1 / 22

Catherine Brys (catherinebrys@yahoo.co.uk) Morag Greig (m.greig@lib.gla.ac.uk)

Improving the usability of a University Library web site: user research, analysis, design and usability testing. Catherine Brys (catherinebrys@yahoo.co.uk) Morag Greig (m.greig@lib.gla.ac.uk) University of Glasgow. Project background & aims.

zayit
Télécharger la présentation

Catherine Brys (catherinebrys@yahoo.co.uk) Morag Greig (m.greig@lib.gla.ac.uk)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Improving the usability of a University Library web site: user research, analysis, design and usability testing Catherine Brys (catherinebrys@yahoo.co.uk) Morag Greig (m.greig@lib.gla.ac.uk) University of Glasgow

  2. Project background & aims • Glasgow University Library web site & third-party catalogue web application • Improve usability & accessibility • Re-design organisation-centered web site into user-centered (task-centered) site

  3. Before re-design: 2 ‘home’ pages before

  4. Methodology Four pillars: user types, user tasks, content & current problems

  5. User & stakeholder investigation • Library staff interviews • Training sessions for students by Library staff • User Quickpolls: problems, tasks • Web User Panel: problems • User Observation sessions: problems in context

  6. Analysis: main problems • Often used items not prominent • Library item searches confusing • Information hard to find (users & Lib staff) • Grouping and labels (acronyms, jargon, organisation-centered site) • Presentation: unattractive, cluttered

  7. Analysis: tasks • Interviews, training sessions • Tasks Quickpoll: open question - quantitative data • 25 recurring tasks • 50% 'search for an item' 50% of items = books Task-centered home page & forms to search by item type ...

  8. Design: wireframes • User tasks • Home page items • Web conventions • Frequency of use per task

  9. Design: wireframes

  10. Three designs • Three different information layouts • Three different colour schemes • Implemented using fully accessible templates • Consultation of Library staff: choice!

  11. Three designs 3 designs

  12. Staff and User Panel feedback Library staff: feedback on 3 designs info layout 1 preferred User Panel: feedback on design 1: • Too much info • Colours Work with graphic designer: • Colour scheme • Column layout ..

  13. Modified design home page modified

  14. Search forms for Library items books, journals, etc.

  15. Discount usability testing • Aim: test home page & search forms (book, journal, etc.) • Budget max £500 • Pre-defined tasks • Criteria for selection participants – correlation • Round 1: 6 users; round 2: 5 users; round 3: disabled users • 'Dummy' links to try out ideas

  16. Meeting room, 2 observers, projector Discount usability testing: set-up participant observer observer

  17. Results of usability testing (1) • Information Architecture & design effective • Labels and grouping clear – few added/changed • Search for books, journals, etc.: new search forms effective – frequent tasks for many users

  18. Results of usability testing (2) • Underlying issues identified: • How to research a topic • Understanding a journal article reference • 'Google effect' • Some undergraduates very impatient – don’t read labels on forms, just dive in .

  19. Final design Content added to address underlying issues 'Can wehelp?' 'Ten seconds top tips' 'UG/PG support' 'after'

  20. Challenges • Consultation culture • Library had no previous usability projects • Limited budget & resources • Academic year cycle • Involvement disabled students • Philosophy about studentlearning?

  21. Lessons learned • Quickpolls & User Panel effective (research, first cut) • User research powerful in getting Library staff buy-in • Using high-fidelity prototypes & trying out ideas effective • Involving colleagues in usability testing: awareness; advocacy

More Related