effective content strategy for campus websites at career ... · effective content strategy for...
TRANSCRIPT
Effective Content Strategy For Campus
Websites at Career Colleges
Meeting the Information Needs of Current Students
By
Gary L. Teagarden
A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Master of Arts
In
English: Technical Communication Option
Minnesota State University, Mankato
Mankato, MN
August 19, 2011
ii
August 19, 2011
This thesis paper has been examined and approved.
Examining committee: ____________________________________
Dr. Roland Nord (English)
____________________________________
Dr. Lee Tesdell (English)
____________________________________
Dr. Gretchen Perbix (English)
iii
Abstract
Websites are used to communicate a wide range of information to students
attending career colleges. In lieu of a college’s generic or all-purpose website, which
caters to the needs of multiple audiences, I suggested current students would prefer
campus-specific or local websites that focused almost exclusively on their needs. To
explore this assumption, I designed a research plan that included a survey of current
students at my organization, Globe Education Network, a consortium of career colleges
with more than 25 campuses.
The survey of current students helped me answer the following questions:
• What features or traits would students like to experience on the sites?
• What content subjects or items would students like to read and see on the
sites?
• Which elements are most important when weighing website quality?
• What’s the ideal information architecture for a student-focused career
college website?
The survey, which was sent to 3,000 students, yielded a 3.6% response for a total
of 108 surveys. Among the findings: 98% of respondents rated navigation as either
important or very important when assessing website quality. In a question on the
importance of content areas, 30.7% of respondents rated the college’s Facebook page as
important or very important, while 13.6% rated the school’s Twitter page as important or
very important. The survey sought responses to more than two dozen website quality,
content, and user-preference factors.
iv
Table of Contents
Abstract .............................................................................................................................. iii
List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... vi
List of Figures ................................................................................................................... vii
Chapter 1: Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1
Chapter 2: Literature Review .............................................................................................. 5
Web writing ................................................................................................................. 6
Information architecture .............................................................................................. 8
Content strategy ......................................................................................................... 12
Website aesthetics ...................................................................................................... 18
Chapter 3: Method ............................................................................................................ 20
Survey design ............................................................................................................. 21
Student survey ........................................................................................................... 24
Chapter 4: Results ............................................................................................................. 29
Survey Section 1: Current Student Profile Questions ................................................ 29
Survey section 2: Website use and topic preference questions ................................. 31
Survey Section 3: Mobile access and social media questions ................................... 38
Chapter 5: Discussion ....................................................................................................... 42
Research question 1: What features or traits would the students like to experience on
the campus websites? ................................................................................................. 43
v
Research question 2: What content subjects or items are students most interested in
reading and seeing on the sites? ................................................................................. 49
Research question 3: Which elements of the website are the most important when
weighing site quality? ................................................................................................ 56
Research question 4: What is the ideal information architecture for a career college
website? ..................................................................................................................... 58
Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 71
References ......................................................................................................................... 74
Appendix A: Website Design Documents ........................................................................ 78
Appendix B: Website Style Guide .................................................................................... 80
Appendix C: Survey consent–formatted ........................................................................... 81
Appendix D: Survey consent ............................................................................................ 82
vi
List of Tables
Table
1. Globe Education Network campuses listed by major brand ................................. 23
2. Question 2: Please indicate how many academic quarters you have been a student
here. ....................................................................................................................... 30
3. Question 3: What degree or certificate are you pursuing? .................................... 30
4. Question 8: Which website navigation label would you most likely click to find
information about the college’s classes and programs that are offered online? ... 37
5. Question 9: Which website navigation label would you most likely click to find
information about different program offerings? ................................................... 38
6. Question 13: How do you prefer to be contacted by the university? .................... 39
7. Question 16: How important is it to have mobile access to the college’s websites?
............................................................................................................................... 41
vii
List of Figures
Figure
1. Campus websites are written in the active voice.................................................... 7
2. The inverted triangle of good web writing. ............................................................8
3. The content strategist interdependencies...............................................................14
4. Question 4: How often do you visit any of the school’s websites, including the
student website?......................................................................................................31
5. Question 5: How important is the quality of the school’s website to you?............32
6. Question 6: How important are these website elements when assessing quality?.33
7. Question 7: How important are the following content areas or topics to you?......36
8. The Facebook icon linking to the campus’ Facebook page is placed on the
home page............................................................................................................ 44
9. An excerpt from a news and events page of a campus site................................... 44
10. The campus sites were designed to be easy to scan. .............................................46
11. The first-generation campus websites focused on prospective rather than
current students.....................................................................................................47
12. A sample faculty page from the first-generation campus site................................48
13. Orem campus faculty page. ...................................................................................50
14. Faculty profile page................................................................................................51
15. Service learning story on the Woodbury campus site............................................52
16. Service and applied learning web page on the Orem campus site. .......................53
17. A campus website wireframe showing a photo gallery module............................55
viii
18. Campus website information architecture........................................................... 59
19. The campus websites contain several IA ideal practices.......................................60
20. An early wireframe for a campus website program page......................................62
21. Program page from the campus website................................................................62
22. Home page of the Woodbury, MN campus website............................................. 63
23. Excerpt from the Directions page of the Layton, UT website...............................64
24. Home page of Globe University's brand website...................................................65
25. Typical program on a GEN brand site...................................................................66
26. Campus-level page from a Rasmussen College website........................................68
27. Campus-level page from an ITT Technical Institute website................................69
28. Campus-level page from a Herzing University website........................................70
A1. Information architecture for Globe Education Network’s campus websites........79
A2. Wireframe for campus website academic program page......................................80
B1. First page from GEN's website style guide...........................................................81
C1. Survey consent–formatted.....................................................................................82
D1. Survey consent......................................................................................................83
1
Chapter 1: Introduction
Most college and university websites are designed to address a wide range of
users and stakeholders: prospective students, current students, parents, alumni, staff,
community members, and employers. The problem with creating website content for this
wide range of users is that it’s difficult to provide enough depth and breadth of
information to satisfy all users. In addition, content managers run the risk of confusing
users with content that does not specifically address them.
The one-size-fits-all sites of career colleges, as well as most colleges, do not
adequately meet the information needs of all audience groups equally, especially for
current students. At Globe Education Network (GEN), where I am employed as a
communications director and web strategist, I addressed this problem by creating a
template for local campus sites that differed greatly from the organization’s major
websites. The template and information architecture of these sites could then be followed
by locally-based communications specialists for developing content. These new campus
websites principally serve as a virtual hub for current students at each of GEN’s 23
campuses. Secondary audiences for these sites included local staff and faculty, and
community partners and businesses in the surrounding area. All the content for these
audiences is localized for the campuses, which are home to between 200 and 800
students.
I argue that locally-based websites that focus almost exclusively on students do a
better job of meeting the students’ day-to-day information needs than GEN’s one-size-
2
fits-all brand websites. My research aided me in the development of these sites and had
several goals:
• To discover what features or traits (e.g., link to Facebook) the students
would like to experience on the campus websites,
• to discover what content subjects (e.g., faculty bios) or items students are
most interested in reading and seeing on the sites,
• to discover what elements (e.g., design) of the website are the most
important when weighing website quality, and
• to design an effective information architecture for a student-focused career
college website.
My research approach took two paths: first, I conducted a student survey to
identify what students want (features or traits) on the sites and what they are most
interested in reading and seeing; second, I analyzed the literature for the purpose of
identifying conventions that I could incorporate into the design and structure of the
campus sites. For practical reasons, I limited my research to small subsets of literature
focused on content strategy, web writing, information architecture, design, and social
media. All of these areas, except web writing, were also touched upon through the
student survey. Furthermore, I examined a number of articles that focused on the unique
characteristics of college sites, and the information needs and site behaviors of students.
Several researchers— (Grossman, 2010) (Ingram, 2009) (McNeil, 2008) (Unger &
Chandler, 2009), Alexandar (2005), Nielsen (2010), Poock (2001), and Andergassen et
al. (2009)—have looked at aspects of college student experiences on university websites.
I also drew upon their work to help guide the development of our campus websites.
3
Globe Education Network consists of three major brands—Globe University,
Minnesota School of Business, and Broadview University—all prominent for-profit or
career colleges with campuses in Minnesota, Wisconsin, South Dakota, Utah, and Idaho.
Each brand has a complementary website (brand site) that is designed to attract and
collect applications from prospective students. Secondary audiences for these sites
include employers and other community partners. The brand sites offer the prospective
student general information about the schools’ academic programs and degree offerings
in addition to admissions and financial aid content. Prior to the creation of our campus
websites, many of our currently enrolled students used these all-purpose sites as a
gateway to Blackboard and other student tools.
System-wide, more than 11,000 students are enrolled in GEN’s degree, diploma,
or certificate programs. Therefore, the primary audience—currently enrolled students—
was small and well defined compared to the audiences addressed by the organization’s
brand sites. Most of our students have full- or part-time jobs and attend school part-time
day or night. According to student records at GEN, the demographic of the typical
student is a 27-year-old woman with a job and one child. Students at career colleges also
don’t stay on campus throughout the day, which gives them less time to network with
other students. Instead, they spend time communicating with classmates virtually through
the school’s website and other tools such as email or Facebook.
In Chapter 2, Literature Review, I summarize the top ideas and conventions to
incorporate into career college campus websites. A few of these ideas include write in the
active voice, keep paragraphs short, and create web pages that are easy to scan. In
Chapter 3, Method, I describe my 16-question survey that went to 3,000 students across
4
23 campuses. In Chapter 4, Results, I provide detailed results of each question, and in
Chapter 5, Discussion, I give an in-depth analysis of the survey’s findings and provide
more insight into how parts of my literature review either substantiated or disproved
survey results. Here, I also summarize the key findings from the study and restate the
benefits of websites that are created to meet the needs of current students at local
campuses. In addition, I provide the reader with ideas around related problems that need
to be resolved or addressed in future studies.
