalam pemenuhan kebutuhan pengguna. Oleh karena itu, penelitian ini menerapkan metodologi Design Thinking untuk melakukan redesign dan pengembangan prototipe website komunitas akademik IS Society. Proses Design Thinking menggabungkan temuan kualitatif melalui observasi dan wawancara semi-terstruktur dan data kuantitatif melalui pengujian langsung. Prototipe diuji oleh 40 partisipan menggunakan platform Maze untuk mengukur performa tugas serta kuesioner System Usability Scale untuk menilai persepsi kemudahan penggunaan. Hasil pengujian menunjukkan rata-rata direct success sebesar 94,25% pada delapan skenario tugas, dengan dua skenario mencapai tingkat keberhasilan 100%, dan skor SUS rata-rata 87,06 dengan kategori Excellent. Temuan ini menunjukkan bahwa prototipe memiliki beban kognitif yang rendah serta navigasi yang efisien. Namun, masih ditemukan permasalahan pada visual hierarchy dan visibilitas elemen kontrol yang menyebabkan terjadinya misclick pada alur diskusi dan profil. Rekomendasi perbaikan meliputi penegasan tampilan tombol utama agar lebih mudah dikenali, penyederhanaan nama dan simbol menu, serta penambahan panduan awal singkat bagi pengguna baru untuk mempermudah proses penggunaan pertama kali. Secara keseluruhan, penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa penerapan Design Thinking efektif dalam mengarahkan proses iterasi berbasis data untuk pengembangan situs komunitas akademik dan dapat menjadi blueprint evaluasi yang dapat direplikasi pada konteks serupa.

Unduhan

Data unduhan belum tersedia.

Referensi

W. Kayanja, M. Kyambade, and T. Kiggundu, “Exploring digital transformation in higher education setting: the shift to fully automated and paperless systems,” Cogent Educ., vol. 12, no. 1, p., 2025, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2025.2489800.

I. L. Petre, D. A. Hristache, M. M. Dobrescu, A. Constantin, E. C. Dumitra, and C. G. Radu, “Digital Communication in Higher Education Settings: A Pilot Study on Students’ Behavioural Trends,” Sustain., vol. 17, no. 7, pp. 1–12, 2025, doi: 10.3390/su17073038.

X. Xin, S. Tianlei, and L. Chao, “Analyzing Students’ Perceptions of Information Communication Channels as E-Learning Platforms in Higher Education,” Prof. la Inf., vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 1–14, 2025, doi: 10.3145/epi.2024.ene.0605.

G. Tazhenova, N. Mikhaylova, and B. Turgunbayeva, “Digital media in informal learning activities,” Educ. Inf. Technol., vol. 29, no. 16, pp. 21673–21690, Nov. 2024, doi: 10.1007/s10639-024-12687-y.

J. F. E. van Calis, J. Naaldenberg, A. W. C. van der Cruijsen, M. C. J. Koks-Leensen, G. L. Leusink, and K. E. Bevelander, “Inclusive digital platforms: Designing for and with users with mild intellectual disabilities or low literacy skills,” Comput. Hum. Behav. Reports, vol. 17, no. October 2024, p. 100617, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.chbr.2025.100617.

F. Ezeh, O. Adanigbo, U. Ugbaja et al., “Systematic Review of User Experience Optimization in Multi-Channel Digital Payment Platform Design,” Gulf J al. Adv. Bus. Res., vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 271–282, 2023, doi: 10.51594/gjabr.v1i3.135.

M. C. R. da Costa, “the Importance of User Interface Design in Real Estate Platforms,” Int. Seven J. Multidiscip., vol. 1, no. 1, 2024, doi: 10.56238/isevmjv1n1-018.

R. Alsaeed and M. Mahdi Hassan, “Common Usability Issues on University’s Websites,” no. c, pp. 67–72, 2022.

Zulfiandri, S. N. Putri, and A. Subiyakto, “Evaluating User Interface of A Transport Application Using Usability Evaluation Methods,” in 2021 9th International Conference on Cyber and IT Service Management (CITSM), Sep. 2021, pp. 1–7, doi: 10.1109/CITSM52892.2021.9589020.

