Thursday, March 27, 2008

Accessible Instructional Multimedia: Live blog from CATS 2008

AIMs are online multimedia resources that demo to faculty the use of accessible technologies in teaching.

AIMs enable faculty to understand the ways that emerging technologies can be used to support student success.

Project supported by EnACT to help faculty and staff to develop accessibility training resources to help faculty learn about incorporating accessibility into their course materials... or at least I think that what's this is about... actually, not all of them are about accessibility, but most are.

AIM projects are added to MERLOT repository. Most appear to be videos.

Total of 40 projects planned from eight CSUs... 6 from Chico... wOOt!

6 completed to date, 13 under development.

Next round of projects... applications due in April

Topics wanted:
  • Universal design for learning
  • Assistive technology
  • Distance Learning
  • Technologies designed to address particular Instructional challenges
  • Case studies on deploying accessible course materials
  • Other topics
Examples
Then it all devolved into one guy asking a bunch of questions...

Monday, March 3, 2008

Pop Up Menus

We had a recent discussion about using pop ups menus on our sites.

Should the top level menu items be links to a 'main' page or should they just be text to hover over to show the pop up menu? What about menus with combinations of simple links and pop up sub-menus? If there is a link to a 'main' page, what should be on that page?

Sounded like a job for ResearchMan!

Here are my informal results...

General Sites

For the most part, hover menus are not that popular. I looked at about 90 sites (Amazon, eBay, CNN, etc., etc.) and only about 20% used hover menus. That's not to say that they are a bad thing; they just aren't as common as we might think.

Menu Item is Link with Main Page

MSNBC uses hover menus that list major news categories. The first item in the menu is "[Category] Front Page". Clicking on the hover text takes you to the category front page. Time uses similar functioning drop down menus. Clicking on the menu item takes you to the main page for the news category.

A number of other sites follow a similar model, though these do not have the main page listed at the top of the pop up list.

Menu Item is Link with Visual Aid

Geek.com uses a visual aid (an arrow) to indicate which menu items are pop ups. There are actually a couple of sites that do this.

Menu Item is not Link

A few sites use a model where menu items with pop ups are not themselves links, but menu items without pop ups are links.

Higher Education

Pop up menus are about as common on university home pages as they are on commercial sites.

Menu Item is Link with Main Page

Of the 40 or so university sites I reviewed, this was the only kind of pop up that I found.

The contents of the 'main page' under a link varied, from 'Welcome' pages filled with happy talk, to links to other sites, to pages of links that essentially repeated the contents of the submenus. On some sites, all of these were present on different links. Some sites included single links as well as pop ups in the same menu, without distinguishing between them (e.g., FSU and Syracuse).

Recommendations

It seems pretty clear that the clear majority of sites make the top level menu items links to some sort of main page. I think it almost approaches a 'standard' practice. I do like the idea of visually distinguishing between simple links and links that have pop up sub-menus.

The destination of the top level link varies. With news sites, it typically goes to something like the "US News" or "Sports" front page. With shopping sites, it might be to the "Electronics" main page.

For university sites, it's a bit less clear, and the destination of the link should probably be determined on a case-by-case basis. Ideally, it would link to a page with relevant information, but there are cases where there might not be much information to put under the main category (this might be particularly true with smaller departmental sites).

So, it might end up linking to a page that just repeats the list of items in the sub-menus. This is sub-optimal, however, and every effort should be made to make the 'main' page contentful (new word!) and relevant. One thing is clear, though... as Steve Krug says in Don't Make me Think, "happy talk must die"! No one reads "Welcome" pages or "Message from the Dean" pages. eliminate them! A list of links is more useful.

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

Pimping Your Campus

Yesterday, I asked our provost how budget cuts would affect recruitment and recruitment strategies (see this post).

As Provosts are wont, she gave a very long and detailed answer that appeared to be mostly in a foreign language. However, I did catch a few key phrases.