5
Chapter 2: Literature Review
My literature review, as well as the student survey, had a practical application,
which was to help identify ideas and conventions that I could incorporate into the design
and structure of the campus websites. While I uncovered research that focused on general
university websites—Adelman, (2006), Alexander, (2005), Poock & Lefond, (2001),
Sandvig & Bajwa, (2004)—findings from this research also applied to career colleges.
Dey Alexander, for example, found that students could have a hard time finding what
they are looking for due to “poor information architecture, poor content, poor search
results and, a poor search interface” (2005, p. 1). He also found that some university sites
rely too heavily on words and navigation labels that were familiar to people only within
the education sector. The use of jargon or inclusive language made the sites more
confusing. In fact, 72% of participants were adversely affected by ambiguous language
found on sites. “Content that was too long or wordy, or contained information that was
not relevant to the participant adversely affected 28% of participants” (p. 12). Dey also
noted “the most common and severe problem occurred when universities referred to
subjects as ‘courses’” (p. 13). Authors Redish (2007), Halvorson (2010), Krug (2006),
and Nielsen and Loranger (2006) cite the need for web writers to be clear and concise
with copy and word choice. As a result of these findings, I incorporated editorial
guidance into the website style guide (not a formal part of this study) that instructed
campus communications specialists to not use industry jargon and academic-speak
(Appendix B). Examples of industry jargon include such phrases as learning outcomes,
service learning (without a definition), registrar, and student retention.
6
Web writing
Good writing is an essential ingredient of effective websites. Ginny Redish
addresses what it takes to write great content in her book Letting Go of the Words:
Writing Web Content that Works (2007). Noted below are her guidelines:
• Talk to your site visitors. Use “you.”
• Show that you are a person and that your organization includes people.
• Write in active voice (most of the time).
• Write short, simple, straightforward sentences.
• Cut unnecessary words (usually an editor helps oversee content).
• Give extra information its own place.
• Keep paragraphs short; chunk the information.
• Start with the context—first things first, second things second.
• Put the action in the verbs, not the nouns.
• Use your web users’ words. (p. 172)
Campus communications specialists write in active voice and short, straightforward
sentences (Figure 1).
7
Figure 1. An excerpt of a campus site web page shows copy written in active voice and liberal use of personal pronouns. The sentence length of 25–35 words makes for quick and easy reading.
Web experts recommend content writers cut to the chase when writing for the
web. Citing journalism’s practice of shaping content to conform to an inverted triangle
(Figure 2) that packs the most important information into the first two sentences of a
paragraph, Ann Handley advises writers to simply “Lead with the good stuff” (Handley
& Chapman, 2011, p. 110). Redish is a fan of the inverted triangle and cites its
importance in her web-writing book (2007, p. 104).
8
Figure 2. The inverted triangle of good web writing (Redish, 2007, p. 104).
Jakob Nielsen (2009) also provides web writers with solid guidance for writing
strong headlines and subheads, which is listed below:
• Short (because people don't read much online);
• Rich in information scent, clearly summarizing the target article;
• Front-loaded with the most important keywords (because users often scan
only the beginning of list items);
• Understandable out of context (because headlines often appear without
articles, as in search engine results); and
• Predictable, so users know whether they'll like the full article before they
click (because people don't return to sites that promise more than they
deliver). (p. 1)
Information architecture
Sandvig and Bajwa (2004) observe that university students are goal-oriented and
tend to move through websites as quickly as possible. They studied nine university
websites: Harvard University, Pepperdine University, Princeton University, University of
Michigan, and University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, Rensselaer Polytechnic
Main point
Supporting information & proof points
Background & history
9
Institute, University of California Los Angeles, University of Texas Austin, and Yale
University. One of the questions they asked was “How do university students navigate or
seek information on university websites?” (p. 14). Website attributes users liked most
were simplicity and good organization. Least-liked attributes were clutter and poor
organization. Nielsen (2010b, p. 3) found that college students “prefer sites that look
clean and simple, rather than flashy and busy.”
Because students are goal oriented, designers should create a website structure, or
information architecture, that enables students to navigate and scan through a site
quickly. In fact, following students’ predilection for content with a simple look and feel,
Poock and Lefond found the second most important factor to students was architecture
and organization (2001, p. 17). “Ninety-five percent of survey respondents [students]
rated site architecture as important or very important” (2001, p. 18). Nielsen echoes
Poock and Lefond’s finding that architecture is important to a site with this observation:
“Students are multitaskers and move through websites rapidly, often missing the item
they come to find” (2010b, para. 1). A simple information architecture and
complementary content will do a better job of meeting the needs of current students
compared to an architecture that addresses the needs of multiple stakeholders. Morville
and Rosenfeld observe that a common technique for organizing the information
architecture of a website is to employ what is known as top down architecture (2007, pp.
42-45). In this approach, the architect or content strategist tries to anticipate what
questions users may have when visiting the site. The authors suggest top-down questions
such as these:
• Where am I?
10
• I know what I’m looking for; how do I search for it?
• How do I get around this site?
• What’s important and unique about this organization?
• What’s available on this site?
• What’s happening there?
• Do they want my opinion about their site?
• How can I contact a human?
• What’s their address? (p. 44)
I used questions like these to help guide decision-making around navigation, aesthetics
and copy. My goal was to create easy-to-comprehend web pages.
In addition, Sandvig & Bajwa (2004) claim when it comes to navigating websites,
students have a clear preference for browsing over search. To provide users with superior
browsing experiences calls for a well-designed navigation interface. Alexander (2005)
found that poor placement of navigation elements led to delays or failures in finding
information. Moreover, Alexander found that poorly written link text affected 31% of
users (2005, p. 12). Poorly written link text typically does not provide enough
information to the reader to properly set the expectation for what’s on the page. For
example, a one-word link like brochure is too vague, but the link academic program
brochure is more descriptive and provides enough context to satisfy the user’s curiousity.
In a more recent study of college student web behavior, Jakob Nielsen (2010a) found that
students are “strongly search dominant” and turn to search immediately if they can’t find
what they’re looking for. Nielsen contends that nearly half of all web users are “search
dominant,” (2006). Jared Spool (2001), however, contends that users are not inherently
11
search or browse dominant, but rather they choose either behavior based on the design of
the website. For instance, if users encounter link failures on a home page, they
immediately employ search to find what they’re looking for. Spool observed users
participating in both search patterns, depending on the design of the website.
Still, information architects should provide clear paths to the most commonly
sought information on the site. Ironically, the three-click rule—once espoused by
Nielsen, Loranger and other usability experts—is now considered an unnecessary
convention. Dagan (2008) reported that Loranger now contends that the number of clicks
is not important as long as the content flow makes sense and is logical.
One method architects use to facilitate efficient navigation and search on websites
is to use an A–Z index (Hedden, 2005). Nielsen, however, dismisses the A–Z index as a
tool of “lazy design teams” who resort to alphabetizing when architects can’t create a
better structure (Nielsen, 2010b). Nielsen found that users rarely think in terms of A–Z
unless there is an “inherent logic” to the pages, such as a list of countries. He contends
that sorting does not work on many websites because users may not even know what
they’re looking for. However, specific sections could benefit from A–Z sorting, such as a
list of academic programs or majors on a college website. Moreover, Hedden (2005)
notes that college and university websites are one category of site that is well suited for
an A-Z index, primarily due to content such as academic programs and class listings. I
did not launch the campus sites with content organized under an A–Z convention.
Steve Krug (2006, p. 31) offers these tips for making sure users see and
understand your website:
• Create a clear visual hierarchy on each page.
12
• Take advantage of conventions (top primary navigation, left secondary
navigation).
• Break pages up into clearly defined areas.
• Make it obvious what’s clickable (underlines and color differences).
• Minimize noise (eliminate clutter). (p. 31)
Content strategy
Kristina Halvorson, a well-known authority on content strategy, defines the
discipline as “the practice of planning for the creation, delivery, and governance of
useful, usable content” (2010, p. 32), which typically includes lists, text, data, graphics,
video, and audio. According to Halvorson, content strategists focus on answering these
questions:
• What content do we need to create? Why?
• How will the content be structured?
• How will users find the content?
• How will we get from here to launch?
• What’s next once the content is out there? (p. 37)
These questions along with my results helped guide my decision making around
navigation (site map), content topics, and what the project plan ultimately looked like.
The website content strategy (Halvorson, 2010, p. 32) is a roadmap with milestones or
deliverables that include a plan that is “actionable, achievable, and executable.” The
strategist decides what content must be delivered and how that content meets the purpose
of the page; how the content gets added to the site; and, finally, who will care for the
content once the site is launched. This last step in the process is commonly referred to as
13
either governance or maintenance. Some would argue that governance is the most
important never-ending task for the content strategist. In addition to the governance plan,
the content strategist, creates and delivers a range of documents (content inventories, task
lists, and site map) that help guide development of the website. For the governance plan, I
created a simple Excel worksheet that was used to track every web page. I used the sheet
to report the details of edits (what was edited and when).
Rachel Lovinger (2007), another influential web professional, observes that
content strategy is a “philosophy of data” where nearly everything qualifies as content:
copy, photos, structure, metadata, design, and more. Figure 3 illustrates the span of
influence of content strategy on website creation.
Figure 3. The content strategist is involved in nearly all aspects of website development, including information architecture, design, programming, and copywriting (Ingram, 2009). Clearly, website development is a collaborative process.
14
For the campus website rollout I was in the role of content strategist, but I also
worked with several other team members to create and launch the sites. As noted in
Figure 3, these other team members included copywriters, two designers (visual and
interaction), and a programmer. I also played the role of information architect.
