1 / 30

EPA

EPA.net. Proposed Modifications & Research Jonathan Effrat. Why and How. EPA.net serves an important role inside and outside the East Palo Alto community Every project has room for improvement We’ve divided proposed changes into two areas

shawnmckinney
Télécharger la présentation

EPA

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. EPA.net Proposed Modifications & Research Jonathan Effrat

  2. Why and How • EPA.net serves an important role inside and outside the East Palo Alto community • Every project has room for improvement • We’ve divided proposed changes into two areas • Site aspects we believe clearly violate usability or design principles and should definitely be changed • Site aspects which raise interesting questions that we believe demand further research

  3. Apparent Problem Areas • Let’s first look at some changes that we believe don’t require further research • These mostly fall into three categories • Clarity • Consistency • Ease of Use

  4. Clarity • Common usability heuristic (see http://web.mit.edu/is/usability/usability-guidelines.html) • Confusing and conflicting link names • Provide descriptions on sub-pages about what their purpose is • Promote the visual prominence of frequent and expected uses

  5. Conflicting Link Names

  6. Consistency • One of Nielsen’s key usability heuristics (see http://www.useit.com/papers/heuristic/heuristic_list.html) • Improve consistency in layout and visual schema • Many subpages have a different look and feel • Navigation layout varies from page to page • EPA.net banner at top feels disconnected from side-bars

  7. Inconsistent Interface

  8. Ease of Use • Another key heuristic and a key facet of usability (see http://www.wqusability.com/articles/more-than-ease-of-use.html) • Provide easy link to let users make EPA.net their homepage • Link headings to the corresponding subsection • Create alternative for users with lower technical and English literacy

  9. Linkable Headings

  10. Other Issues • Change weather image (maybe use weather.com’s alternative) • “Find Jobs” and “Events” links at top take user to pages that don’t seem to load properly • To more fully understand stengths and weaknesses of site, increased user tracking and data analysis is key

  11. Weather Feature

  12. Research Problem Areas • For many aspects of the site, ideal changes are not as clear cut and require further research • We have chosen four areas we believe would be fascinating areas to study • Simplicity vs. complexity • Specificity vs. generality of content • Site navigation methods • Customization vs. universality

  13. Simplicity vs. Complexity • EPA.net is currently quite a busy, information-rich interface • Many other big-name sites, like Yahoo and MSN.com also tend to be more complex • While many leaders in the field of human-computer interaction emphasize simplicity at all costs, we suspect that for certain types of users and sites, complexity suit users needs better • This is an exciting research question that hasn’t really been explored yet

  14. Simplicity vs. Complexity • Some potential research questions related to EPA.net • Pictures – load time vs. attention grabbers • Link directly to news site, or provide first few sentences • Impact of scrolling • Size and density of text, language level, cognitive load • Logging in as barrier

  15. Specificity vs. Generality of Content • EPA.net content is very local right now, which is beneficial to the local community, but doesn’t give as broad a perspective of what happening in the outside world or lend itself to other communities • This could also be explored from an issue of language, such as in what way the site should cater to its large Hispanic user base

  16. Specificity vs. Generality of Content • Some possible research questions • How local must content be? • Multilingual issues – diversity of population

  17. Site Navigation Methods • This is an area where some research has been done but there are no agreed upon navigation paradigms in the usability community • EPA.net uses various navigation techniques inconsistently, and it would be interesting if one model is a better fit through research

  18. Site Navigation Methods • Some major navigation methods • Tabs • Site-map • Side-bar links • Icons

  19. Customization vs. Universality • Level of customization is a big issue that is closely tied to EPA.net • Language: English or multilingual • EPA is a diverse community and user base with language issues • Experience level: how much technical expertise needed • Cultural angles: how much cultural awareness needed to understand site • People often want to differentiate based on cultural group • Preferences/aesthetic aspects: color scheme, location of site components

  20. Customization vs. Universality • In many ways, customization vs. universality ties together the other research areas we considered • Level of simplicity can be customized and often determined by how many customized features are added • Specificity of content can be seen as customized content (customized to be specific to you or your area) • Site navigation can be customized and navigation preferences are likely to vary a lot from one individual to another

  21. A Conceptualization:Level of Granularity

  22. Open Source Design • A hot trend is for software projects to implement the code in an open source way • Encourages contributions and a continuous feedback loop • Using open source principles in design haven’t been explored • Let community members actively participate in or contribute to software or websites they will be using • Technology leaders in the community will have the opportunity to provide an ongoing critique of the efforts and users in the community will have a chance to participate in user studies

  23. Conducting the Research • We will coordinate the design of multiple site prototypes, which can be deployed at the Technology Access Points (TAPS) • The prototypes will be targeted at answering one of the research questions • Users at the TAPS will be asked to evaluate the prototype of the site and some will be interviewed • By analyzing browsing habits as well as from questionnaires and interviews, we’ll gain qualitative and quantitative information

  24. Bringing it all Together • EPA.net is a vital community resource and it’s in everyone’s best interest to make sure it leverages the most cutting-edge design principles • This research also has implications for nearly every website because how personal or customized allows itself is something every site struggles with • Community involvement and engagement is a priority – EPA.net should be By and For EPA residents

  25. Thank You • A big “Thank You!” to Todd and Rolando for their contributions to and support of my work on this project • Thank you to all you folks for being here and being a part of the process

More Related