The document summarizes a project to redesign the website of a university library to improve usability and accessibility. It describes conducting user research through interviews, surveys and observations to understand user tasks and problems. Based on the analysis, wireframes and designs were created with a task-centered approach and tested through discount usability testing. The testing provided feedback that informed further modifications and additions to address underlying issues identified. The lessons learned included how user research was effective in getting staff buy-in and involvement, and using prototypes to try out ideas.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

8. Design: wireframes
• User tasks
• Home page items
• Web conventions
• Frequency of use per task
By Many
easy to find
By Few
more hidden
Frequent
few clicks
Easy to find and
few clicks
More hidden but
few clicks
Occasional
more clicks
Easy to find but
more clicks
More hidden &
more clicks

9. Design: wireframes

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

11. Three designs
3 designs

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

13. Modified design home page
modified

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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