One thing in particular stuck with me. She said that they've done research that shows that we have much higher conversion rates (is that the term you recruitment folks use?) if they can just get the people to visit the campus. She said that a lot of people come, see the campus and want to immediately enroll.

And it's true. Chico state has a beautiful campus located at the edge of a lively small town downtown area. Chico, our Provost said, is seen as an appealing destination, particularly once people see it.

That made me think that that is one the main messages our Web site should be communicating. At every turn, it should be saying, "This is a beautiful place. This is a great place to live."

bottom line: we need to pimp our campus (as in more effectively advertise it's beauty and desirability).

As you may know, in my other life, I'm a professional photographer, and I enjoy shooting our campus. A while back I was playing with an idea for a small photo book showcasing the campus as a beautiful natural environment through the seasons. I uploaded a mock up to the Web... and pretty much left it there.

As it is, I don't think this is much of a tool for promoting our campus, but I do think that it could be turned into something that could be very effective in at least communicating to people that this is a special, beautiful place, and you should come visit.

I'd be happy to hear your impressions and thoughts.









Y'all come visit, y'hear!

Thursday, February 14, 2008

Page Titles - Best Practices

Title tags are vital from both usability and SEO perspectives. We use the following format for page title tags: Page Title - Department Name - University Name.

I just finished writing up these standards for our own Web site and realized that they are practices that all universities could benefit from.

Although technically optional, title tags are one of the most vital pieces of information that you can put on your Web pages.

Why? There are several reasons:
  1. The Title tag is what appears at the top of your browser window, in the title bar and identifies the page users are viewing (see image, below).
  2. The Title tag is what appears in the tabs in the browser window, and identifies the content of each tab (see image, below).
  3. The Title tag is what appears in the user's Bookmarks or Favorites when they bookmark your page.
  4. Search engines like Google place a lot of weight on Title tags when ranking search results.
Browser Title Bar:

Browser Tabs:

As a result of the importance of the Title tag, we at Chico State have developed a set of best practices to use when assigning Title tags to your page.

Page Title Standards


Use the following format for page title tags: Page Title - Department Name - University Name

Examples:

Faculty and Staff - Geography and Planning Department - CSU, Chico
Academic Services - Provost and Vice President of Academic Affairs - CSU, Chico
Current Students - College of Business - CSU, Chico

Reasons:

You want to include your department name and the university's name in all Title tags so that users searching for "geography faculty chico" will find your page. If you don't include your department name or the university name, you dramatically reduce the odds that your page will turn up in the search results.

Also, the order in which the elements appear is also important. Since browser tabs can only show the beginning of the page title, you want to have the most specific information (the current page's title) first, followed by the department and then the university. Pages titled like "CSU, Chico - Department Name - Page Title" will all appear as "CSU, Chico" in the browser tabs (see images, below).

Wrong: University Name - Department Name - Page Title

All the pages below are different, but you can't tell which is which by the page title, since they all start with "California State University, Chico".

Browser Tabs
Favorites


Right: Page Title - Department Name - University Name

Page titles with the specific page's title first:

Browser Tabs

Favorites


Home Page Titles

Home page titles should just be the department name and the university name: Department Name - University Name.

Examples:

Office of the President - CSU, Chico
Geography and Planning Department - CSU, Chico

Do not use "Home" or "Welcome" in your home page title. Nobody searches for "home" or "welcome" and they take up valuable space in the browser tabs (see images, below).


Wrong: Welcome/Home - University Name - Department Name

All these home pages are different, but we can't tell which is which.

Browser Tabs
Favorites



Right: Department Name - University Name

These home pages all use just the department name and the university name.

Browser Tabs

Favorites

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Analyzing the Future - Part 5 - Page Structure

An examination of the organization of page content from a semantic perspective. Sounds scary, but it's mostly about clean, simple, accessible, and well organized HTML on your home page.

In previous posts in this series, I've looked at home page content from a number of different perspectives (navigation, page dimensions, page elements). This time, I wanted to look at the structure of content from a more semantic perspective.

