DBR port folio #3

The labels for the web sites are going to be designed using several methods. First of all some labels are defined using conten authors’s knowledge of the content that the web site is going to contain. According to Morville & Rosenfeld this method is useful for finding candidates for labels but not the final labels. This I because the content authors are professional indexers and don’t necessarily speak the language of the user (2007, p. 105). The labels defined by the content authors are tested with users by using an open card sorting as described earlier. The data from the card sorting are analysed and held together with log data from the former web site. More specifically the log data are analysed using Search Log Analysis (SLA) following recommendations from the article by Jansen, Understanding User – Web interaction via Web Analytics (2009). SLA has a grounded theory approach where theories are grounded in observations from the real world rather than hypotheses. This means that the method has an inductive approach as well as the DBR method (p. 65). Using the knowledge from these three methods I as a designer define the final labels in collaboration with the content author.

When the web site is launched and has been running for about a month it is possible to test whether the instructional goals has been fulfilled. As described earlier the instructional goals are: 1) the users should be able to find information that they are looking for and 2) be inspired to explore the web site and find additional information of interest. Both goals should be fulfilled leaving the user with a feeling of having had a good experience where their individual wishes have been taken into consideration.

A useful method for doing this is web analysis. When doing a web analysis Jansen is describing several metrics (2009). There is a lot of useful and interesting metrics that directly or indirectly tell something about goal 1) and 2). In the following I am going to describe some of the most obvious ones.

Keyword Analysis tells us what keywords the user are searching for when finding our site. By looking at these keywords in relation to the labels it tells us whether we have succeeded in speaking the language of the users when designing the labels. Top pages is a metric that shows which pages of the web sites that receive the most traffic. By looking at this it is possible to analyse whether the pages has been sorted so that the post popular pages are the ones that are easiest to access. It is also possible to get an indication of whether we have succeeded in designing the page so that it suits the different target groups. E.g. if the main menu Handikapvenlig has very low traffic compared to the other main menus maybe the disabled people doesn’t feel that the web site design suits them. Visit length is an important metric as it tells us whether the user is spending time at the web sites or just entering and leaving right away. This information can be combined with another metric Referring URL which tells what sites have directed traffic to the web site. My combining these two set of data it is possible to see which sites that are referring the most time-consuming users. E.g. does a site for disabled users refer a lot of users that spend less than five seconds on the site? If this is the case, it could also be an indication that the design is not appropriate for the segment of disabled people. The last metric that I am going to mention is Visitor path. This gives us information about how the user navigates through the web site and can give an indication of whether the user finds what he/she is looking for.

Even though web analysis provides some valuable data it has some shortcomings. Jansen stresses that  “These shortcomings include failing to understand the affective, situational, and cognitive aspects of system users.” (2009, p. 51). He therefore recommends that the method is combined with other data such ad surveys and laboratory studies (ibid. p. 51ff). In the case of testing whether the instructional goals of the web site for Feriecenter Slettestrand has been fulfilled it would be ideal to combine the web analysis with a usability test followed by an interview or a post questionnaire. 

This post is going to be updated with reflections upon the interpretive framework used in this design...

DBR port folio #2

According to Cobb & Gravemeijer some specific issues should be clarified during the preparation phase. These issues include clarifying the instructional goals and documenting the instructional starting points. This includes describing a envisioned learning trajectory and finally, setting a theoretical framework (p. 69). In the following I am going to reflect upon these issues in relation to the design of the web site focussing on designing labels for different target groups.

The instructional goals of the design can be divided into two categories: 1) the users should be able to find information that they are looking for and 2) be inspired to explore the web site and find additional information of interest. Both goals should be fulfilled leaving the user with a feeling of having had a good experience where their individual wishes have been taken into consideration.

The instructional starting point is documented by looking at the different users and their knowledge about the company so far. In relation to this Cobb & Gravemeijer stress that you shouldn’t document the level of reasoning typical of e.g. students at a specific age, but the consequences of their prior instructional histories (p. 69). In relation to the users of the web site I interpret this as not looking at the characteristics of the specific target group, but at their existing knowledge of the company or of the concepts that we want to present at the web site e.g. “adventure holidays”.

The company already has experience with the target groups and their information needs and a lot of the content from the old web site is going to be transferred to the new one – just organized and to some degree labelled differently. The target groups also already have knowledge about the services and experiences that the company offers. But a lot of these offers are not very visible at the old web site and because of that, the marketing has so far been characterized by passing from mouth to mouth. The challenges in building upon the old design are therefore to organize and label the offers that the users maybe already know of. And when doing so keeping the soul and the personal touch that has very much characterized the (missing) marketing strategy so far.

