Indiana State
University
A good web site is a delight and a poor web
site is worse than no web site at all. But, what makes a good web site?
This is an evaluation question, and an answerable one.
A literature is emerging to address these
kinds of evaluation questions (Cornell University Libraries ,2001,
Schrock, Kathleen, 1998, and Center for Instructional Technology, Academic Technology and Networks, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill,
2000). While there are many ‘best practice’ statements and models of
good and bad web sites (Flanders, 2001), these are generally values driven and
developed in the absence of data.
Information Technology (IT) creates asynchronous computer mediated interactions between people. Computer mediated interaction does not contain valuable visual communication cues, in contrast to face-to-face interaction. The loss of these cues can lead to misunderstandings on many levels. The lack of feedback mechanisms, inherent in face-to-face interaction, can severely limit communication. Student affairs professionals can never be sure that students are reading our web pages in the way that we intended, and students can never be sure if we are responding to their needs. Student Affairs is essentially student focused and interpersonal, and our web sites should reflect our core values.
Understanding what makes a good web site is difficult; especially understanding what makes a good web site within a specific campuses institutional and organizational context. Introducing the reader to multiple strategies for enhancing web site quality is the heart of this material. All of the evaluation questions are focused on elements that can be changed to better meet student need.
Using multiple strategies for evaluating your web site will result in a stronger evaluation, and consequently a better web site. While each evaluation strategy can be used alone, the strategies presented here were not designed to stand alone, but to reflect different evaluation questions. Because each campus will have a unique web site, the strategies presented here contain general questions that form the beginning of an evaluation plan. Campus specific questions should be developed and explored.
The strategies presented here are introduced as models. Much as a model car is a miniature representation of a real
car, lacking size, detail and the ability to drive, these models are miniatures
of full-scale evaluation strategies. To
use a full scale evaluation, some assembly is required.
Our work in student affairs is values driven. In evaluating a site, determine the basic values that should be reflected and determine if these are reflected in the site. The following list of basic values are proposed as a useful start in developing a list of values to be used in evaluating student affairs web sites:
Environmental theory and practice is a strong tool to examine the features of your web site (Wallace, 2000, Banning, Davies and Quick 2000). Asking what, how, who, when and where questions are important in evaluating a web site. Web pages can succumb to the same analytical techniques as the campus environment.
The questions below reflect a human aggregate and a
perceptual model of campus. There
are undoubtedly many additional questions that can and should be asked on
different campuses.
Student development and learning provide wonderful means to examine features
of your web site. These questions
should be answered as a degree, not as yes-no questions, and specific web
features should be associated with student development and learning goals.
Concepts and practices of student learning are effective in evaluating a
student affairs web site. Learning
is the acquisition of knowledge and skills as the result of experience.
The web site can be seen as an experience and as providing information
about experiences on campus.
Web sites can be seen as a projection of the institution's values and
structure. Most web sites in student affairs use the organizational
structure as the web structure. Unfortunately,
most students use the organization in different ways.
Organizational structure is designed for certain managerial goals; web
site structures should be designed with other goals in mind.
One method of evaluating a web site is to have a novice user try to find specific information on the site. To do this have a student who does not know your web site try to find specific items starting from the campus home page using only links. If these cannot be found, then the student should use the campus search feature to find them. Watch as the student tries to find the information, and pay attention to how the student uses the site. If you need to answer any questions from the student, the search is a failure, since all information and directions for getting it should be on the web site.
The student should try to find active information that is subject to regular
changes, such as the intramural sports teams and schedule, the name and phone
number for the Director of the career center, a photo of the CSAO, and a list of
student organizations. The student
should also try to find regulatory information that is not subject to regular
changes, such as the Student Government Constitution, the campus Code of Student
Conduct, and the Student Affairs Mission Statement.
Links are an important part of any web site, and the student should try
to find links from the student affairs pages to affiliated student affairs
sites, professional organizations, and to specific campus academic activities.
Accessibility
is a campus requirement and a core student affairs value. Building accessibility and web page accessibility should be
of equal concern. There is
extensive literature and sets of recommendations for web page accessibility.
The Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) at the World Wide Web Consortium
(W3C) provides excellent and thorough information and accessibility guidelines,
which are summarized below. A visit
to their web site is required reading when evaluating web pages.
|
Web Accessibility Initiative
(WAI) Guidelines that web content developers must satisfy. In General
And if you use images and image maps
And if you use tables
And if you use frames
And if you use applets and scripts
And if you use multimedia
And if all else fails
|
Web sites can be designed with many things in mind such as stakeholders, expense, color scheme, and many other web features. Four main areas, web site navigation and design, web site technical details, web site aesthetics and web site content will serve as a beginning point for the evaluation process for student affairs web pages. While complicated web site evaluation schemes exist, simple is always a good starting point.
