Design Recommendations for a Child-Oriented Christian Education App Based on Usability Evidence
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35870/ijsecs.v6i1.6592Keywords:
Mobile Learning Application, Children-Computer Interaction, Child-Oriented Usability, Usability, Religious Education TechnologyAbstract
Technology has become a routine part of children's learning, including the transmission of religious values through mobile applications. This study evaluates the usability of the Superbook Kids Bible App — a child-oriented Christian learning application — using Nielsen's five usability dimensions: learnability, efficiency, memorability, errors, and satisfaction. A descriptive quantitative survey was conducted with 100 respondents selected through purposive sampling, with sample size determined by Slovin's formula at a 10 percent margin of error. A 25-item questionnaire was validated using Pearson item-total correlations, yielding validity coefficients ranging from 0.598 to 0.824, while reliability testing confirmed good internal consistency. Descriptive results indicate moderate overall usability, with mean scores of 22.40 for learnability, 8.12 for efficiency, 8.65 for memorability, 17.76 for errors, and 14.91 for satisfaction. Category analysis identifies efficiency as the primary bottleneck, with 46 percent of respondents in the low category, followed by learnability at 33 percent, while errors were predominantly moderate at 60 percent. Based on these findings, the study proposes evidence-based design priorities: performance improvements to reduce loading and response delays, streamlined navigation to cut unnecessary steps, and guided onboarding with child-appropriate prompts to support early-stage learnability, alongside clearer feedback and error recovery mechanisms. Future research should combine task-based observation with usage analytics, test interventions such as gamification and personalization, and apply longitudinal designs to examine sustained engagement and learning outcomes in faith-based mobile learning.
Downloads
References
Ahmed, S. K. (2024). How to choose a sampling technique and determine sample size for research: A simplified guide for researchers. Oral Oncology Reports, 12, 100662. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oor.2024.100662
Allotodang, F., Tolle, H., & Dengen, N. (2021). Design and evaluation of Bible learning application using elements of user experience. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 12(5), 422–425. https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2021.0120552
Almanasreh, E., Moles, R., & Chen, T. F. (2019). Evaluation of methods used for estimating content validity. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 15(2), 214–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2018.03.066
Andrade, C. (2021). The inconvenient truth about convenience and purposive samples. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, 43(1), 86–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0253717620977000
Antonelli, K., Steverson, A., & Cmar, J. L. (2023). Usability of 4to24: A transition application for parents of students with visual impairments. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 117(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X221150239
Azahari, N. A., Said, W. M., Hassan, S. N., & Goje, K. (2025). A comparative heuristic assessment of Muslim Pro and Sajda: Evaluating user-centered Islamic mobile applications. Journal of Hadith Studies, 10(2), 181–195. https://doi.org/10.33102/johs.v10i2.401
Bibi, S. H., Munaf, R. M., Bawany, N. Z., Shamim, A., & Saleem, Z. (2020). Usability evaluation of Islamic learning mobile applications. Elkawnie: Journal of Islamic Science and Technology, 6(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.22373/ekw.v6i1.5920
Campbell, S., Greenwood, M., Prior, S., Shearer, T., Walkem, K., Young, S., & Walker, K. (2020). Purposive sampling: Complex or simple? Research case examples. Journal of Research in Nursing, 25(8), 652–661. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987120927206
Cash, P., Isaksson, O., Maier, A., & Summers, J. (2022). Sampling in design research: Eight key considerations. Design Studies, 78, 101077. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.101077
Casidy, R., Phau, I., & Lwin, M. (2016). The role of religious leaders on digital piracy attitude and intention. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 32, 244–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.04.006
Christanto, H. J., Dewi, C., Sutresno, S. A., & Silalahi, A. D. (2024). Analyzing the use of Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer and Artificial Intelligence. Revue d'Intelligence Artificielle, 38(4), 1297–1304. https://doi.org/10.18280/ria.380423
Christanto, H. J., & Sediyono, E. (2020). Analisa tingkat usability berdasarkan Human Computer Interaction (HCI) untuk sistem pemesanan tiket online kereta api. Jurnal Sistem Informasi Bisnis, 10(2), 163–172. https://doi.org/10.21456/vol10iss2pp1163-172
Christanto, H. J., Sutresno, S. A., Denny, A., & Dewi, C. (2023). Usability analysis of human computer interaction in Google Classroom and Microsoft Teams. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, 101(16), 6425–6436.
Christanto, H. J., Sutresno, S. A., Singgalen, Y. A., & Dewi, C. (2024). Analyzing benefits of online train ticket reservation app using technology acceptance. Ingénierie des Systèmes d'Information, 29(1), 107–115. https://doi.org/10.18280/isi.290112
El-Asam, A., Katz, A., Street, C., Nazar, N. M., & Livanou, M. (2021). Children's services for the digital age: A qualitative study into current procedures and online risks among service users. Children and Youth Services Review, 122, 105872. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105872
Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2015). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11
Graham, A., Powell, M., Taylor, N., Anderson, D., & Fitzgerald, R. (2013). Ethical research involving children. UNICEF Office of Research – Innocenti.