This brings me further on to the envisioned learning trajectory because when designing the web site, it is important to make sure that the users feel that there is a person in the other end so to speak. Maybe the users have been used to just calling the staff in the reception when they needed information. With a well structured and information rich web site this call should be unnecessary. But this also requires that the web site has this personal touch and individual offers for the specific target group. More specifically the design is a complete re-design of the old web site using some of the content from the old one. Focussing on the labelling of the web site the new labels should ensure that the content of the web site is labelled with the user’s language.

The theoretical framework used in the design process will be theories about information architecture. More specifically Morville & Rosenfeld’s Information architecture for the World Wide Web. Hereunder theories about labelling and organising content. The method used for collecting data, card sorting, is also a method described by Morville & Rosenfeld. Besides that the foundation of my way of executing the method are also inspired by articles found on the Internet – for instance: http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/card_sorting_a_definitive_guide

This article describes card sorting in at very concrete and “how-to” way. There are several ways of analysing data from card sorting and I have not decided on how to do it yet.

The chosen way of approaching this design is influenced by my professional background as I spend last semester on information architecture and got inspired by the methods and theories that I was introduced to. I have not worked specifically with labelling content before by I find it very relevant and essential when it some to user-centered design. 

Design-based Research Method (DBR) port folio #1

During the course in Design-based Research Method (DBR) I am going to write a port folio where I reflect upon theories and methods used in relation to this design-method. This will be done in relation to tasks that I am working with during my internship.

The design that I am going to focus on during this course is the design of the web site. The problem that I am working with deals with the challenge of designing a single web site that appeals to various and very different target groups. These target groups are 1) mountainbikers and adventure holidays in general, 2) companies (course attendants), 3) families/normal guests and 4) disabled people (also using many of the offers available for the other target groups). The different target groups work very well together in praxis, but when it comes to marketing they have different information needs. The goal is to make the site appear as a whole where all the target groups are equally important. The problem is also defined by the fact that web communication and digital marketing has not been prioritized in the company so far. But the younger generation is about to take over and a graphic designer has been hired to change the entire appearance of the company: web site, brochures signs, merchandise and so forth.

In the design of the web site I am going to focus mainly on labelling in regards to the target groups. So far I am planning to use card sorting as at method to get a better understanding of the language that the different target groups are using. I am also going to focus on search optimization, which is also related to labelling, categorizing and defining headlines. 

In their article Design methodology and design practice (1999) Löwgren & Stolterman recommend to take a closer look at the problem definition before the design phase starts by using the why why why?-method. By using this method the design possibilities are broadened and more aspects are brought in to the design phase. Using the why why why?-method in relation to designing new labels for the web site could create the following why-chain:

Why testing the labels by using card sorting?

To get a better understanding of the user’s language

Why? 

To make the language of the web site appeal to them

Why?

To make it easier for them to navigate on the web site

Why?

To make it easy for them to find the relevant content?

Why?

To make them wanting to visit the place.

Internship at Feriecenter Slettestrand

My internship takes place at Feriecenter Slettestrand (www.slettestrand.dk) - a holiday destination situated in Jammerbugen close to Fjerritslev. The center has facilities for disabled people as well as ”normal” guests. The latest target group that has shown an interest in the place is mountain bikers. This is mainly because of at 20 km. marked route in the stunning nature surrounding the center. In relation to this the center has applied Realdania for funds to develop the MTB concept.

My tasks in the company is:

• Development of a communication strategy and target group definition regarding the MTB project for Realdania. Overall structuring of the project description using project management tools. Deadline: The 8th of October - (very busy at the moment!)  
• Assisting the design of the new web site for Feriecenter Slettestrand (being launched ultimo October), focussing on target group definition, labels and search optimization. 
• Evaluating the website by usability testing and/or by using Google analytics logfiles.

Case 3: evaluating e-Learning Lab's website

In the evaluation of eLL’s website usability testing will be the approach when finding issues to approve on the website. Usability testing was the most used method for testing in the 1980’s and is still a very popular method. Today methods as heuristic evaluation and field studies are also dominant when designing and evaluating software ( Rogers et. al. 2002, p. 341). In usability testing typical users are tested under controlled conditions where they are given a set of predefined tasks that they have to complete. Users performance are for example measured in time spend on a task, number of errors or clicks. Most often users are given a questionnaire or are interviewed after the test (ibid.).

One of the characteristics of usability testing is that it is controlled by the evaluator and takes place under laboratory conditions where there are no disturbing elements. The user is recorded when doing the task and the video is used for later analysis.  User performance is then quantified and put up in tables or usability specifications that are used for evaluating the software. Even though data is quantified the number of users are too small to do a statistical analysis (ibid. p. 342).

Considerations about our approach

A script that shortly introduces the test should be made and presented for each user so that all the users are carried through the same procedure and differences are eliminated (ibid. 434).