HTML coders (the good ones, anyway) are obsessed with good semantic code; nice hierarchical structures, valid XHMTL, etc. But you can have a well-formed, semantically perfect page that is an incomprehensible, poorly organized and impossible to use site.

The goal is to have good semantics and good organization. If you do that, the odds are that you'll also have good accessibility as well.

Methodology

As usual for this series, I victimized my usual 18 standard sites.

For this analysis, I turned off all CSS and and replaced all images with ALT text using the Web Developer Toolbar in Firefox. This provided me with a semantic view of each page, stripped of the fancy graphics and colors designed to fool me into wanting to attend their school.

I ended up looking at pages like this:


Why would I look at pages like this? A couple of reasons. First, to be able to see the real organization of information on the page, and second (and more importantly) because disabled users using screen readers and users on cell phones often access your pages just like this.

Results

I saw a lot of variations in page organization, and a variety of good and bad practices.

Only two sites used table-based layouts. Yea!

Eight sites had some sort of "Skip to..." navigation at the top of the page, though NC State kind of went overboard with six different "Skip to..." links at the top of the page. "Skip to Content" was the most popular, with "Skip to Navigation" a close second.

A couple of sites put all their links at the bottom of the page. This might have been deliberate in order to focus on the content, but home pages tend to be portal pages, so navigation should be prominent and easily accessible.

Search boxes tended to be toward the top of the page, but not always. I think for disabled users, search boxes must be very difficult to find on most Web pages.

Semantically, sites were all over the map. Some sites, like UT Knoxville and Loyola Marymount, followed valid heading organization. Other sites, used a mix of only H4 and H5 tags, all H3 tags, etc., etc. Some used no headings at all.

There were also a few pages (e.g., University of St. Thomas) appeared to be all links and little content.

Recommendations and Best Practices

Based on my examination of the 18 home pages, I came up with a list of best practices to look for:
  • Complete separation of content and presentation (via CSS-based design)
    • This includes CSS-based layout instead of table-based layouts
  • Semantic HTML
    • Based on properly ordered and nested heading tags (H1, H2, etc.)
  • Presence of descriptive ALT tags for all non-content free images
    • Images that are just pretty pictures can have empty ALT tags
  • Presence of navigational shortcuts at the top of each page
    • e.g., "Skip to Content" links
  • Reasonable mix of content and navigation
    • Who wants a page that's nothing but links? It makes your home page look like a link farm.
  • Prominent placement of search box
    • Typically very near the top of the page, or the placement of a navigational shortcut to the search box at the top
  • Prominent placement of the name of the institution
    • This should be your H1 tag (ya think?)
What would the "perfect" page look like? Well, the actual content would depend on your site, but you can see a sample bare-bones page here, or look at the layout below.

Sample Page:


Hypothetical State University

Content

News & Announcements

News Item 1

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Nullam suscipit, tortor quis sollicitudin porttitor, diam metus aliquam ante, ut sodales felis purus ac quam. Mauris ut erat in ipsum laoreet lacinia. More...

News Item 2

Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Donec varius tempus urna. Phasellus porta blandit lacus. Nunc nec arcu et metus sodales ullamcorper. Mauris vitae leo id sapien sagittis lacinia. More...

More News...

Events Calendar

February 14, 2008

Valentine's Day Massacre - Have a bang at the SMC Cartage Garage!

February 20, 2008

Integer mattis dolor vel felis. Aliquam viverra nunc eget leo. Pellentesque interdum urna non purus.

More Events...

Hypothetical State University
123 Main St.
Anytown, USA 12345
1-800-345-6789
info@hsu.edu
Copyright © 2008 HSU

Tuesday, February 5, 2008

What is the Purpose of a University Web Site?

Yesterday our CIO was going over the new Web governance structure being implemented at our campus. According to him, one of the missions of this new Web governance structure is to "determine the purpose of the university's Web site."* It seems like a reasonable question.