Presented in table form below is a checklist that includes details for each
of the four areas and which can serve as a starting point for evaluating a web
site. The point assignments
are arbitrary, but serve as a vehicle to summarize the data collection process.
|
Navigation and Design |
|||||
|
|
Points |
||||
|
|
(4) |
(3) |
(2) |
(1) |
(0) |
|
Material should be found within three clicks from the home page and take no more than 30 seconds to load, even on a slow modem. |
3 clicks |
4 clicks |
5 clicks |
6 clicks |
7 clicks |
|
All pages should list a most recent update date, and have been updated within the past 12 months. |
All |
|
Most |
|
Some |
|
There should be an appropriate and consistent tool bar/navigation set on pages. |
All |
|
Most |
|
Some |
|
It should be very easy is it to find the Student Affairs pages from the school home page. Main link - not a pull down menu item. |
Home Page |
Second |
Menu item link |
|
No |
|
Material should be organized or indexed by function (department). |
All depts. |
|
Most depts. |
|
Some depts. |
|
Material should be organized or indexed by population being served - Information for students, faculty and staff. |
All |
|
2 of 3 |
|
Stdts. only |
|
Sum of points in each column |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Navigation
and Design Points |
|
||||
|
|
|||||
|
Technical Details |
|||||
|
|
Points |
||||
|
|
(4) |
(3) |
(2) |
(1) |
(0) |
|
There should be a search function for the pages or site. |
Yes |
|
|
|
No |
|
There should be a feedback section for pages or site. |
Yes |
|
|
|
No |
|
There should be page counters on all pages. |
Yes |
|
|
|
No |
|
Pages should meet accessibility standards. |
Yes |
|
Most |
|
No |
|
Pages should reside on a fast server. |
Fast |
|
Med. |
|
Slow |
|
Pages should load quickly at 28.8 baud. |
Fast |
|
Med. |
|
Slow |
|
All links should be active. |
All |
|
|
|
Most |
|
Sum of points in each column |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Technical
Details Points |
|
||||
|
|
|||||
| Aesthetic Appropriateness | |||||
|
|
Points |
||||
|
|
(4) |
(3) |
(2) |
(1) |
(0) |
|
There should be a consistent 'look and feel' within the site. |
All |
|
Many |
|
Some |
|
There should be school and division identification throughout the site. |
All |
|
Many |
|
Some |
|
The pages should be appropriately attractive. |
All |
|
Many |
|
Some |
|
Sum of points in each column |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aesthetic
Appropriateness Points |
|
||||
|
|
|||||
| Content | |||||
|
|
Points |
||||
|
|
(4) |
(3) |
(2) |
(1) |
(0) |
|
Information should be provided for all types of current, prospective and alumni students, faculty and staff. |
All |
|
3 of 5 |
|
1 of 5 |
|
Care should be taken to not over-emphasize any student sub-population. |
All |
|
Many |
|
Some |
|
Student affairs functional areas should be covered broadly. |
All |
|
Many |
|
Some |
|
Student affairs functional areas should be covered in depth. |
Deep |
|
Some |
|
None |
|
Academic material should be well integrated into the student affairs pages. |
Fully |
|
Some |
|
None |
|
Material must be current and accurate. |
All |
|
Many |
|
Some |
|
Department or division home page should list contact names, numbers and E-mail addresses for important people, as well as hours of operation. |
All |
|
Many |
|
Some |
|
Department or Division Mission is available. |
Yes |
|
|
|
No |
|
Sum of points in each column |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Content
Points |
|
||||
|
|
|||||
|
Total Evaluation Score |
|
||||
Banning, James H., Davies, Timothy G., and Quick, Donald G., (2000) The Campus Web Visit, Student Affairs Online, Fall 2000, Vol. 1, No. 3 http://www.studentaffairs.com/ejournal/Fall_2000/art3.html
Bloom, B. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, New York, David McKay Company, Inc.
Center for Instructional Technology, Academic Technology and Networks, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill,
(2000). Evaluating Web Sites for Educational Uses: Bibliography and Checklist
http://www.unc.edu/cit/guides/irg-49.html
Chickering, Arthur, (1993) Education and Identity (2nd Ed.) San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
http://www.library.cornell.edu/okuref/research/webeval.html
Flanders, Vincent (2001) Web Pages That Suck.com at http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/
Schrock, Kathleen, (1998) Evaluation of World Wide Web Sites: An Annotated Bibliography, ERIC EDO-IR-98-02 http://ericir.syr.edu/ithome/digests/edoir9802.html
Wallace, Heather (2000). Campus Ecology Theory and Websites: One Example of Applying Traditional Student Affairs Theory to Technology, Student Affairs Online, Fall 2000, Vol. 1, No. 3 http://www.studentaffairs.com/ejournal/Fall_2000/art4.html