1. Sedef Gavaz Web phase two: Presentation to the Web Strategy Group University of Aberdeen │ Information Architecture Review 26 th January 2011 Rachel Rennie & Sedef Gavaz

2. Contents 1.Project Overview 2.Executive summary 3.Methodology 4.Findings 5.Recommendations

3. Project overview

4. Tasks completed Kick off PID meeting Stakeholder Interviews Over 2 days plus phone interviews Site audit Web Persona Workshop Develop personas Library Project Current site and Competitor Review (x 2) Requirements gathering workshop with Library Develop Library IA and functionality wishlist Presentation to key stakeholders and library University Information Architecture Card sort exercise Websort Analysis & development of IA Present IA & recommendations - levels 1,2 IA workshop (levels 3,4) IA Workshop IA refinement and development for lower levels Wireframes Wireframe workshop Develop wireframe Presentation of static wireframes Create low-fidelity clickable wireframes (up to 10) User testing Usability testing current site versus new wireframe recommendations over 2 days Final recommendations Present Final IA and wireframes to key stakeholders Final IA and wireframes Presentations to the University

5. Key project task timeline Initial stakeholder interviews July 2010 Workshop and develop Personas August 2010 Library review & IA development August 2010 Card sort, Websort October 2010 IA Workshop, Wireframe Workshop October 2010 Develop static & dynamic wireframes November 2010 User Testing December 2010 Collate findings January 2011 Presentation of final IA, findings & refinements January 2011 Project sign off 4 th February 2011

6. Executive summary

7. We have run usability sessions with 10 potential website visitors, who were all web savvy and who had been exposed to a number of university websites. Users felt that the current site was sometimes difficult to navigate. Generally, visitors commented that they found the visual design appealing. Upon reflection a significant majority of the test participants preferred the user journeys available through the new wireframes. They were able to complete key tasks around - find a course, access course details and locate a college of interest, with ease. There are further refinements to several sections of the site. Users felt that these small changes would further positively improve the website experience.

8. Methodology and participants

9. Proven methods – quotes Add quotes from industry people...

10. Methodology 10 potential website visitors were interviewed in 60 minute sessions A structured test script was used to prompt tasks that focused on courses, expertise, research and teaching along with the findability, navigation, accessibility and overall appeal Morae video recordings were made of users and their interactions

11. Participants summary profile Demographics: majority were male and the age range was 17-32 Experience online: users were all very experienced Life stage: ranged from considering universities for undergraduate/post graduate study to researchers and potential business collaborators

12. Who we’ve spoken to Test participantType of userNameSexAge 1 Research User Harry M 30 2 Business User Greg M 29 3 Research User William M 27 4Prospective Postgraduate (International) Damilola M 24 5 Business User Emmanouil M 32 6 Prospective Postgraduate Charlotte F 28 7 Prospective Undergraduate Afzol M 17 8 Prospective Undergraduate Henry M 17 9 Prospective Postgraduate (International) Muhammad M 24 10 Prospective Undergraduate NAME F 17

13. Key tasks for test participants 1.Apply online 2.Find a entrance criteria for course 3.Find a research group and find research about e.g. energy 4.Find an academic/expert 5.Donate to the University 6.Phone number of the e.g. French department 7.Find term dates 8.Funding options for postgraduate course

14. Findings

15. Findings - summary 1.Current site: Most users felt that it was more difficult to find information as it was buried. Task times were much longer where users completed tasks. 2.Wireframe prototype: It was broadly felt by users that the interface was intuitive, the structure was simpler, it was easier to locate information and that there were good links between sections which allowed for a seamless user journey 1.Courses: The tabbed structure of individual course pages was positively received. Users were able to access a wide range of information within one area with clear signposting. 2.Colleges: The Colleges on the home page were hugely successful with users actively engaging and responding positively to this content. 3.Research & business: The research and staff profile pages were joined-up. Users liked the easy to access information.

16. General impressions “Generally I think the existing web site was a bit harder, it was such a long process. Maybe I was doing it wrong, I wouldn’t bother reading through it all... I’d just like a quick link and I want it to be clear” The new website is much easier, the tabs improve the process and make it much more efficient... It’s a far more efficient process, it’s far easier to use. I would be far more likely to use the new website than the old one if I had the option.”

17. User journey 1 – Apply for a course Current site Task was difficult to complete Search box prompted the comment “I expected to see a list of courses” User searching for an ‘Apply’ button ‘How to apply’ section/tab was difficult to find Overall impressions: “it’s not easy” Prototype wireframe Course search used - task was easily completed Careers and placement – “that’s good... It’s an interesting bit of information” Overall impression: “It’s a lot clearer... It’s a good contrast, it’s very clear, structure, modules”

18. User journey 2 – Entry requirements Current: Found it difficult to locate entry requirements for science courses Overall impressions “They could probably make that a bit clearer” Prototype: Task was easily completed Overall impressions “That’s very clear... It’s far better, it’s far clearer”

19. User journey 3 – research Current: Took users many clicks to locate an institute/research centre Overall impressions “Its pretty standard... Although, it did take a while to get there” Prototype: Task was easily completed Research excellence and themes – “why are these separate?” Overall impressions “Far less clicks to get here”

20. User journey 4 – find an academic Current: Struggled to find academic staff linked to a specific area/subject One user tried starting again Overall impressions “****” Prototype: Task was easily completed Profile is “much clearer” Overall impressions “way easier, I did that in a few seconds... It’s much better”

21. User journey 5 - donate Current: Quickly and easily located ‘Donate now’ Campaigns easily accessible Overall impressions “I guess when they’re asking for money they make it so easy” Prototype: Task was completed Responded positively to case study Overall impressions “Could show more funds to donate to”

22. User journey 6 – locate term dates Current: Difficult to find; users didn’t know where to locate this information Expected to see general term dates Overall impressions “I’m not sure where to look... I didn’t find that easy to find” Prototype: Easy to locate Centralised term dates were liked Overall impressions “I think that's very intuitive... This would be very useful”

23. User journey 7 – funding for a course Current: Located funding opportunities Not ideal that content was in a Word document rather than on the site Overall impressions “” Prototype: Easy to locate Overall impressions “Much better... Cost of living is good for someone who has never lived in the UK”

24. User journey 8 – department phone number Current: Located funding opportunities Not ideal that content was in a Word document rather than on the site Overall impressions “****” Prototype: Located generic contact details Responded positively to the contact us section with designated numbers for specific enquiries Overall impressions “****”

25. Recommendations

26. Recommendations and considerations 1.Course pages need to have an apply now call to action 2.Consider adding ‘Research excellence’ content to ‘Research Themes’ and removing it from the navigation 3.Review the name ‘Expert academics’ 4.Add another tab to ‘Staff profile pages’ that provides information such as the structure of the group and mini biographies on PhD and postdocs in research groups 5.Highlight the current fundraising campaigns and promote ways to give such as time and money – one off donation, monthly donation, credit card, PayPal etc. People like to see where their money is going 6.Link term dates to individual course pages so that they are easily accessible 7.Consider splitting out undergraduate and postgraduate teaching in the primary navigation 8.Provide a named contact and phone number for each of the Colleges