Now, I've taken a small poke at that issue in a previous post, but I got afraid and ran away from it because it seemed big and scary.

But it's a real issue... or is it?

If you put it in the terms of, "does our university Web site have a purpose?", you better hope the answer is "hell yes!" instead of "not that I'm aware of", but trying to define that purpose is not so easy.

Of course, you're all saying, "the Web site doesn't have a single purpose." And let's face it; it's not even one Web site; it's many Web sites, under the control of many different people, and serving many different audiences and needs.

As a result, I'm not personally convinced that we can come up with a "definitive" answer to this question. I believe that we have to take a more molecular view of the site. That is, I think that we can say, "OK, we need to do this. And we need to have that. And there has to be this component", without having to have a complete "big picture" view.

Not that I don't believe in the "big picture" approach, or even agree with it; I do. I just feel that the Web as an environment, as a tool, and as a platform is too complex and evolving too rapidly for definitive, big picture answers.

Of course, that doesn't change the political reality that the CIO expects the Web governance suckas (er... committee members) to determine the purpose of the university's Web site.

Personally, I plan to be sick that year.

I'm sure some of you have encountered this issue. How have you approached it? Dealt with it? Defused it? Succumbed to it?

*(for the sake of simplicity, I'm assuming here that he was referring to the campus's public Web site, www.csuchico.edu, and not all the other Web-based applications, such as the portal or the LMS).

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

A Beautiful Nightmare

Wherein I worry that lowly end users of our content management system will turn our beautiful new Web site into an unnavigatable mess.

After years of beating around the bush, we're finally going to be getting an enterprise Web content management system (WCMS) for Chico State. We're getting Hannon Hill Cascade Server, but that's not the point of this post.

I've fought very hard for an enterprise WCMS over the past several years, but the closer we've gotten to getting one, the more misgivings I have.

I know that's heresy, but as an admittedly elitist web developer I'm wary of turning the unwashed masses loose on Web sites without adult supervision.

I'm not worried about them putting pink text on green backgrounds - we can control that with pre-made templates.

What I'm worried about is having people with no experience with or (concept of) organizing information creating and attempting to organize departmental Web sites. After all, we're talking about people whose desktops look like this:

(image stolen from this site)

We have spent years thinking about WCMS's. We've spent months reviewing products, trying to select the best one for our needs. We're going to spend more months developing the best and most beautiful templates for people to use. And we're going to hire people to manage this great piece of software and manage a smooth rollout of the technology to campus.

And then we're going to turn over virtually the entire CSU, Chico Web presence to (let's be honest) a bunch of department secretaries and let them turn it into a Web version of their computer desktop.

This isn't making sense to me.

Why bother to invest all this time, money and effort on the back end, if the people who will actually, hands on, implement and manage major pieces of the campus have no idea of what they're doing?

OK, so we'll offer - no, require - training in information architecture, organizational skills, writing for the web, etc. for everyone who will use the WCMS.

Right.

How am I going to sell that? That isn't sexy. The software is sexy (if you're into that sort of stuff, which personally I'm not). New designs are sexy. Training isn't sexy. Information architecture isn't sexy.

The very stakeholders that need to sign off the standards and requirements for the WCMS barely know what information architecture is, so they're not going to get it. If they don't get it, they won't require anyone else to get it.

End result... We end up with a beautifully designed new site, run by a sophisticated piece of content management software, but where the content is an impenetrable mishmash of confusing, redundant, mislabeled links and huge rambling pages of run-on content. Even better, there'll be no consistency across subsites with regard to terminology, labeling, organizational schemes or writing style.

For the user, our Web site will be a beautiful nightmare.

We have to prevent this. I'm open to ideas.

Thursday, December 20, 2007

Spin off Blog - "Tales from Redesignland"

In order to keep the serious stuff from the cartoons, I'm creating a new cartoon blog called "Tales from Redesignland" to chronicle the lives of us poor web developers... particularly those in higher education.

Y'all come visit us, y'hear?

