Reimagining User Navigation on the iSchool Website

iSchool Website

Date

Feb-May 2023

Role

User Interviews, Card Sort Study, Analyzing Data

Team

John Neumann: Supervisor

Uzma Sheikh: UX Researcher

Sreehana Mandava: UX Researcher

Hazel Dunn: UX Designer

Tools

Miro, Optimal Workshop, Zoom, Figma

Problem Statement

With the rapid success of the Undergraduate Informatics Program, the School of Information’s website has gained new visibility; however, its navigation fails to meet the needs of its expanding user base, highlighting the urgent need for a strategic redesign.

We evaluated the navigation of the website in four stages:

Stage 1: User interviews and navigation tasks 

Stage 2: Open Card Sort

Stage 3: Closed Card Sort 

Stage 4: Tree Test Validation

Stage 1: User interviews and navigation tasks

Prior to starting the card sort study, we wanted to gauge users current understanding of the iSchool site through contextual inquiries

Medium: Remote (Zoom)

Target Audience: Undergraduate students, graduate students, faculty, and staff

Method: Each participant completed five navigation tasks on both the iSchool and Computer Science website (which was seen as our “ideal” navigational structure). After each task, participants rated its ease and clarity on a scale of 1 to 7.

Finding #1:

Participants scored the iSchool website an average of 4/7 for ease of navigation and scored the CS website an average of 6/7 for ease of navigation.

Quote: “This flow [navigating to the ‘Advisors’ tab in the iSchool website] was not intuitive. I did not expect to find this information in the ‘Request Information’ button.”

Finding #2:

Participants reported being 33% less confident finding information on the iSchool website when compared to that of the Computer Science website.

Quote: “It would be difficult to complete future tasks on the iSchool website. The hierarchy on the CS website was a lot better.”

Stage 2: Open Card Sort

First, we wanted to understand how users might categorize information on the website through an open card sort

Tool: Optimal Workshop

Method: Our open card sort had a total of 12 participants, who each sorted over 50 cards with information specific to the iSchool.

Results: Participants came up with roughly 75 different categories. However, when evaluated by our team, we identified 10 common subject areas of categories:

  1. About: general information on the iSchool

  2. Undergraduate and Graduate Programs: program, degree, and course information

  3. Academics: resources, curriculum

  4. Admissions: different types of programs and applications

  5. Career: services, employers, resources

  6. Alumni: giving, networking

  7. People: faculty, roles, staff

  8. Research: resources and opportunities

  9. Contact Us: contact information

  10. News: iSchool events and news

Finding #1:

Information hierarchy:

The iSchool website lacks information hierarchy in its navigation; all main tabs have no subcategories. The open card sort revealed that users categorize items more specifically than the current general categories. This highlights the importance of creating information hierarchy through visible subcategories and design.

Finding #2:

Naming conventions:

On the iSchool website, there are some cards and tabs that are too general or ambiguous for participants to grasp. "If (they) had a description of what content would be within some of the titles," a participant said, they "would have been able to better categorize cards." This demonstrates how crucial it is to write more precise titles and place them in appropriate contexts so that they are simple to understand.

Stage 3: Closed Card Sort

Second, we wanted to understand how users might categorize information in our proposed categories through a closed card sort

Medium:Optimal Workshop

Method: Based on the categories we saw from the open card sort, we created 2 different sets of categories that could be used to sort information on the iSchool website. We tested each set of categories in a separate closed card sort, and conducted each study with a different group of participants.

Card Sort 2A focused on a distinction between undergraduate and graduate students, along with more specific topic or category names.

  1. Undergraduate students

  2. Graduate students

  3. People

  4. Research

  5. Careers and Employment

  6. Alumni and Giving

  7. About the iSchool

Result: Overall, Card Sort 2A performed better because the specific categories reduced user confusion about where to place the cards. The findings section below suggest fixes that would lead to better results in the navigation of the website.

Finding #1:

Parallel paths:

Some cards were sorted equally or often in 2 or more categories. This creates the opportunity to create parallel paths in the information architecture, where a user can access the same information from different navigation paths within the website, depending on their line of thinking or perception.

Card Sort 2B focused on more broader concepts, along with more general topic or category names.

  1. Admissions

  2. Programs

  3. Contacts

  4. Research

  5. Careers

  6. Engagement

  7. About

Finding #2:

Topic clarity:

Some cards were sorted into many categories, to the point where the naming conventions or context needed to be reevaluated. This helped us identify what cards may need more information or context.

Stage 4: Tree Test Validation

Finally, we wanted to assess participants’ ability to find information using proposed naming conventions and hierarchy through a tree test

Medium: Optimal Workshop

Method: Ten distinct tasks were assigned to the participants to accomplish. Participants were allowed to browse the tree and choose the destination they believed was most appropriate, even though each assignment had one or more "correct" destinations. Participants were not shown the correct locations.

Result: The tree test resulted in overall 78% success and 68% overall directness.

Finding #1:

Additional parallel paths:

While there were specific correct destinations selected as part of the tree test, participants did select additional paths as correct destinations. When evaluating these destinations, it was found that these could be probable destinations. This showed us that there are more destinations where the correct information could be found than we had predicted, which is fundamental to incorporate into content design.

Finding #2:

Underutilized paths:

Some correct destinations were not recognized by participants. However, we understand that this could be due to our sample size.

Impact

The navigation of the iSchool website was significantly increased with an overall directness of 68% through our identified information architecture. Further, the study built validity in the flaws or issues in the website that have been identified by various stakeholders. It has also created a strong foundation for improvements in website development.

Next Steps

In the first phase of this study, we have identified error prone areas in the iSchool website and even proposed a navigational structure that would improve accuracy while performing various tasks. Further phases of this project can take the findings of this study and explore the following:

  1. Explore Parallel Paths: Investigate potential areas for parallel paths within the proposed information architecture to ensure multiple ways for users to access the same information.

  2. Design Implementation: Develop a strategy for efficiently converting the improved information architecture into the design phase, maximizing usability.

  3. Usability Testing: Conduct comprehensive usability testing on the redesigned navigation to validate improvements and gather additional user feedback for further refinement.

Reflection

This project invoked a phase of intense learning in my professional life as a UX Researcher. This being my first navigational study, I am now able to fully understand the process of assessing and improving the hierarchy of a website. The following have been key lesson I learned throughout this project:

  1. Value of Mixed-Methods Research: Combining qualitative interviews with quantitative navigation tasks provided a holistic understanding of user experiences. I realized that both approaches are essential for identifying and addressing usability issues comprehensively.

  2. Collaboration and Communication: Working with a diverse team of researchers, designers, and stakeholders emphasized the value of clear communication and collaboration. Effective teamwork is vital for aligning objectives and ensuring the successful implementation of design improvements.