1 / 25

What Does a Typical Library Website Look Like?

Anthony Chow, Ph.D . – UNCG Library and Information Studies Dept. Christian Burris – Head of Serials, Wake Forest University Michelle Bridges – School Librarian, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Patricia Commander – Health Sciences Librarian, WSSU. What Does a Typical Library Website Look Like?.

aileen
Download Presentation

What Does a Typical Library Website Look Like?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Anthony Chow, Ph.D. – UNCG Library and Information Studies Dept. Christian Burris – Head of Serials, Wake Forest University Michelle Bridges – School Librarian, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Patricia Commander – Health Sciences Librarian, WSSU What Does a Typical Library Website Look Like?

  2. Overview • Study Introduction • Literature Review • Research Method • Findings • Discussion and Recommendations

  3. Introduction What does a typical library website look like? • We decided to ask ! • Our nationwide study involved all academic and public libraries from all 50 states examining website design, layout, content, and site management.

  4. Literature • Websites are akin to exits off a main freeway, a promise of potential adventure and intrigue and have less time than ever, as little as 25-35 seconds (Nielsen & Loranger, 2006) • In reviewing the literature, there have been many studies describing usability testing and research done on singular institutional websites for one individual library; broad studies focusing on public and academic libraries, however, are not common

  5. Literature (2) • Liu (2009) also made a list of innovative features of website and found that 30 libraries had RSS feeds, four had personalized library spaces, and almost all had live chat as a reference communication tool. • Solomon (2005) conducted a survey of public library websites in Ohio, using a checklist of 61 usability guidelines, features and content. Overall Solomon found that only 35 of the 211 websites surveyed met 80% of her criteria and she noted that important features were missing such as privacy policies, site searches, and feedback mechanisms.

  6. Literature (3) • Usability studies have shown that creating websites with usability guidelines are important as, “patrons who cannot successfully complete specific tasks may not revisit the site” (Chen et al 2009, 963). • Connell (2008) found from a survey of web developers in academic libraries that only 46.8% of them had conducted usability testing of any kind on their websites

  7. Literature (4) • Usability & Usability Testing • ISO 9241-11 (1998): The effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction with which specified users achieve specified goals in particular environments (ISO, 1998). • Utility and Ease-of-Use (Nielsen, 2001) • User-Centered Design (UCD; ) or human centered design • “development proceeds with the user as the center of focus” (Rubin, 1984).

  8. Literature (5) • King (2003) suggests that you first envision your site as a business with information being the product. “…usability studies play a vital role in making sure library users can find information on your Web site quickly and accurately” (p. 13). • Liu (2009) found that "the universe of information presented on academic library homepages still focuses on library functions, requires numerous pathways for access, has overwhelming options, and takes a 'one-design-for-all' approach that fails to recognize users as individuals"(11).

  9. Research Questions • A comprehensive review of the literature revealed no large scale study had been conducted to determine the current state of academic and public library websites • RQ1: What is a standard design layout for academic and public library websites? • RQ2: What are the common features and content academic and public library websites include? • RQ3: Who designs and maintains academic and public library websites? • RQ4: To what extent do academic and public library websites adhere to recommended design guidelines?

  10. Method • 1,469 websites were analyzed for the study • The Library Website Usability Checklist (n=203) • Systematic evaluations of randomly selected sites • The Library Website Survey (n=1,266) • Self-reports from the nation’s libraries

  11. Method (2) • The Library Website Usability Checklist (n=203) • 67 questions divided into five discrete sections – site information, recommended website features, content, feature placement, and recommended information architecture and usability factors • four library websites from each state and the District of Columbia stratified into four categories: one rural public library, one urban public library, one private academic library, and one public academic library.

  12. Method (3) • The instrument was comprised of a total of 44 questions broken down into five sections – general information (4), web design and management (5) , feature checklist (5), content (22), and page location and placement (8). • Over three quarters (76.9%) of our responding libraries were public libraries, while only 23.1% were academic libraries • Breakdown of patron-bases served

  13. Findings

  14. Findings (2)

  15. Findings (3)

  16. Findings (4)

  17. Public vs. Academic Websites

  18. Conclusions & Recommendations • Library websites had excellent results for the standard contents only • Web 2.0 tools were not found on 25.2% of the libraries surveyed in the LWUC and on 73.6% of the libraries in the LWES • 40-60% of library websites did not provide access to their special collections via their websites

  19. Typical library web design • RQ1: What is a standard design layout for academic and public library websites?

  20. Typical Content • RQ2: What are the common features and content academic and public library websites include?

  21. Answers to Research Questions • RQ3: Who designs and maintains academic and public library websites?

  22. Answers to Research Questions • RQ4: To what extent do academic and public library websites adhere to recommended design guidelines?

  23. Conclusions and Recommendations • Information and Content is good (80% favorable rating from evaluators) • ‘snap-shot’ of library website design, content, maintenance, and usability • Main findings: • Content: Search feature, feedback, Web 2.0 features (RSS feeds, social networking, ability to state opinions or be content creators), virtual reference services, location and contact information • Design: Logo is left top header, navigation is side left, contact information is bottom center, and search box (when available) top right. • Usability: Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Satisfaction need to be designed in and frequently tested.

  24. Thank You!! Much of these findings are in new book Library Technology and User Services (Chow & Bucknall, 2008) coming out in November 2011. • Anthony Chow aschow@uncg.edu anthonyschow.wordpress.com • Christian Burris burriscj@uncg.edu

  25. Liu, S. 2008. Engaging users: The future of academic library websites. College and Research Libraries, 69(1), 6-27. References • Chen, Y.H., Germain, C.A. and Yang, H. (2009). An exploration into the • practices of library web usability in ARL academic libraries. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(5), 953-968. • Connell, R. S. (2008). Survey of web developers in academic libraries. The • Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34(2), 121-129. • User Focus (2011). ISO standard 9241-11. Retrieved from • http://www.userfocus.co.uk/resources/iso9241/part11.html on June 10, 2011. • King, D. (2003). The Mom-and-Pop Shop Approach to Usability Studies. • (Cover story). Computers in Libraries, 23(1), 12. • Liu, S. 2008. Engaging users: The future of academic library websites. • College and Research Libraries, 69(1), 6-27. • Nielsen & Loranger (2006). Prioritizing Web Usability. Berkeley, CA: New • Riders • Rubin, J. (1984). Handbook of Usability Testing: How to Plan, Design, and • Conduct Effective Tests. Hoboken, NJ : Wiley and Sons • Solomon, L. 2005. Sinking or swimming? The state of web sites in Ohio’s • public libraries. Retrieved from http://www.designforthelittleguy.com/study.pdf. • Wc3. Notes on User-Center Design Process. Retrieved from • http://www.w3.org/WAI/redesign/ucd on June 11, 2011.

More Related