Tuesday, December 18, 2007

Thoughts on the Redesign Process - The Cartoon Version

No, I'm not bored, I've just wrapped up all of my projects for the semester.

I saw this page and thought it was a very cute way to visually describe the design process. I don't have any Lego men, so I adapted some free icons to do the job.

1. Get the right high-level decision-making organization in place
Their role is thinking about big picture issues, not micromanaging the process or the design.


2. Assemble the Redesign Team
This team may consist of people from several different departments. The team as shown, is made up of roles; one person may play more than one role. Though boundaries may not really exist, I've divided the team into four groups: technical, design, content, and quality.


3. Define High-level Redesign Goals
Ideally, this should be a conversation between the high-level stakeholders and the team leads (project lead, graphic designer, information architect, usability designer, communications specialist, and technical lead). The stakeholders need to communicate the goals and direction for the new Web presence and the team leads need to ask questions and provide feedback from their specific perspectives.


The conversation needs to be focused on eliciting clear direction from the stakeholders while educating them as to best practices and standards on the Web.

The trap at this stage is to begin to micromanage the process before it even starts. Talk should be in general terms, rather than discussing specific design, content or technology issues.

Wrong: "I think that going with an Aqua-style design, but in green, would be best."
Right:
"How do you envision the redesign affecting our branding?"

Wrong: "We should have more dropdown menus!"
Right: "One of our top goals is to simplify the interface of the home page and reduce the clutter of links."

4.
Establish Scope, Timeline and Budget
Scope creep will kill you. Avoid it.


5. Establish Standards
Assemble the full redesign team to discuss and establish standards for coding, design, labeling, content, security, accessibility, etc.

6. Do your Homework
Everyone should be involved at some level in this step, but it is most important for the graphic designer, information architect and usability designer to do as much research on trends and best practices as possible.


7. Profile Site Users
Profiling is good. Get your 'user experience' group together (graphic designer, communications specialist, information architect and usability designer) and construct several personas and some scenarios to go with them. This step should start out as a series of 'blue sky' sessions, just exploring the possibilities, but should evolve into a prioritized lists of tasks.


8. Develop & Test Information Architecture(s)
Building off your work with personas and scenarios, begin building out structures and organization...


... and testing them on users using card sorts and wireframes.


9. Develop & Test Visual Designs
Hopefully, you'll have gotten some general design direction from the stakeholders to give you a start.


Show designs to stakeholders and focus groups of users. Refine and repeat until you have final approval.


10. Create and Test a "Protosite"
Probably the smartest thing you'll ever do.



11. Create and Implement Real Site
After fixing all of your mistakes on the protosite, time to build out and test the real thing.

12. Finish Documentation

13. Go Live
14. Plan for Maintenance


I had fun making this. I hope you had fun reading it. I'm sure that there will be more of the motley crew to come.

Thoughts on the Redesign Process

A look the redesign process for the CSU, Chico home page.

The key to success for any large-scale Web site redesign is a process that works.

Four years ago, I put together a PowerPoint presentation on the Web design process for the Chico State home page. No one ever looked at it, but it's almost as useful today as it was then. With the benefit of four more years of experience, here's a revised version.

The Short Version (for the attention-impaired)
  1. Get the right high-level decision-making organization in place
  2. Assemble the Redesign Team
  3. Define High-level Redesign Goals
  4. Establish Scope, Timeline and Budget
  5. Establish Standards
  6. Do Your Homework
  7. Profile Site Users
  8. Develop & Test Information Architecture(s)
  9. Develop & Test Visual Designs
  10. Create and Test a "Protosite"
  11. Create and Implement Real Site
  12. Finish Documentation
  13. Go Live
  14. Plan for Maintenance
The Long Version (for the terminally bored)

1. Get the right high-level decision-making organization in place
Before you can even begin considering doing a redesign of your home page, you need to have functional, authoritative structures in place for making decisions, and determining and enforcing standards. This should involve people at the highest level possible in order to ensure buy-in as the redesign progresses.