According to Halvorson (2010, p. 6) web content is useless unless it supports a
business objective or supports a user in completing a task. I approach each web page with
similar objectives. I typically put myself in the user’s shoes by determining what user
questions can be answered on each page. For example, a web page highlighting an
academic program could answer a question like “what are the required courses?” Or
“how long will it take to complete it?” On the website of Capella University—a for-
profit, online university—content managers focus on answering four questions a
prospective student typically asks (2009):
1. Do you have a program for me?
2. How much does it cost?
3. How good is it; is it accredited?
4. What is it like taking an online course?
Content strategist Erin Kissane (2011, p. 1) has published a checklist for what makes
good content; the checklist includes the item “good content is user-centered,” whereby
she urges us to adopt the frameworks of our users. Notes Kissanne (2011, p. 1 ), “On a
web project, user-centered design means that the final product must meet real user needs
and fulfill real human desires. In practical terms, it also means that the days of designing
a site map to mirror an org chart are over.”
15
As noted above, some college websites have adopted the language of the
organization, rather than the language [cognitive frameworks] of the user. Kissane’s
complete checklist is as follows (2011):
• Good content is approprate: define a clear, specific purpose for each
piece of content.
• Good content is user-centered: adopt the cognitive frameworks of
your users.
• Good content is clear: seek clarity in all things.
• Good content is consistent: mandate consistency within reason.
• Good content is concise: omit needless content.
• Good content is supported: publish no content without a support
plan (p. 1).
Since users spend so little time on a web page (Nielsen & Loranger, 2006), it’s up
to content managers to create content that is easy to read and easy to find. Nielsen also
reported (1997) that 79% of his test subjects in a reading-habit study scanned web pages;
only 16% read word-by-word.
PDFs, photos and video
Some websites use PDFs in lieu of basic web page content to communicate
information to users. But, for some users, PDFs are a hindrance and frustrate those who
simply want to find what they are looking for and move on. Alexander (2005) found that
this is the case, in particular, with college students. In general, over-reliance on PDFs is
problematic because search engines cannot search them and because users must go
through additional steps—downloading and opening—to interact with them.
16
The effective use of photographs and video within a webstite can add significantly
to the user experience. Students like photographs on college websites (Poock & Lefond,
2001) because they provide insight into what a campus may look like and even what the
students are like. It’s no surprise that some types of photos are better than others.
Through eye tracking studies, researchers (Nielsen & Pernice, 2010) know that most web
users ignore stock photographs, which are used to merely “dress up” a page. These
photos are quite staged and typically consist of two attractive people staring into a
computer screen—one using the keyboard while the other points to the screen and smiles
approvingly. Nielsen and Pernice found that photographs with captions are observed
more often than those without captions. In their study users would often fixate on the
caption, particulary if it contained names, then move their gaze to the photo
(p. 227). The bottom-line: “People look far more at images that are highly related to the
written content on a page than they do at unrelated images” (Nielsen & Pernice,
2010, p. 218).
On the topic of video, conventional wisdom (Nielsen, 2010b) holds that college
students are heavy users of web-based video. Nielsen, however, found that students
weren’t enthusiastic about viewing videos on a college website. He concluded that
students are only interested in video if it’s simple and does not distract from the purpose
of the web page.
Social media
Today, any discussion of content strategy for a college website wouldn’t be
complete without the inclusion of social media. In 2010, Facebook announced that it had
added its 550 millionth member (Grossman, 2010, p. 50). And time spent on social
17
networks and blogs is reportedly growing at over three times the rate of overall Internet
growth (Solis, 2010, p. 19). This growth has led organizations, including colleges and
universities, to redirect budgets and strategies to leverage social media tactics to better
connect with key stakeholders, especially students. As part of the campus website
initiative, I wanted to better understand how our students were using social media tools
such as Facebook, Twitter, and blogs so that we in turn could better connect with them.
Black (2010) notes that younger college-age students (18–24) use Facebook to the point
where they exhibit withdrawal symptoms if they are prevented access to social media
tools. This effect was so strong that it was described as an addiction. Most of the students
at GEN campuses are older than the 18–24 demographic; thus, it was unclear to me if
having social media functionality within our campus sites would be important to our
users. Interestingly, Facebook reported that between 2007 and 2008 its greatest growth
had come from users in the 35–49 category, a subset that consists of one-third of all users
(Solis, p. 19). Nielsen found (2010b) that most students consider Facebook a personal
networking tool and thus tend to avoid it when communicating with organizations. When
colleges and universities do use Facebook or blogs to communicate with students, these
tools have more credibility when they are in the voice of another student (Feeney, 2009).
The numbers of adults between the ages of 18–29 who continue to blog have been
declining steadily over the past few years (Marcus, 2010). Today, only 15% of people in
that age bracket blog—a decline of more than half between the years 2006 and 2009.
During this period of decline, Facebook adoption has risen by millions of users per year
(Solis, 2010, p. 19). Experts conclude that Facebook is now meeting the communication
needs of people who had previously relied upon the art of blogging. Andergassen,
18
Behringer, Finlay, Gorra, & Moore (2009) found another reason for fewer people
choosing to blog: lack of privacy. Today, students turn to the most convenient and
accessible tools that help them communicate with fellow students. By far, the top tool is
Facebook and, to a lesser degree, Twitter.
Website aesthetics
Form, color, photos, graphics, and typography figure importantly into website
effectiveness. Good aesthetics are essential for creating a site that delivers a consistent,
high-quality user experience. Most websites today adopt the convention of using primary
navigation across the top of the page and secondary navigation on the left side. Through
eye-tracking studies, Nielsen has confirmed that users “look to the menus on the top and
left side for links and menu commands” (Nielsen & Pernice, 2010, p. 97). Therefore,
Nielsen and other web experts caution designers not to stray too far from this convention
in navigation and website design. In a study of students, Poock and Lefond (2001) found
that the most effective sites were those that were voted visually intuitive. Krug notes
(2007, p. 99) that a visually intuitive home page could help readers quickly answer
questions like “what do they have here, and what can I do here?”
What makes a website visually intuitive? In addition to sticking with tried and
true conventions, designers manipulate shape and color to develop user-centered designs.
The shape of information alone (Kalbach, 2007) has a powerful effect on the readability
of a typical web page. Kalbach (2007, p. 41) explains “people naturally seek order and
patterns when they come in contact with online information.” Web content is easier to
digest when there’s a consistent shape, such as physical and semantic patterns. To
19
compare how the shape of a wireframe was transformed into a completed web page see
page 57 in the Discussion section.
20
Chapter 3: Method
An ideal web development project begins with a thorough analysis of the target
audiences or site users. This critical audience insight is typically captured through
surveys. Armed with survey data, designers and developers create the information
architecture and content strategy to meet users’ needs. However, many website projects
begin with preconceived ideas about what content the site should have regardless of any
survey feedback. These “inherited requirements” (Unger & Chandler, 2009) helped me
get a quick start on the campus website project. A few inherited requirements for the
campus websites included links on the home page to these often-visited pages:
• Blackboard (learning management system)
• Student email
• Library site
• Financial aid
• Career information
My experience in working with Globe’s other websites also helped guide early
content development and assumptions for needed content. In addition, I interviewed
numerous stakeholders to better understand what other content items must be included on
the site. These individuals included campus directors, academic deans, and the vice
president of operations. The interviews also helped me identify what additional
information I would need that in turn could be mined from the student survey. Highlights
from these meetings include a request from campus directors who wanted to feature local
faculty and academic program chairs, in addition to pages dedicated to news, events, and
21
campus activities. GEN’s vice president of operations wanted the site to showcase
students who were involved in service and applied learning projects as part of the classes
they were taking.
Survey design
To better understand the information needs of our current students and their
content expectations for a campus website, I created a survey. The survey was divided
into three sections:
1. Current student profile questions, which would provide basic demographic data on
the survey respondents. I included demographic profile questions because I wanted a
general understanding of GEN’s students in terms of how long they have been
students, which college they attend, and what type of degree they are pursuing. The
more I knew about who the website readers were, the better I would be at providing
content and information that would be most relevant to them. For example, if most of
the students are pursuing degrees vs. certificates or diplomas, then I might limit the
quantity of content directed at the less popular programs.
2. Website usage and topic preference questions, which would provide insight into what
elements affect student perceptions of quality, what content topics they are most
interested in interacting with, and what their opinions are on primary navigation link
labels? I chose these questions to learn more about what do GEN students really want
to read while on the campus websites. Second, websites consist of numerous elements
and content items—photographs, charts, text, videos, slide galleries, and social media
applications, for instance. There are so many elements I wanted to know their degree
of importance from the students’ perspective. For instance, what I may think is
22
important as the site editor may not be important at all to a student. Having this
insight into student preferences helped prioritize where I spent my time working on
the website. Finally, I used this series of questions to learn student preferences for
two navigation labels (primary navigation links). These links point to the school’s
academic program and online learning content—two of the most visited sections on
GEN’s websites.
3. Mobile access and social media questions, which would provide insight into how
students use social media on GEN’s websites as well as how students use
smartphones (if they do at all) to access content. In response to the rapid growth of
hand-held devices, numerous universities have launched mobile versions of their
websites, which deliver much better user experiences. GEN, as well, is in the process
of launching mobile versions of its flagship sites. Smartphone adoption is indeed
rising, and with it more schools eager to connect with students through their phones. I
wanted a clear picture of the percentage of GEN students using smartphones and how
they use their phones, if at all, to access the campus website. This insight would tell
me if I had to plan for some content being accessed on mobile devices. Finally,
students also use social media applications such as Facebook and Twitter to connect
with their campuses, but I wanted to understand to what degree and how often.
Answers to student social media preferences would provide valuable insights into
content strategy and what role social media should play in the website’s editorial
plan.
There are approximately 11,000 students attending GEN’s three principal schools:
Globe University, Minnesota School of Business, and Broadview University. The sample
size of the survey was 3,000 current students split evenly between the company’s three
schools. Table 1 lists the campus locations by major brand. One thousand names from
23
each brand were selected to achieve an even distribution. I chose not to send the survey to
all 11,000 students.
