Special-education practitioners rated AdaptED Stories as strongly usable, with a mean SUS score of 86.8 corresponding to an A grade¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · design r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In a think-aloud usability study with seven autism practitioners, the system achieved a mean SUS score of 86.8, an A grade on established benchmarks. → Buyankhishig Enkhjargal 2026

Evidence¶

Buyankhishig Enkhjargal 2026¶

Buyankhishig Enkhjargal, Himanshi Lalwani, Hanan Salam. (2026). AI-Assisted Social Story Intervention for Special Education: The Design of AdaptED Stories. arXiv preprint. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.24245 doi:10.48550/arxiv.2609.24245

q2 · i? · design · r3

Summative usability study (Phase 3) with seven UAE-based special-education practitioners using think-aloud tasks and the SUS. The article reports that "The mean SUS score was 86.8" and that overall ease of use received a mean rating of 5.00. No effect size is printed.

"The mean SUS score was 86.8, which corresponds to an "A" grade on established benchmarks, suggesting strong perceived usability among this group of practitioners."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• After design adjustments, the LAD achieved good–excellent usability (SUS M = 4.13, equal to 78.25%) — related
• In early prototype testing, AI-generated visuals were the main barrier to real-world readiness, rated lower than text and narration — related
• The Bloom classification UI shows low perceived workload and high usability in a 50-participant user study — related
• The FACTRIA-aware chatbot received good usability ratings (SUS 70.84) and high usefulness ratings from most of the 11 stakeholders — related
• Adults rated the LLM-powered iCub storytelling system as usable, with a total SUS score of 76.70 indicating good product usability — related
• System usability was rated low in both conditions, with no significant difference between them — related
• The system receives a good average usability rating (SUS 69.7, grade B) but with wide individual variation, which the authors take to suggest UI consistency issues — related
• Experimental-group participants rated TibetCPR highly usable (SUS = 84.3, an Excellent rating), with the highest items on voluntary engagement and independent use — related
• Practitioners perceived the profile-driven workflow as reducing Social Story preparation burden — related