Ideas for introduction script:

·      Tak fordi du vil deltage I usability test af eLL’s website

·      Data fra testen vil blive brugt til at evaluere og forbedre websiden

·      Der vil blive udarbejdet en rapport, som kun bliver delt inden for AAU’s “fire vægge”

·      Du får en række opgaver, som vi vil bede dig løse på hjemmesiden

·      Vi skal bede dig tænke højt mens du udfører opgaverne og testlederen vil stille spørgsmål undervejs

·      Du skal ikke skynde dig igennem opgaverne, bare tag dig den tid du har brug for og sig til, hvis du ikke kan løse en opgave, så går vi videre til den næste

·      Testen vil blive videofilmet og skærmen du udfører opgaverne på bliver ligeledes filmet, videoerne bliver ikke offentliggjort og du må være anonym I rapporten såfremt du ønsker det

·      Vi skal påpege at vi ikke ønsker at teste dine færdigheder inden for IT, men udelukkende hvor brugervenlig web siden er

·      Deltageren får evt. en samtykkeerklæring som han/hun skal underskrive

Rogers et al. also recommend letting the participants start with an explorations task to get familiar with the web site (ibid. p. 435). We have decided that the test should last maximum 30 min. so that we would not take too much of the participants’ time and thereby make it easier to find participants. With the limited time we will not spend too much time on an exploration task. Besides that the users chosen for the usability test are all familiar with eLL’s website or at least eLL as organisation. Instead of at exploration task we will start with an easy task that is loosely defined and very much up to the user how to complete.

According to Rogers et. al. a script for the evaluator to use during the test should also be carried out (ibid.). By following the script an even procedure for all the participants are ensured. Besides that the evaluator are reminded to stay within the time schedule so that the participant does not spend too much time on one task. An estimated amount of time for each task has to be decided by the evaluators before the test.

Ideas for evaluator script:

·      Hvad tænker du om X, når du klikker på X, når du ser X?

·      Kan du fortælle mig hvad du tænker nu?

·      Er du gået I stå?

·      (Hvis opgaven overskrider den estimerede tid:) Jeg bliver desværre nødt til at bede dig om at gå videre til næste opgave.

·      Evaluatoren skal være opmærksom på følgende:

o   Yd først assistance til en opgave når deltageren har gjort adskillige forsøg selv og er gået helt I stå

o   Giv ikke hjælpende hints undervejs

o   Mere?

When making the specific tasks for the test Morville & Rosenfeld have some recommendations for the evaluator (2007, p. 260). Inspired by these recommendations we will, as mentioned, let the participants start out with an open “task”. In relation to that Morville & Rosenfeld recommends to make some topical questions and not only specific tasks (ibid.). Even though the usability test is an artificial setting the evaluator should build in some realistic tasks (ibid.). In the evaluation of eLL’s web site it could be necessary to make specific task for the specific user group taking this recommendation into consideration.   

Events

We are working with four pages in the app for startvaekst.dk. The pages are: a wiki, events, contact and news. I have been working with the page, events, and made a suggestion for a blueprint, wireframe and content inventory list.

The blueprint:

The functions that should be available at this page are:

• Arrangementer i listevisning med mulighed for:
• Føj til favoritter
• Pop-op med arr. beskrivelse
• Herover en header bestående af:
• Hjem (man kommer tilbage til forsiden)
• Vælg uge nr.
• Favoritter
• Find et arr. tæt på mig (GPS)
•  Under favoritter er der ligeledes en listevisning med mulighed for:
• Pop-op med arr. beskrivelse
• Headeren i Favoritter består af
• Hjem (man kommer tilbage til forsiden)
  
• Vælg uge nr.
• Tilbage (til arrangementer, listevisning)
• Find et arr. tæt på mig (GPS)
• Under Find et arr. tæt på mig er der ligeledes en listevisning med mulighed for:
• Føj til favoritter
• Pop-op med arr. beskrivelse 
• Headeren i Find et arr. tæt på mig består af:
• Hjem (man kommer tilbage til forsiden)
  
• Vælg uge nr.
• Favoritter
• Tilbage (til arrangementer, listevisning)
  

Playing in the sandbox

Today we kick-started the design phase with a little play in the sandbox – a tool we use in the design lab to generate ideas.  

Here is a little summary of what we talked about.

There are different where the app for Startvækst can be useful. For example when you are on the go or just have to check something quickly and don’t want to bother turn on your computer.

When a thought strokes your mind you can quickly find relevant information with the app and maybe get additional information sent to your email.

When you get a sudden idea - for example on a café talking to your friends - you can get information from the app.

There a two situations where the app can be useful: 1) when you get a sudden idea and have to get information about something or 2) when you have some time waiting on the train, the bus or for the wife to be ready to go, you can read the latest news or check when there is an event close to you.