Table 1
Globe Education Network campuses listed by major brand Globe University Minnesota School of
Business Broadview University
Appleton, WI Blaine, MN Boise, ID
Eau Claire, WI Brooklyn Center, MN Layton, UT
Green Bay, WI Elk River, MN Orem, UT
LaCrosse, WI Lakeville, MN Salt Lake City, UT
Madison, WI (East) Moorhead, MN West Jordan, UT
Madison, WI (West) Plymouth, MN
Minneapolis, MN Rochester, MN
Sioux Falls, SD Shakopee, MN
Woodbury, MN St. Cloud, MN
The names and email addresses of the survey respondents were selected randomly
from the school’s student database and emailed using the integrated email client Eloqua.
The body of the email contained disclaimer and description copy required by Minnesota
State University’s Institutional Review Board (Figure 8). In addition, the email contained
a link to the survey itself, which was created and designed using the Survey Monkey
website (www.surveymonkey.com). After a two-week period, a reminder email with the
24
original message and link to the survey was sent to the complete database of 3,000
students. See the full survey below.
Student survey
1. Please indicate where you are attending classes (choose one):
o Minnesota School of Business o Globe University o Broadview University
2. Please indicate how many total academic quarters (quarters do not have to be consecutive) you have been a student here, including the quarter that you are now enrolled in:
o 1 (even if this is your first quarter) o 2-4 quarters o 5-7 quarters o 8-10 quarters o 11 or more quarters.
3. What degree or certificate are you pursuing?
o Master’s or MBA degree o Bachelor’s degree o Associate degree o Certificate o Diploma
4. How often do you visit any of your school’s websites, including the student website:
(a visit is defined as viewing any of the pages, including the home page or deeper pages)
o Very frequently (Every day) o Frequently (3-4 times/week) o Occasionally (2 times/week) o Rarely (Once a week) o Never
25
5. How important is the quality of the school’s website to you?
o Very important o Important o Of little importance o Unimportant
6. How important are the following Website elements when assessing quality?
Website Elements Unimportant Of Little Importance Important Very
Important Structure of navigation (ease of use)
◘ ◘ ◘ ◘
Photographs ◘ ◘ ◘ ◘ Graphics such as tables and charts
◘ ◘ ◘ ◘ Search ◘ ◘ ◘ ◘ A-Z index ◘ ◘ ◘ ◘ Easy to scan pages and short paragraphs
◘ ◘ ◘ ◘
Design ◘ ◘ ◘ ◘ Colors ◘ ◘ ◘ ◘
7. How important are the following content areas or topics to you?
Topic Unimportant Of Little Importance
Important Very Important
Photographs of buildings and classrooms
◘ ◘ ◘ ◘
Syllabi and course materials available prior to a class starting
◘ ◘ ◘ ◘
Photos and bios of faculty members
◘ ◘ ◘ ◘ Career services/job information
◘ ◘ ◘ ◘ Success stories about students and projects
◘ ◘ ◘ ◘
26
Topic Unimportant Of Little Importance
Important Very Important
Videos ◘ ◘ ◘ ◘ Student blogs (where you can make and read comments on a variety of education-related topics)
◘ ◘ ◘ ◘
Financial aid and scholarship information
◘ ◘ ◘ ◘
How to get help with homework
◘ ◘ ◘ ◘ Photo galleries ◘ ◘ ◘ ◘ Photos of actual students and classmates
◘ ◘ ◘ ◘
The school’s Facebook page
◘ ◘ ◘ ◘ The school’s Twitter page
◘ ◘ ◘ ◘ Other_________ ◘ ◘ ◘ ◘
8. Which website link would you most likely click to find information about the college’s classes and programs that are offered online?
o E-learning o Online o Online degrees o Distance learning o Online learning o Internet
9. Which website link would you most likely click to find information about different program offerings?
o Academic programs o Programs o Degrees o Degree programs
27
10. Do you have your own Facebook page?
o Yes o No
11. Do you have your own Twitter account?
o Yes o No
12. Do you read or make posts to any blogs? (does not have to be school related)
o Yes o No
13. How do you prefer to be contacted by the university? (Choose as many as you like)
o Email o Telephone o Mail o The school’s Facebook page o Campus website o Text message (Instant messaging) o Other__________________
14. Do you own a “smart phone” such as an iPhone™ Blackberry®, Palm®, Windows® Mobile, or Android™-based phone?
o Yes o No
15. If yes, do you use your phone to access your school’s website?
o Yes
28
o No
16. As a current student, how important is it to have mobile access to the college’s
websites?
o Very important o Important o Of little importance o Unimportant
29
Chapter 4: Results
The following section contains the results of my survey of current students. From
the initial email message to 3,000 students I received 96 responses. The reminder email—
with the original message and link to the survey—was sent two weeks after the initial
email distribution. This follow-up email of the survey generated an additional 12
completed surveys for a total of 108—a 3.6% response rate.
Survey Section 1: Current Student Profile Questions
The first section of the survey contains three demographic profile questions.
Question 1. Please indicate where you are attending classes. The results to this
question were split nearly evenly across all three of our organization’s major brands:
Minnesota School of Business, 38.9%; Globe University, 32.4%; and, Broadview
University, 28.7%. I expected this result, so no surprises here.
Question 2. Please indicate how many academic quarters you have been a
student here. Approximately 64% of respondents (Table 2) have been students for at
least one academic year (four quarters: note that many students at career schools attend
year-round). The distribution of students could have an impact on how future content is
planned for the campus websites.
30
Table 2
Question 2: Please indicate how many academic quarters you have been a student here. Number of Quarters % of Students
1 13.0
2-4 23.1
5-7 24.1
8-10 19.4
11 or more 20.4
Question 3. What degree or certificate are you pursuing? Students pursuing
bachelor’s and associate’s degrees make up 88% of all surveyed students (Table 3).
Since so few students are pursuing master’s degrees and certificate programs, campus
website editors could choose to limit stories and articles directed toward these audience
segments. Insights into audiences helps web editors deliver content that will be read.
Table 3
Question 3: What degree or certificate are you pursuing?
Degree/Certificate % of Students Diploma 8.3
Certificate 1.9
Associate degree 41.7
Bachelor’s degree 46.3
Master’s degree 1.9
31
Survey section 2: Website use and topic preference questions
Within this section of the survey, six questions explored website use and topic
preferences of students.
Question 4. How often do you visit any of the school’s websites, including the
student website? From this question (Figure 4) I learned that the school’s students are
prolific users of GEN websites: 85.2% either use the sites every day or 3–4 times per
week. Nearly 15% occasionally or rarely visit the sites.
Figure 4. Question 4: How often do you visit any of the school's websites, including the student website?
Question 5. How important is the quality of the school’s website to you? The
response to this question was nearly unanimous (Figure 5), with 96% of respondents
reporting that website quality is either important or very important.
31%
55%
11%
4%
Very Frequently (Every day)
Frequently (3-‐4 8mes a week)
Occasionally ( 2 8mes a week)
Rarely (once a week)
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 Percent
32
Figure 5. Question 5: How important is the quality of the school’s website to you?
Question 6. How important are the following website elements when assessing
quality? The results of this multi-part question are presented in Figure 6 (p. 33).
Navigation: 98% of respondents rated navigation as either important or very
important.
Photographs: Surprisingly, many respondents did not equate photographs on the
site with quality; 38.7% rated photos important or very important; 61.4% rated photos of
little importance or unimportant.
Graphics: A majority, 55.5% of respondents, rated graphics such as tables or
charts as important or very important to assessing the quality of a website; 44.5% rated
graphics of little importance or unimportant.
Search: 93% of respondents rated search as important or very important when
evaluating website quality.
57%
39%
4%
0%
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70
Very Important
Important
Of liKle importance
Unimportant
Percent
33
A-Z Index: Another indication that students want easy-to-navigate websites is
the overwhelming response to this question: 81% rated an A-Z index as important or very
important; 18.6% rated the index of little importance or unimportant.
Easy-to-scan pages and short paragraphs: Of course, users associate easy-to-
scan pages with high quality. Exactly 91.2% of participants rated easy-to-scan pages and
short paragraphs as either important or very important when assessing quality.
Design: The measure of design and quality may be more subjective and the
results of this question were slightly less than unanimous: 79.4% rated design important
or very important when assessing quality; 20.6% rated design of little importance or
unimportant.
Color: Respondents rated color nearly as important as design when considering
the quality of a website: 71.7% rated website color important or very important when
assessing quality; 35.4% rated color of little importance or unimportant.
Figure 6. Question 6: How important are these website elements when assessing quality?
0 20 40 60 80
Colors
Design
Easy to scan pages
A-Z index
Search
Graphics (charts/graphs)
Photographs
Structure of navigation
Percent
Unimportant
Of Little Importance
Important
Very Important
34
Question 7. How important are the following content areas or topics to you?
The answers to this question (Figure 7) helped validate my assumptions about what
content elements current students were interested in seeing on the site. Respondents were
asked to rate each item on a scale of unimportant to very important. Items ranged from
content topics to rich-media elements such as videos and photographs. The answers to
questions like this help form the content strategy for a website, which includes key
themes, messages, and recommended topics.
The school’s Twitter page: 13.6% of respondents rated content on the school’s
Twitter page as important or very important; 86.4% of respondents rated the Twitter page
was of little importance or unimportant to them.
The school’s Facebook page: 30.7% of respondents rated the school’s Facebook
page as either important or very important to them. In contrast, 69.2% rated the Facebook
page of little importance or unimportant to them.
Photographs of buildings and classrooms: 35.6% of respondents rated these
images as important or very important; 64.4% rated the photos of little importance or
unimportant.