Hagen, M. H., Cruzes, D. S., Jaccheri, L., & Fails, J. A. (2023). Evaluating digital creativity support for children: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 38, 100603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2023.100603
Hiuredhy, D. K., Christanto, H. J., Christine, C., & Sutresno, S. A. (2024). Exploration of modernity: Worship reservation system at Rose of Sharon Church Salatiga utilizing Flutter framework. Journal of Information Systems and Informatics, 6(1), 136–152. https://doi.org/10.51519/journalisi.v6i1.650
Ibrahim, A., Al-Rajab, M., Hamid, K., Aqeel, M., Muneer, S., Parveen, M., & Saleem, M. (2023). Usability evaluation of kids' learning apps. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Business Analytics for Technology and Security (ICBATS 2023). Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICBATS57792.2023.10111473
Itzhak, N. B., Franki, I., Jansen, B., Kostkova, K., Wagemans, J., & Ortibus, E. (2023). Usability and user experience of an individualized and adaptive game-based therapy for children with cerebral visual impairment. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 35, 100551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2022.100551
Kakavand, Z., Shirehjini, A. A., Moghaddam, M. G., & Shirmohammadi, S. (2023). Child-home interaction: Design and usability evaluation of a game-based end-user development for children. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 37, 100594. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2023.100594
Kooijmans, R., Langdon, P. E., & Moonen, X. (2022). Assisting children and youth with completing self-report instruments introduces bias: A mixed-method study that includes children and young people's views. Methods in Psychology, 7, 100102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.metip.2022.100102
Lehnert, F. K., Niess, J., Lallemand, C., Markopoulos, P., Fischbach, A., & Koenig, V. (2022). Child–computer interaction: From a systematic review towards an integrated understanding of interaction design methods for children. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 32, 100398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.100398
Lehnert, F., Doublet, S., & Sim, G. (2025). Designing usability/user experience heuristics to evaluate e-assessments administered to children. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 92, 103933. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csi.2024.103933
Li, M., Lv, Y., Pu, Y., & Wu, M. (2025). Design and evaluation of children's education interactive learning system based on human computer interaction technology. Scientific Reports, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-90800-y
Madadizadeh, F., & Bahariniya, S. (2025). Tutorial on internal consistency assessment by Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega. Perioperative Care and Operating Room Management, 41, 100568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pcorm.2025.100568
Malkewitz, C. P., Schwall, P., Meesters, C., & Hardt, J. (2023). Estimating reliability: A comparison of Cronbach's α, McDonald's ωt and the greatest lower bound. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 7(1), 100368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2022.100368
Mavish, S., Christanto, H. J., & Sutresno, S. A. (2024). Analisis dan redesign aplikasi M-Paspor dengan metode design thinking untuk peningkatan usability dan pengalaman pengguna. Journal of Information System Research (JOSH), 5(4), 947–958. https://doi.org/10.47065/josh.v5i4.5447
Mertala, P., López-Pernas, S., Vartiainen, H., Saqr, M., & Tedre, M. (2024). Digital natives in the scientific literature: A topic modeling approach. Computers in Human Behavior, 152, 108076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.108076
Myers, L. J., & Arterberry, M. E. (2022). Digital media and children under 3 years of age. Infant Behavior and Development, 66, 101677.
Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability engineering. Academic Press.
Nielsen, J. (2005). Usability for the masses. Journal of Usability Studies, 1, 2–3. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:63275098
Pal, D., & Vanijja, V. (2020). Perceived usability evaluation of Microsoft Teams as an online learning platform during COVID-19 using system usability scale and technology acceptance model in India. Children and Youth Services Review, 119, 105535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105535
Phillips, S. M., Summerbell, C., Hobbs, M., Hesketh, K. R., Saxena, S., Muir, C., & Hillier-Brown, F. C. (2021). A systematic review of the validity, reliability, and feasibility of measurement tools used to assess the physical activity and sedentary behaviour of pre-school aged children. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-021-01132-9
Ridwan, A. (2025, November 25). Data on Indonesian students using mobile phones, laptops, and the internet in 2025. Databoks Katadata. https://databoks.katadata.co.id/en/technology-telecommunications/statistics/69251fd00425f/data-on-indonesian-students-using-mobile-phones-laptops-and-the-internet-in-2025
Superbook Kids Bible App [Mobile application]. (2025). The Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN). https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=air.cbn.superbook.bible.app.android&hl=en
Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach's alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1273–1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2
Thompson, P. (2013). The digital natives as learners: Technology use patterns and approaches to learning. Computers & Education, 65, 12–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.022
Vasalou, A., & Gauthier, A. (2023). The role of CCI in supporting children's engagement with environmental sustainability at a time of climate crisis. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 38, 100605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2023.100605
Downloads
Published
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Henoch Juli Christanto
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Copyright Retention and Open Access License
Authors retain copyright of their work and grant the journal non-exclusive right of first publication under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
This license allows unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
2. Rights Granted Under CC BY 4.0
Under this license, readers are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, including commercial use
- No additional restrictions — the licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as license terms are followed
3. Attribution Requirements
All uses must include:
- Proper citation of the original work
- Link to the Creative Commons license
- Indication if changes were made to the original work
- No suggestion that the licensor endorses the user or their use
4. Additional Distribution Rights
Authors may:
- Deposit the published version in institutional repositories
- Share through academic social networks
- Include in books, monographs, or other publications
- Post on personal or institutional websites
Requirement: All additional distributions must maintain the CC BY 4.0 license and proper attribution.
5. Self-Archiving and Pre-Print Sharing
Authors are encouraged to:
- Share pre-prints and post-prints online
- Deposit in subject-specific repositories (e.g., arXiv, bioRxiv)
- Engage in scholarly communication throughout the publication process
6. Open Access Commitment
This journal provides immediate open access to all content, supporting the global exchange of knowledge without financial, legal, or technical barriers.
