Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Student Preferences to Library
Signage: Methods, Tips, and
Best Practices to Consider
Mark Aaron Polger, Assistant Profess...
Our project
• Signage audit
– Evaluation of language, branding,
design, and placement
• Creation of policies, guidelines,
...
Summer 2012
Dilemma:
•Too many signs (clutter)
•Students often overlooked
signage
•Contradictory, punitive, and
inconsiste...
Summer 2012
• Performed a comprehensive signage audit:
– Divided signs into permanent and temporary
– Divided signs into t...
Fall 2012 - Summer 2013
• In alignment with new college brand:
– Developed interim signs and removed old signs
– Created a...
Fall 2013
• Informal Questionnaire
– Approximately 60 library employees
participated
– Faculty and staff identified font f...
Fall 2013
• Signage preference questionnaire
(N=325)
– Showed students six signs with identical
messages but in old and ne...
Conclusion
• Recurring themes were identified:
– Preferred images over text
– Clean and simple design
– Brief messages
– B...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

METRO talk- May 27, 2014 on Library Signage Audit and Replacement

756 views

Published on

Published in: Marketing
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

METRO talk- May 27, 2014 on Library Signage Audit and Replacement

  1. 1. Student Preferences to Library Signage: Methods, Tips, and Best Practices to Consider Mark Aaron Polger, Assistant Professor and First Year Experience Librarian, College of Staten Island, CUNY MarkAaron.Polger@csi.cuny.edu Amy F. Stempler, Assistant Professor and Coordinator of Library Instruction, College of Staten Island, CUNY Amy.Stempler@csi.cuny.edu METRO UX SIG Meeting, May 27,2014
  2. 2. Our project • Signage audit – Evaluation of language, branding, design, and placement • Creation of policies, guidelines, signage map • Student, Faculty, and Staff feedback • Student Survey • Signage replacement • Conclusion
  3. 3. Summer 2012 Dilemma: •Too many signs (clutter) •Students often overlooked signage •Contradictory, punitive, and inconsistent design •Absence of branding •Negative impact on students’ perception of the library and librarians
  4. 4. Summer 2012 • Performed a comprehensive signage audit: – Divided signs into permanent and temporary – Divided signs into three categories: policy, informational, and directional – Counted signs and identified problems • Started to develop: -Guidelines & policies -Signage templates -Signage locator “map”
  5. 5. Fall 2012 - Summer 2013 • In alignment with new college brand: – Developed interim signs and removed old signs – Created a common “look and feel” with new college logo, colors, and font face – Developed best practice guidelines and a signage policy to create a consistent “library brand.” – Worked towards establishing buy-in
  6. 6. Fall 2013 • Informal Questionnaire – Approximately 60 library employees participated – Faculty and staff identified font face, font size, and language preference – Received buy-in from department
  7. 7. Fall 2013 • Signage preference questionnaire (N=325) – Showed students six signs with identical messages but in old and new designs • Cell phone • Textbook • Calculators • Silent Study • Computer use • New Books – Students were asked to select the signs they preferred – Included an option for general comments about signage and the library
  8. 8. Conclusion • Recurring themes were identified: – Preferred images over text – Clean and simple design – Brief messages – Bright colors – Large font • Spring 2014 – Incorporated images to new signs – Continuously evaluate language, placement, design, and purpose of signs

×