Photographs of actual students and classmates: 21.8% of respondents rated
these images as important or very important; 78.2% rated them of little importance or
unimportant to them.
Syllabi and course materials available prior to class starting: A near
unanimous 96% of survey respondents rated this content important or very important.
35
Career services/job information: 90% of respondents rated career-related
content as important or very important; 10% rated this content of little importance or
unimportant.
Photos and bios of faculty: 68.3% of respondents rated this content as either
important or very important; 31.7% rated the content of little importance or unimportant.
Success stories about students and projects: 61.8% of respondents rated this
topic important or very important; 38.2% rated the topic of little importance or
unimportant.
Videos: 36.7% of respondents rated videos as important or very important, while
63.4% rated them of little importance or not important.
Student blogs: 36.3% of respondents rated blogs as important or very important,
while 63.8% rated them of little importance or unimportant.
Financial-aid and scholarship information: 90.2% of respondents rated this
content area as important or very important. Nearly 10% rated the content of little
importance or unimportant.
How to get help with class work and studying: 90.2% of respondents rated this
content important or very important; 9.8% rated it of little importance or unimportant.
Photo galleries: 25.5% of respondents rated photo galleries (collections of photos
that can be viewed sequentially) as important or very important; 74.5% of respondents
rated galleries of little importance or unimportant.
36
Figure 7. Question 7: How important are the following content areas or topics to you?
I used the next two questions to provide insight into navigation label preferences
of students searching for content pertaining to the organization’s numerous online and
academic programs. GEN websites have used many different labels over the years, and I
wanted to settle on one label for consistency. Question 8. Which website navigation
label would you most likely click to find information about the college’s classes and
programs that are offered online? The responses were not decisive (Table 4), but the
labels with the highest responses were Online Learning (44.4%) and Online Degrees
0 20 40 60 80
Photo galleries
How to get help with class work and studying
Financal aid and scholarship info
Photos and bios of faulty members
Career services/job information
Student blogs
Videos
Success stories about students and projects
Syllabi and course materials available prior to class start
Photos of actual students and classmates
Photos of buildings and classrooms
The school's Facebook page
The school's Twitter page
Percent
Unimportant
Of Little Importance
Important
Very Important
37
(26.3%). Based on the results of this question, we will change our link to Online
Learning. Note that in this table, as well as most others, the responses appear in the same
order as they appeared in the survey, a randomized list (i.e. not alphabetized).
Table 4
Question 8: Which website navigation label would you most likely click to find information about the college’s classes and programs that are offered online? Label % of Students
E-learning 10.1
Online 7.1
Online Degrees 26.3
Distance Learning 4.0
Online Learning 44.4
Internet 8.1
Question 9. Which website navigation label would you most likely click to find
information about different program offerings? This question addressed the school’s
program offerings, one of the most highly trafficked areas of GEN’s websites (Table 5).
Again, GEN has used different labels for the link to this content, but I wanted to find the
most popular option selected by current students. However, there was no obvious
winner—38.6% of respondents chose Academic Programs and 37.6% chose Degree
Programs.
38
Table 5
Question 9: Which website navigation label would you most likely click to find information about different program offerings? Label % of Students Academic Programs 38.6
Programs 15.8
Degrees 7.9
Degree Programs 37.6
Survey Section 3: Mobile access and social media questions
Section 3 of the survey provides insight into how students use social media on
GEN’s websites, as well as how students are using smartphones to access content. The
intent of questions 10, 11, and 13 was to understand how students may or may not
interact with the university’s social media channels. My assumption was that if most of
GEN’s students have their own Facebook profiles, the students may be open to receiving
communications from the school through Facebook. More and more colleges have turned
to social media to connect with students.
Question 10. Do you have your own Facebook profile? 85.9% of respondents
answered yes; 14.1% answered no.
Question 11. Do you have your own Twitter account? 15% of students who took
the survey have their own Twitter account; 85% do not.
Many colleges and universities have been employing blogs on their websites as a
tactic to connect with students. Students use class-specific blogs, which are often tied into
39
a school’s learning management system (LMS) like Blackboard and D2L, but would
students use other blogs?
Question 12. Do you read or make posts to blogs? Blog adoption is quite low;
26.7% of students answered they use blogs, while 73.3% answered no.
Question 13. How do you prefer to be contacted by the university? In an attempt
to optimize channels of communication between students and our schools, I wanted to
better understand student preferences for communication (Table 6). This question also
held implications for our site information architecture and design. I wanted to provide
prominent links to the most preferred channels on the sites’ home pages. Respondents
could choose more than one answer; thus, the answers do not total 100%. The results of
this question are summarized in Table 6.
Table 6
Question 13: How do you prefer to be contacted by the university? Media % of Students Email 97.0
Telephone 27.7
Mail 29.7
Facebook 5.0
Campus website 12.9
Blackboard announcement 31.7
Text message 9.9
Because of the proliferation of smartphones and increasing numbers of consumers who
access websites through their phones, I created the following questions to provide insight
40
into our students’ mobile behaviors. To better respond to the information foraging
behaviors of students or prospective students, many colleges are designing optimized
versions of their websites for mobile devices, including the new class of tablet devices
like the Apple iPad.
Question 14. Do you own a smartphone such as an iPhone, Blackberry, Palm,
Windows, or Android-based phone? Smartphone penetration among current students is
36.6%. From a Wall Street Journal article, according to ABI Research (Mattioli, 2010),
smartphone market penetration in the U.S. is 28%. Therefore, GEN student adoption of
smartphones is higher than the U.S. average.
Once I established the percentage of students who owned a smartphone, the next
logical question was to ask the smartphone owners if they used them to visit GEN’s
websites.
Question 15. If yes, do you use your phone to access your school’s website?
Only 24.3% of smartphone owners use them to access GEN’s sites.
Question 16. How important is it to have mobile access to the college’s
websites? (Regardless of how they answered 15) The responses were evenly split—50%
of respondents rated mobile access important or very important while 50% rated it of
little importance or unimportant.
41
Table 7
Question 16: How important is it to have mobile access to the college’s websites? Importance % of Students Unimportant 21.0
Of little importance 29.0
Important 25.0
Very important 25.0
42
Chapter 5: Discussion
The information obtained from my research was instrumental in my shaping the
direction of the websites. The streamlined campus websites will offer fewer navigation
elements and help build a stronger sense of community for career college students. For
example, custom sites will deliver local news and content tailored for students at a
specific campus. Students will learn about the qualifications of their faculty members, see
faculty photos, and read about how their campuses are providing students opportunities to
work and network with local nonprofits and employers. Moreover, students will do this
without having to navigate through content targeted to parents or prospective students. In
a post-research analysis of other career college websites in the Twin Cities, I found that
no other schools were publishing much localized content and that none had websites
devoted to a single campus location.
The literature review revealed that students have definite opinions and preferences
for what makes a good website experience and what does not. These preferences and
opinions will be discussed at length in the ensuing pages. In addition, my survey helped
identify content students would like to read and see. Delivering content that is focused on
the needs of the user is also a tenet of user-centered design, today’s most effective web
development philosophy, according to Kalbach (2007).
43
Research question 1: What features or traits would the students like to
experience on the campus websites?
As expected, the website features or traits students identified as most important
were those that enhanced the user experience, such as page design, scannability,
information architecture, and color. The student survey was designed to identify the most
wanted website functions including social media applications and website access via
smartphones. Early on, I had expected that students would embrace social media tools
like Facebook or Twitter to interact with faculty and other university officials. To my
surprise, however, both the literature review and student survey revealed tepid
enthusiasm for both of these tools in the context of organizational websites. Nielsen
(2010b) found that most students don’t use Facebook to communicate with institutions,
reserving it mostly for personal communications. But my research found that at least
30.7% of students said they would use the school’s Facebook page. Easy-to-find access
to Facebook was integrated into the sites through multiple paths. Students, on the other
hand, showed very little interest in Twitter: 86.4% said they would not visit the school’s
Twitter page. Roughly one-third of the schools’ students are engaging the schools’
Facebook pages, enough for some campus websites (Figure 8) to use a Facebook icon as
a quick link to the campus’ Facebook page. Some of the campus sites have avid
Facebook followers, particularly if the local coordinators make daily posts with questions
that attempt to engage students. The Woodbury campus, for example, has more than 400
followers, and the site’s manager works hard to build student engagement through
numerous posts, almost all of them asking for some kind of feedback. Other campus sites
import a Facebook feed to display on the campus news and events page (Figure 9).
44
Figure 8. The Facebook icon (1)—link to this campus' Facebook page—is clearly visible on the home page.
1
1
Figure 9. An excerpt from a news and events page of a campus site shows the campus Facebook feed (1).
45
A few campuses use Twitter to broadcast announcements and do have a few
dozen followers. For reasons to be determined, however, Twitter has not been widely
embraced by students at GEN campuses or at most colleges and universities. Further
research into Facebook, Twitter, other emerging social media applications and further
research about how they are implemented on career college websites could help identify
niche uses for the technologies. For example, further research could reveal if students
would be more apt to use Facebook if profiles were established for specific academic
programs. In addition, further research could show the affect of campus participation if
students themselves made most of the Facebook posts.
As I discuss in the subsection on information architecture, many students prefer
A–Z indexes on websites: the survey revealed 81% of students think the index is
important or very important. Therefore, I will add an A–Z index in a future enhancement
to the sites, in spite of the objections from critics like Nielsen. I believe a listing of the
schools’ academic programs could benefit from an A–Z index and help students find
programs faster.
Most web users scan pages (Nielsen & Loranger, 2006) instead of reading them;
my survey respondents said easy-to-scan pages were important or very important to
include in a website. Students associated these elements with a high-quality site. Since
page scannability was considered important to users, I incorporated tables, charts, and
images into the website design (Figure 10). Easy-to-scan pages are achieved by writing
short sentences and moving relevant copy into tables, charts, and lists. Content that is
contained in text boxes and modules with ample white space also adds to the scannability
of web pages. There is a clear visual hierarchy with contrasting headlines and subheads;
46
the design uses top primary navigation and left secondary navigation; the page is broken
up into clearly defined areas—content boxes and short, easy-to-scan copy blocks; links
that are set apart with contrasting color and font weight; and page design that is clean and
uncluttered.