The role of high-level administration should strategic, not tactical, in nature. Their role should be in setting priorities, overall goals, and high-level messaging instead of micromanaging the design, information architecture, labeling, etc.

At Chico State, we have a brand new Web Governance committee, consisting of the CIO and vice presidents.

2. Assemble the Redesign Team
You can't actually conduct a redesign without competent people in responsible positions. Nor can you respond to questions posed by administration concerning the redesign without qualified people on staff.

A large scale redesign like a university Web site requires a number of roles (one person may fill several roles):
  • Project Lead
  • Technical Lead
  • Graphic/Visual Designer
  • Information Architect
  • Interaction/Usability Designer
  • HTML Coder
  • Programmer
  • Web Server Administrator
  • Multimedia Developer
  • Photographer
  • Accessibility Designer
  • Writer
  • Content Manager/Editor
  • Communications Specialist
  • Quality Assurance
Skimping on any of these areas can cause you major grief down the line. Your best bet for success is a cooperative interdisciplinary team that may span several organizations on campus (most notably Information Technology and University Advancement).

At Chico State, we have the design/technical/IA/usability people under two closely related roofs, but lack a close relationship with the Advancement folks.

3. Define High-level Redesign Goals
This step really needs to be a conversation between the administration and the redesign team. The administrators bring an awareness of the university's top priorities, goals, concerns and issues to the table, while the design team brings knowledge of technologies, standards, best practices, other university Web sites, as well as a lot of experience with the Web redesign process that administrators may lack.

A strictly top down approach is likely to result in a site neither well organized, well designed or usable. A bottom up approach is likely to result in a site that lacks focus and fails to meet the top priority needs of the campus.

Example goals might include:
  • Create new, fresher, more “hip” look
  • Implement strategic goals for university web presence
  • Improve navigation/site structure
  • Make site easier to use
  • Address accessibility issues
  • Attract more new students
  • Fulfill university core objectives
  • Improve site performance
  • Make site easier to maintain/change
  • Enhance university image/branding
  • Increase design consistency across entire site
  • Implement new technologies (e.g., WCMS)
4. Establish Scope, Timeline and Budget
The biggest danger in undertaking a project like redesigning a campus Web site is scope creep. Scope creep will kill any project and can permanently damage working relationships on campus. It must be avoided at all costs.
  • Establish a clear list of what will and will not be done
  • Clearly define personnel to be involved (including timebase and responsibilities)
  • Establish clear milestones
  • Plan for content lag
  • Write a detailed production plan outlining major goals, strategy, resources & timeline
5. Establish Standards
One thing that has saved Web Services from endless trouble and heartache over the years is the fact that we invested a lot of time early on in developing standards (everything from design standards to file naming standards to accessibility standards to labeling standards).

Before you get into do a redesign, you need to develop a comprehensive standards document and make sure that everyone sticks to it. Some standards to consider:
  • Coding (XHTML, CSS, file naming, etc.)
  • Accessibility
  • Security
  • Graphic design
  • Communications (branding, brand usage)
  • Labeling
  • Content (writing guidelines, etc.)
6. Do your Homework
You can't fix a problem if you don't know that there is a problem, and you still can't fix a problem you've identified if you don't know what your options are. So this step is two-fold:
  1. Analyze and test your existing site
  2. Educate yourself as to what other sites are doing
This entire blog is dedicated to this step, and I can't stress the importance of this step enough. You skip it at your own risk.

To better understand your existing site, you should:
  • Examine log files for usage and patterns (Google Analytics is great for this)
  • Do a page structure analysis
  • Create a visual site map to better understand the site’s existing structure
  • Conduct usability testing of existing site (to identify specific problems)
  • Audit existing content
To educate yourself as to what others are doing, you could read this blog or search for university redesign blogs.