S. Kazemi, G. Liebchen, and D. Cetinkaya, “A Survey on the Usability and User Experience of the Open Community Web Portals,” Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. (including Subser. Lect. Notes Artif. Intell. Lect. Notes Bioinformatics), vol. 13516 LNCS, no. June 2025, pp. 409–423, 2022, doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-17615-9_28.

A. Minet, D. Wentzel, S. Raff, and J. Garbas, “Design thinking in physical and virtual environments: Conceptual foundations, qualitative analysis, and practical implications,” Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, vol. 207, no. July, p. 123596, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123596.

R. Verganti, C. Dell’Era, and K. S. Swan, “Design thinking: Critical analysis and future evolution,” J. Prod. Innov. Manag., vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 603–622, Nov. 2021, doi: 10.1111/jpim.12610.

R. Razzouk and V. Shute, “What Is Design Thinking and Why Is It Important?,” Rev. Educ. Res., vol. 82, no. 3, pp. 330–348, Sep. 2012, doi: 10.3102/0034654312457429.

C. Nakata and J. Hwang, “Design thinking for innovation: Composition, consequence, and contingency,” J. Bus. Res., vol. 118, pp. 117–128, Sep. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.06.038.

C. B. Muñoz, N. H. Nanclares, L. R. Murillo Zamorano, and J. Á. L. Sánchez, “Design Thinking in Higher Education,” Gamification Des. Think. High. Educ., no. November, pp. 37–61, 2023, doi: 10.4324/9781032675558-3.

P. Y. Pratiwi and N. P. E. Suchahyani, “Implementation of Design Thinking Method and Usability Testing in the Design of a Scholarship Information System,” J. Pendidik. Teknol. dan Kejuru., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 133–144, 2024, doi: 10.23887/jptkundiksha.v21i2.81688.

Y. Sürmelioğlu and M. Erdem, “Design, implementation, and evaluation of an online instructional process to enhance teachers’ design thinking skills,” Humanit. Soc. Sci. Commun., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–13, 2025, doi: 10.1057/s41599-025-05131-0.

Y. Deng and W. Liu, “Board 72: How to Develop Engineering Students as Design Thinkers: A Systematic Review of Design Thinking Implementations in Engineering Education,” doi: 10.18260/1-2--42918.

L. F. Alvarado, “Design thinking as an active teaching methodology in higher education: a systematic review,” Front. Educ., vol. 10, Mar. 2025, doi: 10.3389/feduc.2025.1462938.

T. Li and Z. Zhan, “A Systematic Review on Design Thinking Integrated Learning in K-12 Education,” Appl. Sci., vol. 12, no. 16, p. 8077, Aug. 2022, doi: 10.3390/app12168077.

S. Magistretti et al., “Unpacking experimentation in design thinking: Contributions to innovation performance and the moderating role of digital technologies,” Technovation, vol. 141, no. March 2024, p. 103187, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2025.103187.

J. Sauro and J. R. Lewis, “Quantifying user research,” in Quantifying the User Experience, Elsevier, 2016, pp. 9–18.

J. Auernhammer and B. Roth, “The origin and evolution of Stanford University’s design thinking: From product design to design thinking in innovation management,” J. Prod. Innov. Manag., vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 623–644, 2021, doi: 10.1111/jpim.12594.

S. Panke, “Design Thinking in Education: Perspectives, Opportunities and Challenges,” Open Educ. Stud., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 281–306, Jan. 2019, doi: 10.1515/edu-2019-0022.

B. Mostefai, T. Boutefara, N. Bousbia, A. Balla, S. Dhelim, and A. Hammia, “Enhancing user experience in e-learning systems: A new user-centric RESTful web services approach,” Comput. Hum. Behav. Reports, vol. 18, p. 100643, May 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.chbr.2025.100643.

M. Hyzy et al., “System Usability Scale Benchmarking for Digital Health Apps: Meta-analysis,” JMIR mHealth uHealth, vol. 10, no. 8, p. e37290, Aug. 2022, doi: 10.2196/37290.

A. Bangor, P. Kortum, and J. Miller, “Determining what individual SUS scores mean; adding an adjective rating,” J. usability Stud., vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 114–23, 2009.