Figure 10. The campus sites possess the hallmarks of easy-to-scan web pages: (1) short paragraphs, subheads, (2) content enclosed in boxes, and (3) right-side modules help users scan pages to quickly comprehend content. (4) Ample white space and leading between sentences adds to the lightness of the web pages.
Again, students are task oriented and prefer clear pathways and unambiguous
navigation. Students also prefer sites that are clean and simple, as opposed to cluttered
and unorganized; thus, the campus sites are bright and open; extra leading makes the
copy appear less dense (Figure 10). In addition, separate content modules on the left and
1 3 4 2
1
2
3
4
47
rightsides of the pages lend an organized, structured air to the sites. Bright blues and
greens form the basic color palette for the campus site. My survey noted the importance
that students place on both color and design when assessing the quality of a website:
Between 72% and 79% of surveyed students found these factors to be important
or very important when assessing quality. Figure 11 depicts a previous campus website
home page—my redesign changed the focus of the site from prospective to current
students. This page featured several paragraphs of dense copy, short lists of links, and an
information form. The previous sites primarily used stock photography and
mostly generic copy. For example, in Figure 12, a sample faculty page of the first-
Figure 11. The first-generation campus websites focused on prospective rather than current students. This page features several paragraphs of dense copy and lists of links.
48
generation campus site uses a stock photo with generic content and another inquiry form.
Most of the content on this page has a strong sales focus, and the copy is not tailored to
the campus location, as is the case with the new campus websites.
Figure 12. A sample faculty page of the first-generation campus site features marketing- oriented copy and short lists of links. In addition, the page uses generic photography and a marketing lead form. To summarize research question one, I found students prefer
• easy-to-scan web pages,
• intuitive information architecture,
• campus Facebook page,
• A–Z index, and
• clean and simple web page layouts.
49
Research question 2: What content subjects or items are students most
interested in reading and seeing on the sites?
My survey helped determine the level of importance for several content subjects
or themes, some of which—faculty photos and bios, for example—had also been
validated through research I discovered during my literature review. The survey also
helped validate early decisions I made about which content items to include in the site,
such as faculty bios. If the results of my survey had revealed a significant gap between
the planned content for the site and what users were telling us they would like to see in
the sites, then we could alter the content before, or shortly after, the first sites were
published. Here, again, were the content subjects and items I assessed.
Photographs of buildings, classrooms, and actual students: Through research,
I found that students like environmental (buildings, people, and grounds) photographs on
college websites (Poock & Lefond, 2001) because they provide insight into what a
campus and its students may look like. Students look for these visual clues and wonder to
themselves, “Could I fit in here?” But, surprisingly, only 35.6% of the survey
respondents rated photos to be important or very important, the opposite of what I
discovered during the literature review. In addition, only 21.8% of survey respondents
rated photos of actual students and classmates important or very important. Further
research into the use of environmental and student photos on career college websites
could help explain the different results. The differences could be explained by the fact
that Pook and Lefond studied students attending traditional public and private
universities, and I suveyed students at a career college. For instance, the geographical
location and physical atmosphere of the college may be less of a concern for students at a
50
career college than for students at traditional universities. In contrast to traditional college
students, career college students spend less time on campus due to jobs and other family
responsibilities. As noted earlier, the average age of a student at GEN colleges is 27.
1
2
3
Figure 13. Orem campus faculty web page. Students can view faculty and bios by program, content that was considered very important by survey respondents: (1) Photographs of students and faculty provide authentic snapshots of campus life. (2) Clicking on a faculty thumbnail photo takes the user to a bio page of the faculty member. (3) The secondary navigation for the Life @ Orem section offers users insights into the campus leadership team and faculty.
51
Photos and bios of faculty: My previous experience as an adjunct faculty
member led me to think that students would like to see photos and biographical
information about the school’s faculty (Figure 13). The response to this question
validated my idea. Most users (nearly 83%) found this content to be either important or
very important.
Figure 14 shows a sample Elk River, Minnesota campus faculty web page.
Photographs of students and faculty provide authentic snapshots of campus life.
Figure 14. With faculty profile pages like this one on the campus sites students can learn about their instructors’ experience and background.
Syllabi and course materials available prior to class starting: Anecdotal
evidence acquired from current students prior to the launch of the website led to the
inclusion of this question in the survey. Many students would like to read the course
52
syllabi and materials well before the first day of class. Students overwhelmingly (98%)
rated this content important or very important.
Success stories about students and projects: In talking with students I
concluded that at least some would want to read stories about other students and the
classroom-related projects they are involved in (Figures 15 and 16). At GEN, these
success stories and projects are usually referred to as service or applied learning projects
(For the survey I chose to phrase them as success stories because the concept of service
learning is just being introduced at GEN schools, and therefore, not yet well understood.)
The projects give students a chance to work with employers and community partners on
real-world activities that align with their career interests. Approximately half of the
survey respondents rated this content important to them.
Figure 15. Success stories involving GEN students, such as this service learning story, comprise about 30% of the content of campus sites.
53
Figure 16. Service and applied learning web page on Orem campus website.
Videos: Conventional wisdom holds that college students are voracious
consumers of rich media, such as videos. In the survey, however, 36.7% of students rated
videos as important or very unimportant; 63.4% rated them of little importance or
unimportant. Jakob Nielsen (2010b) found that many students ignore videos because they
distract them from what they’re looking for. I believe more research could be done to
better understand web video viewing by career college students. Although students like to
view videos on YouTube, and so-called viral videos for entertainment purposes, more
could be learned on what role videos could play on college websites. In a pilot program
now underway on a few GEN campuses, we have equipped local communications
54
specialists with digital SLR cameras capable of shooting video. The cameras are
delivered with Adobe Photoshop Elements (image editing) and Premier (video editing)
software to help the communications specialists create content for their campus sites.
Thus far, they are using the cameras to take photos of students at activities and events
around campus, including graduation ceremonies. Time will tell if the cameras will lead
to more photographs and videos being posted to the websites.
Student blogs: My expectations were high that students would want
opportunities to blog. But, 63.8% of respondents reported that a student blog function
was of little importance or unimportant. Approximately 36% of students thought blogs
were important or very important. This finding was echoed in the literature review, where
I discovered that only 15% of today’s college students blog. As I stated in the literature
review, students are increasingly abandoning blogs and moving to Facebook for web-
based communications—even though Facebook is not used as a primary vehicle for
communicating with institutions, such as universities.
Financial-aid and scholarship information: According to Google Analytics
data on GEN’s major brand websites, financial-aid content is the topmost searched
content on the organization’s sites. It would stand to reason, therefore, that financial-aid-
related content would be quite popular with current students on the campus websites.
More than 90% of respondents thought this content area was important or very important.
How to get help with class work and studying: More than 90% of respondents
rated this topic important or very important. The high level of interest in this topic
confirmed my assumption to include this content on the campus sites.
55
Photo galleries: In my literature review I found some evidence for including
good, contextual photos on websites, so I planned to include photo galleries, as well. But
in my student survey results I found that nearly 75% of respondents rated photo galleries
(collections of photos that can be viewed sequentially) of little importance or not
important. I added a photo gallery module to the campus site templates at the outset of
the project thinking students would be interested in this content. Figure 17 shows a detail
view from an early wireframe depicting a photo gallery module. Performance of these
pages (based on page views) will be closely monitored to ensure the photo galleries are
being viewed. If not, this content will more than likely be replaced with a single image.
Figure 17. A campus website wireframe depicts a photo gallery module (1) on the top right side of the page.
1
56
Career services and job information: Because GEN is a career college, students
are naturally focused on developing their careers and finding a job. Indeed, 90% of
respondents found this topic to be important or very important.
To summarize research question two, students found the following content items
to be the most important:
• Photos and bios of faculty members
• Success stories about students and projects
• Syllabi and course materials available prior to class starting
• Financial-aid and scholarship information
• How to get help with class work and studying
• Career services and job information
Research question 3: Which elements of the website are the most
important when weighing site quality?
While researching the literature, I found that some students equate website quality
with the quality of the organization (Poock & Lefond, 2001). It would, therefore, stand to
reason that a college would want to do everything in its power to create and deploy high-
quality websites as they accurately reflect or become a beacon for the brand. The topic of
institutional quality is even more relevant today for colleges in the for-profit sector. Some
for-profit colleges are under scrutiny by the Department of Education for unethical and
misleading business practices. Even though GEN has not been named in this ongoing
investigation, the company is at risk by simply being grouped within this industry. For
the record, most of the schools called out in the investigation are large, publicly held
companies.
57
In my survey, students rated navigation, graphics, search, A–Z index, easy-to-
scan pages, design, and color as important to assessing site quality. In the literature
review I also found evidence (Poock & Lefond, 2001; Sandvig & Bajwa, 2004;
Alexander, 2005) that supported student affinity for sites that are easy-to-scan and easy to
navigate.
Students (81%) also found an A-Z index to be a highly desirable function and
associated it with a quality website. As a result of this finding, I will incorporate an A-Z
index in some sections of the website, perhaps as a method for organizing academic
programs.
Another consistent theme with my secondary research was that college students in
general are goal oriented and tend to move through sites very quickly. Designers should
make note of this and present page content so that it’s easy-to-scan and digest. Content
should not be delivered through PDFs because students are reluctant to download and
read them. Their preferences are to read content directly from a web page. GEN is in the
process now of removing most academic program data in PDF form and converting the
information to a regular html-formatted web page. Google Analytics data (page views) on
these pages has already shown higher levels of page views and lower bounce rates on
pages where PDF content has been removed and replaced with html content.