7. Profile Site Users
Real Web designers profile their site users; the rest of us are just posers. Profiling (in this case profiling is good) allows you to role play in a sense; to get inside the heads of your users and see your site from their perspective. This is vital for administrators and designers who have a radically different view of the campus Web site than a 17 year-old high school student looking for a place to go to college.

Some steps in profiling:
  • Categorize users (currents students, faculty staff, alumni, etc.)
  • What are their characteristics?
    • Demographics
    • Browser versions used
    • Internet access (broadband/modem)
  • Develop personas for testing/designing purposes
    • 6-8 should be sufficient
  • Why personas?
    • They personalize the users you are designing for
    • Helps you visualize how each persona might approach the site
    • Used in testing scenarios (how would Davin the art student use this feature?)
8. Develop & Test Information Architecture(s)
Now we start to get to the meat of the process.
  • Examine what other universities have done
  • Develop taxonomies
  • Do card sorting tests
  • Conduct task analysis for common tasks that have poor task modeling on current site
  • Develop site maps
  • Develop and test wireframes
  • Conduct user scenarios to keep IA on track
  • Get feedback from administration on IA finalists
9. Develop & Test Visual Designs
To most people, this phase is the only phase of a redesign. Certainly, it is the most visible.
  • Develop design concepts
  • Refine into designs (must follow wireframes)
  • Insure that designs stick to the architecture
  • Get feedback (e.g., focus groups)
  • Get approval (powers that be must sign off on the design)
10. Create and Test a "Protosite"
The purpose of testing a protosite is to give people a chance to use the site before it goes live. This allows you to work out a lot of bugs in design, IA and usability before subjecting it to the entire campus. Some universities do a public "beta" with the protosite in order to get a wider range of feedback. Protosites are easy to set up if you have a WCMS.
  • Create skeleton site (ising proposed visual design, navigation & site structure)
  • Multiple alternate designs can be tested
  • Conduct usability testing with real users
  • Refine design and structure based on results
11. Create and Implement Real Site
This is the final dress rehearsal before going live and the last chance to tweak designs, templates and content. This is where the QA and testing really kicks in to find bugs and problems, make sure that all pages are accessible, make sure that all pages work with supported browsers, etc.

You might consider making this site available to users as well for testing and feedback. Using a tool like Google Analytics, you can get valuable information about how people are using the new site even before it officially goes live.

12. Finish Documentation
Haha! Documentation is never finished. Documentation should have started no later than step 4 (Establish Standards). We use a wiki for all of our documentation and I can't recommend that approach highly enough.
  • Style Guide (fonts, colors, page dimensions, banners, etc.)
  • Production Standards Guide (file naming conventions, code standards, CSS, etc.)
  • Page Templates (can be in WCMS)
13. Go Live
Finally. Couldn't we have just hired a student to do a new home page and left it at that?
  • Freeze all design and content
  • Complete QA testing
  • Plan announcement strategy (vitally important! - people HATE surprises)
  • Consider phased, or soft, launch
  • Have a “What’s Changed” page
  • Transfer to live server
  • Party!
14. Plan for Maintenance
Actually, this should be done long before the site goes live. If you have a WCMS, maintenance will be part of that project's implementation plan.
  • Get post-launch feedback from users
  • Fix bugs, serious problems
  • Determine who is responsible for maintaining what
  • Train departmental editors (make them familiar with standards, and with maintaining site integrity)
Web Design Process Resources

Monday, December 17, 2007

Analyzing the Future - Part 4 - Home Page Elements

An analysis of the placement of page elements on 18 newly redesigned college/university home pages.

This post is in essence a repeat of the research I did a year ago on the top 20 university Web sites. You can read that post here. The difference here is that the sites I'm looking at are completely different and they've all been redesigned within the past year.

I've changed a few bits this time around, so I went back and redid the numbers from last time to properly correspond.

Most Common Page Elements

No major changes here except that features and events have become more popular, and "quick links" have become much less popular.