What was a surprise to me was how students did not consider photographs or
images to be a reflection of quality. Instead of linking images to quality, another measure
of photograph importance on a website could be determined with the question—do
photographs add to your understanding of the content? Web readers still want
meaningful information and prefer more information, not less. Moreover, Nielsen (2010)
58
found that website users and students only prefer photographs that are relevant to the key
messages of the page. Photos with captions were also gauged to be more effective than
photos without captions. This finding has led me to direct campus website coordinators to
publish captions with photos whenever possible, especially to identify students and
faculty members.
To summarize research question three, students found these items to be most
important when assessing website quality:
• Navigation
• Graphics
• Search
• A–Z index
• Easy-to-scan pages
• Aesthetics
• Color
Research question 4: What is the ideal information architecture for a
career college website?
Research from Sandvig & Bajwa, (2004) and Nielsen, (2010b), as well as the
results from the survey indicated that students prefer websites that are clean and simple
and that provide clear navigation pathways. The web content and navigation labels
should be free of academic jargon and easy to understand. In other words, users should
not have to think to use the site. My survey results echoed these conclusions: 98% of
respondents said that clear navigation was important or very important. One could argue
that these findings could apply to all web users. After all, who wouldn’t want to
59
experience a simple and intuitive website? I believe, however, that the findings can serve
as a reminder to website managers to keep their websites focused on the content needs
(user-centered design) of their users—in this case, current students.
As discussed earlier in the literature review, Sandvig and Bajwa (2004) found that
students become frustrated if they have to drill deeper than three levels to obtain the
information they seek. With the three-level guideline in mind, I created the information
architecture for the site to be fairly flat—with most content viewable within two or three
clicks of a start page (Figure 18).
Figure 18. Information architecture for Globe Education Network’s campus websites. Most of the content on the site is reachable in three clicks or fewer. For a larger, easy-to- read version of this figure, see Appendix A.
60
While creating the information architecture and content for the campus sites, I
would informally test navigation label ideas with students and other stakeholders. If a
link label did not test well for comprehension, I would alter it before going live with the
website.
For instance, I had to change a navigation label from Learning Center to Service
& Applied Learning because some reviewers cautioned that the label Learning Center
could be construed by students as a place to go for study help, not the area I intended—a
section to find information on service-learning and applied learning projects. In my
literature review, I also uncovered a strong preference for standard conventions for both
search and navigation elements (Nielsen & Pernice, 2010)—that is, the primary
navigation at the top of the page, and the secondary navigation on the left side (Figure
19). These preferences were not addressed in the survey, although students (93%) did rate
1
3
2
Figure 19. The campus websites contain several ideal information architecture conventions: (1) top primary navigation, (2) left-side secondary navigation, and (3) top search box.
61
search as important or very important when evaluating quality. According to Nielsen &
Pernice (2010, p. 65) users prefer that search boxes be placed at the top of the page—
above the masthead (Figure 19). Usually, the search box is to the far right, but this is
where I positioned the service learning persistent link because the designer did not want
to position the service learning logo adjacent to the corporate logo out of fear of
confusing users. The search box was placed at the top of the page, but centered.
In Figure 20, a wireframe of a program page clearly shows the shapes of top and
side navigation, plus content areas in the center and left of the page. The shapes of these
areas of information conform to the familiar patterns found in today’s websites. Figure 21
depicts a typical program page after its wireframe translation. The photos, graphics, and
typography on this page closely match the wireframe (Figure 21). If designers want to
optimize user experience and deliver highly usable sites, it’s best to design sites using
familiar patterns and shapes. Kalbach refers to the focus on the user as user-centered
design (2007, p. 19). Kalbach joins Kissane (2011) and Halvorson (2010) with the
familiar refrain that both content and design should be user-centered.
62
Figure 20. An early wireframe for a campus website program page shows where the basic content areas will be displayed. Sections for navigation elements and content areas are clearly marked. Figure 21 depicts the final translation of this wireframe to a web page.
Figure 21. A final program page on the campus site depicts four distinct information shapes. Primary navigation (top), secondary navigation (left), main content area (center), and custom content modules (right).
63
The campus website’s architecture (Figure 22) is clearly focused on local content
and content that is most appealing to the current student. Local website coordinators—
called communication and community relations specialists—are encouraged to develop a
localized copy style for their websites. Within reason, the campus sites should reflect
Figure 22. Home page of the Woodbury, MN campus website highlights: (1) primary navigation optimized for local content (e.g., Life @ Woodbury, News), (2) social media tool links, (3) persistent link to service/applied learning stories, (4) quick links to essential student tools, (5) banner images and associated stories feature campus events and real students; (6) campus news and events stories content area open up in the news section when clicked on by users, and (7) content modules tailored to feature events, faculty, or students. the local community with geographically unique images and language. For instance, one
website (Figure 23) states on its Getting to the Campus page, “Turn left at the lights by
Sam’s Club.”
2 1
6
4
7
5
3
64
Since students move through sites quickly and become frustrated if they have to
drill deeper than three levels (Poock & Lefond, 2001), I developed a fairly flat
architecture for the campus sites. By contrast, GEN’s typical brand sites (Figure 24 and
25) address prospects and parents, and most of the content is focused on capturing
prospect inquiries and describing academic programs. The site features marketing-
flavored banners and promotional copy on the home page. One of the most prominent
visual elements on the page is a request for information form.
On the other hand, the campus site home page’s (Figure 22) primary navigation is
optimized for local content (e.g., Life @ Woodbury, News). Students have quick access
to social media tools and links to essential student tools such as Blackboard and the
library. Site banner images and associated content feature campus events and actual
students. Students can read the top news and events on the home page in a glance. This
area is constantly updated to maximize student engagement. It’s not uncommon for
students to see their classmates pictured in campus stories. Indeed, one of the hallmarks
Figure 23. Excerpt from the directions page of the Layton, UT website. The campus websites are personalized with references to local landmarks and sights.
65
of a GEN school is small class size, which enables site managers to frequently feature
students and
faculty in classroom settings through stories and photographs. Communications
coordinators have the ability to create photo galleries, which can be added to any web
page. Galleries are ideal for telling stories of campus events through photos and captions.
The survey indicated low interest in this feature, but I would like to ask the question with
a different research method such as a focus group to see if galleries could work in certain
circumstances.
1
3
2
Figure 24. The home page of Globe University's brand website is written to attract prospective students and (1) includes a request for information form. (2) The primary navigation focuses on the needs of prospective students, and (3) banner images feature marketing messages.
66
Figure 25. This typical program page on one of GEN's major brand sites is populated with contact forms, calls-to-action buttons, a find-a-campus module, and links to multiple programs—all content designed to hook prospective students.
To summarize research question four, the ideal information architecture for a
career college website should include these qualities:
• Clean and simple with clear navigation pathways
• Clear navigation labels (no jargon)
• Primary navigation across the top of the page; secondary navigation on the left side
• Search boxes at top of page
67
Following my survey and literature review I also examined other career college
websites to assess if competitive schools offered campus-centric websites, but found
nothing that compares to GEN’s sites. Regional career college websites such as
Rasmussen College, ITT Technical Institute, and Herzing University deploy marketing-
and sales-oriented websites designed to attract prospective students. As far as I could tell,
these schools do not have a similar strategy to GEN’s campus site network. Rasmussen
(Figure 26) does have three pages off of its main site that are campus specific, including a
message from the campus director page, a degrees page, and an “about” page. See sites
from ITT Technical Institute and Herzing University in Figures 27 and 28, which do not
offer any campus-centric content.
68
Figure 26. A campus-level page from Rasmussen College includes a tab view so users can see the campus blogs (inset). This campus section is part of the architecture of Rasmussen’s main site and can be up to three pages: message from the campus director page, degrees offered page, and an “about” page.
69
Figure 27. This page from ITT Technical Institute’s website is the closest the school has to a campus-level website. This sales-oriented site is more typical of career-college websites, which focus very little content toward current students. These sites, as well as the campuses, have an extreme cookie-cutter look and feel.
70
Figure 28. Herzing University features a campus page on its main website. The content is marketing focused and clearly not directed to current students with its generic message from the campus director. In a study reported in the College & University Journal (Poock & Lefond, 2001) one survey respondent shared his annoyance with websites that serve up self-absorbed content like messages from senior leaders: “Why is there a picture of a middle-age white guy?”
71
Conclusion
The challenge of helping to create and implement a complete new class of
websites for which the primary communications goal was to serve the needs of current
students was both stimulating and hard work. My literature review and student survey
revealed a range of good ideas and conventions that helped establish a strong framework
for the websites. The literature categories investigated included content strategy, web
writing, information architecture, design, and social media.
Career colleges differ from regular public and private colleges by offering
programs that often are quicker paths to a job or career. Moreover, the typical student at a
career college differs significantly from the typical student at a public/private school. The
findings of my research will potentially lead other career colleges to examine their web
content strategy, editorial mix, and information architecture to see if they are effectively
providing these unique college students with compelling content. I hope that other career
college website managers can employ my guidelines on their sites while experimenting
with their own ideas.
Previously, I stated that the quality (Poock & Lefond, 2001) of the website is
sometimes linked to institutional quality. A low-quality website could reflect negatively
on a school’s quality or reputation, but that’s not the focus of my study. Moreover, in the
current divisive climate for career colleges, this is a risk no one should take. With
increasing competition for students at all schools and declining enrollments, no website
manager can afford not to deliver consistent, high-quality experiences for fear of it
reflecting poorly on the quality of the school.
72
In future studies, one could spend more time researching best practices around the
presentation of rich media (e.g., video and interactive graphics) on college websites. This
field is changing rapidly, and new technologies are emerging regularly—some with great
promise. It takes an astute and plugged-in web professional to stay up with best practices
in this industry. The practice of content strategy is helping to bring a more rigorous
discipline to website development. Interestingly, while I was conducting my research,
planning the sites and writing this paper, a number of new studies and books appeared
that I read and added to my working bibliography (Solis, 2010; Kissane, 2011; Handley
& Chapman, 2011). In addition, there were several web articles by Jakob Nielsen (2010,
2010a, 2010b). These added references enhanced my research.
The reader of my study should also take away the key message that in order to
design, create, and deploy effective websites, one has to focus on the site users. And the
more I know about GEN students, the better I will get at delivering what they want from
GEN’s campus websites. Indeed, I sought the opinions of students.
I was disappointed in the low response (3.6%) to the survey. Next time I will send
the survey to all students—approximately 11,000, instead of a population size of 3,000. I
would also include an incentive to students for completing the surveys, with the objective
to increase the total number of respondents substantially. In addition, a survey is not the
most ideal tool for assessing the user-centeredness of a website. In future studies I would
also include small focus groups of students to observe behaviors as they navigated and
experienced websites. Future surveys would take place about twice a year to continually
measure how current students and secondary audiences are using the sites. Insights into
which pages are viewed, and how often, helps strategists to continually fine-tune and
73
create content that audiences want. This data should come from a combination of web
analytics and surveys.
Since the rollout of the first campus website in September 2010, GEN has 13
operational sites as of May 2011. At GEN corporate headquarters the biggest operational
challenge has been supporting the new campus sites without adding corporate staff.
My original idea was that locally-based websites, which focus almost exclusively
on students, would do a better job than the school’s one-size-fits-all websites of meeting
the students’ day-to-day information needs. The campus websites would serve as a virtual
campus-meeting place, commons, or student union. When each website was brought
online, I observed how the page views grew week-by-week, month-by-month. Through
Google Analytics I was able to see how the page views grew from just a few dozen, to
hundreds, and thousands. For example, when the Orem, Utah website went live in
September 2010 it was averaging between 25–100 total visits a week. By January 2011
the total visits per week had climbed to approximately 1,500. The Woodbury, Minnesota
campus website went live with a few hundred weekly visitors in November 2010, but by
January 2011 the site was averaging 4,500–5,000 weekly visitors. Anecdotal feedback
from the campuses and students has been quite positive. In six months I will send a
follow-up survey to students to evaluate their opinions of the content and whether or not
it is meeting their information needs. The more we monitor the needs of our site users,
the better we will get at making continuous improvements. It is clear that a need exists
for a campus-based website that focuses on current students. Over time, technology and
business resources may dictate how GEN will deliver local content—but students will
continue to be the final arbiters of what’s useful and what’s not.
74
References
Adelman, C. (2006). How to design a Web site that welcomes prospective applicants. The
Chronicle of Higher Education, 53 (10), 1-5.
Alexander, D. (2005). How usable are university websites? A report on a study of the
prospective student experience. Monash University, Information Technology
Services. Victoria: Southern Cross University.
Andergassen, M., Behringer, R., Finlay, J., Gorra, A., & Moore, D. (2009). Weblogs in
higher education—why do students (not) blog. Electronic Journal of E-Learning,
7 (3), 203-215.
Black, R. (2010, April 27). College students are 'addicted' to social media and even
experience withdrawal symptons from it. Retrieved April 30, 2010, from
NYDailyNews.com: http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/2010/04/27/2010-04-
27_college_students_are_addicted_to_social_media_and_even_experience_
withdrawal_sym.html
Dagan, D. (2008, November 16). Three-click rule defunct, says Nielsen Norman usability
group. Retrieved June 21, 2011, from
ThatDanny!:http://www.thatdanny.com/2008/11/16/three-click-rule-defunct-says-
nielsen-norman-usability-group/
Feeney, N. (2009, Spring). Getting personal: How colleges and high school students
connect online. Journal of College Admission, 4-7.
Grossman, L. (2010, December 27). 2010 Person of the year: Mark Zuckerberg. Time,
p. 50.
75
Halvorson, K. (2010). Content strategy for the Web. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.
Handley, A., & Chapman, C. (2011). Content rules: How to create killer bogs, podcasts,
videos, ebooks, webinars (and more) that engage customers and ignite your
business. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Hedden, H. (2005, January 5). A-Z indexes to enhance site searching. Retrieved
June 12, 2011, from Digital Web Magazine: http://www.digitalweb.com/articles
/a_z_indexes_site _searching/
Ingram, R. (2009, July 31). They'll thank you later. Retrieved February 3, 2011, from
Shut the door on your way out, Cicero:
http://www.richardingram.co.uk/2009/07/theyll-thank-you-later/
Kalbach, J. (2007). Designing Web navigation. Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly Media, Inc.
Kissane, E. (2011, March 8). A checklist for content work. Retrieved March 14, 2011,
from A List Apart: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/a-checklist-for-content-
work/
Krug, S. (2006). Don't make me think: A common sense approach to Web usability
(2nd ed.). Berkeley, CA: New Riders.
Lein, K. (2009, November 24). Content strategy at Capella University. (G. Teagarden,
Interviewer) Minneapolis, MN.
Lovinger, R. (2007, 03 26). Content strategy: The philosophy of data. Retrieved
September 12, 2010, from Boxes and Arrows:
http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/content-strategy-the
76
Marcus, M. B. (2010, February 3). The young prefer Facebook to blogging, Twitter.
Retrieved May 27, 2010, from USA Today:
www.usatoday.com/tech/wireless/2010-02-04-teensonline04_st_n.htm
Mattoli, D. (2010, December 31). Apps focus on profit is blurry. The Wall Street Journal:
Digital Media, p. 1.
McNeil, P. (2008). The Web Designer's Idea Book: The Ultimate Guide to Themes,
Trends and Styles in Website Design. (A. Schell, Ed.) Cincinnati, OH:
F & W Publications, Inc.
Morville, P., & Rosenfeld, L. (2007). Information architecture for the World Wide Web
(3rd ed.). Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly Media.
Nielsen, J. (2010a, October 4). Alphabetical sorting must (mostly) die. Retrieved
October 5, 2010, from Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox:
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/alpha-sorting.html
Nielsen, J. (2010b, December 15). College students on the Web. Retrieved
December 17, 2010, from Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox:
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/students.html
Nielsen, J. (1997, October 1). How users read on the Web. Retrieved March 27, 2011,
from Useit.com: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9710a.html
Nielsen, J. (2010c, November 1). Photos as Web content. Retrieved November 10, 2010,
from Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/photo-content.html
Nielsen, J. (2009, April 27). World's best headlines: BBC news. Retrieved April 28, 2009,
from Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/headlines-bbc.html
77
Nielsen, J., & Loranger, H. (2006). Prioritizing Web usability. Berkeley, CA: New
Riders.
Nielsen, J., & Pernice, K. (2010). Eyetracking Web usability. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.
Poock, M. C., & Lefond, D. (2001, Summer). How college-bound prospects perceive
university web sites: findings, implications, and turning browsers into applicants.
College & University Journal, 15-21.
Redish, J. (. (2007). Letting go of the words: Writing Web content that works. San
Francisco, CA, U.S.: Morgan Kaufmann.
Sandvig, C. J., & Bajwa, D. (2004, Fall). Information seeking on university web sites: An
exploratory study. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 13-22.
Scagnoli, N. I. (2001). Student orientations for online programs. Journal of Research on
Technology in Education, 34 (1), 23.
Solis, B. (2010). Engage! The complete guide for brands and businesses to build,
cultivate, and measure success in the new Web. Hoboken, NJ:
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Spool, J. (2001, May 01). Are there users who always search? Retrieved February 19,
2011, from User Interface Engineering:
http://www.uie.com/articles/always_search/
Unger, R., & Chandler, C. (2009). A project guide to UX design. Berkeley, CA:
New Riders.
78
Appendix A: Website Design Documents
Figu
re A
1. In
form
atio
n ar
chite
ctur
e fo
r Glo
be E
duca
tion
Net
wor
k’s
cam
pus
web
site
s.
79
Figu
re A
2. W
irefra
me
for c
ampu
s w
ebsi
te a
cade
mic
pro
gram
pag
e.
80
Appendix B: Website Style Guide
Figure B1. First page from GEN's website style guide. Created to provide editorial and style guidance for the campus websites.
81
Appendix C: Survey consent–formatted
Figure C1. Formatted email consent form sent to survey recepients
82
Appendix D: Survey consent
Globe Education Network Campus Website Survey Understanding the information needs of current students. As a current student at a Globe Education Network (GEN) school—Globe University, Broadview University or Minnesota School of Business—you have been randomly selected to participate in a survey. This survey will help GEN better understand how you are using the school’s websites. In a major change to improve website communication for our current students, every campus location will soon have its own website. This survey will help identify your top information needs and preferences while visiting and interacting with the campus website. The survey results will also help us design the best navigation and structure for the new site. Therefore your opinions will count. Risks Your participation in this survey is voluntary. There are no known risks associated with the research, but you must be at least 18 years old to participate in the survey. If you are not at least 18, please close the survey. Potential benefits As a result of your participation, your responses and ideas will help shape the design and content of the new website. Protection of confidentiality Your participation in this study will be confidential. Any presented or published results of the study will not include your name or any personally identifiable information about you. Contact information If you have any questions about this survey or if problems arise, please contact Gary Teagarden, Communications Manager, Globe Education Network: ([email protected]; (952-332-8234; 612-799-0472). In addition, you may contact principal investigator, Dr. Roland Nord ([email protected]), or the Internal Review Board Administrator, Dr. Terry Flaherty ([email protected]), both of Minnesota State University. If you would like more information about the specific privacy and anonymity risks posed by online surveys, please contact the Minnesota State University, Mankato Information and Technology Services Help Desk (507-389-6654) and ask to speak to the Information Security Manager