Element Sites 2006 Sites 2007
Photos 100% 100%
Primary Navigation 100% 100%
Search Box 100% 94%
News 85% 83%
Top Banner 90% 78%
Secondary Navigation 70% 78%
Feature/Spotlight 55% 78%
Events 30% 67%
Quick Links 45% 22%

Page Element Placement

I've placed the results from 2006 on the left and from this year on the right. Overall, there were few earthshaking changes, but there were a few trends:
  • Identity/logo branding is more consistently placed in the upper left-hand corner
  • Search box placement in the upper right-hand corner has become almost universal
  • Primary navigation is less concentrated on the left side of the page, and is becoming more common on the top or upper right
  • Secondary photos have become more common and tend to be concentrated below and to the right of the main photo
  • Feature item area is increasing in size
  • News and events continue to be concentrated on the lower left-hand and right-hand portions of the page (respectively)
Top Banner

Identity/Logo
Search Box

Primary Navigation
Secondary Navigation
Main Photo

Other Photos

Feature Item
News
Events/Calendar
Quick Links

Thursday, December 13, 2007

Analyzing the Future - Part 3 - Navigation

A look at at links and navigational structures used on newly redesigned college/university home pages. Topical organizations (About, Admissions, Academics, etc.) are most popular in the most prominent navigational areas, while audience-oriented links are most common in secondary navigational areas. The usual crud (Contact, Directory, Site Map) is most common in tertiary navigation areas.

Navigation (which links, what they're called, where they're placed, how they're grouped and organized) is probably the single most fascinating topic for me in reviewing Web sites.

There are a lot of potential approaches, but interestingly enough there are actually a number of standout trends in the 18 sites I reviewed.

Methodology

Gawddamn methodology again. What is this, some ivory tower university? Oh, yeah.

I've done other examinations of home page navigation (here and here), and I will revisit those. But for this analysis, I wanted a slightly different approach.

Home pages are complex entities, serving many purposes. As a result, most have more than a single navigational area (by navigational area, I mean a clearly defined area with a cluster of links and no other content).

For the purposes of this analysis, I've broken these navigational areas into:
  • Primary navigation (usually the largest and most prominent navigational area)
  • Secondary navigation (usually not as prominent, but still easily identifiable, often providing a contrasting navigational scheme to the primary; e.g., audience vs. topical)
  • Tertiary navigation (the fine print links typically clustered at the top and/or bottom of the page)
Here's a good example:


Results

Primary and Secondary Navigation

Virtually every home page examined had navigational areas that could be interpreted as primary, secondary and tertiary, though there could easily be disagreements as to which was primary and which secondary. I made my best guess.

Far and away the most common navigational setup among these sites was to split the primary and secondary navigations between topical and audience-oriented organizations. Most common was to use the primary navigation for topical links and the secondary navigation for audience-oriented links, but a significant minority reversed this approach.


Primary Secondary
Topic 12 5
Audience 4 10

The most common topical links in the primary and secondary nav areas were:

Link # of Sites
About (university)
16
Academics 13
Athletics 12
Admissions 12
Campus Life/Student Life 11
Research 9

Interestingly, "Programs" and "Colleges & Departments" (and equivalent terms), which I expected to be prominent, were not common at all. Programs appeared in the primary or secondary navigation only 4 times, and Colleges & Departments only twice.

The most common audience-oriented links in the primary and secondary nav areas were:

Link # of Sites
Alumni 16
Current Students 14
Faculty/Staff 13
Prospective/Future Students 10
Parents 8

Tertiary Navigation

Tertiary navigation areas consist mostly of small links across the top or bottom of the page. The most common links in these areas were:

Link # of Sites
Contact Us
12
Employment/Jobs 9
Directory/A-Z Index 7
Maps 7
Site Map 7
Giving 6
Portal 6

Number of Links

The average number of links in each of the three navigational areas was between 5 and 6, though there was a higher variation in the tertiary links because they were scattered around the page. The primary nav tended to have more links than the secondary nav, which was more concentrated at 5 or 6 links long.