Over and over I have read articles about library usability study case studies. Although the tactics range from observing students complete tasks to card sorting tactics to determine how people would prefer the homepage to look, they all have the same result. The appearance that you are improving the website based on data, but they really aren’t. Nearly every study draws similar conclusions that users don’t understand library jargon and were unfamiliar with certain services, and therefore didn’t know where to begin to look for them.
I admit that at FAU I also conducted a study on the usability of students based on the monitoring students complete tasks model. What I thought I would find out is if the new interface of the library’s website improved or hindered the users from completing tasks. What I really found out was that people didn’t have any clue that some of the tasks were possible on the library’s website never mind how to do them. So I didn’t actually prove anything about usability, because of that lack of knowledge. I also found that focus groups can give their personal frustrations when using the site, but that most people do not have enough multimedia communication background to offer a reasonable way to fix the problem. People are very good at telling you what they like and don’t like but are unable to imagine a better library website. So in essence the studies do not help libraries to create a better website, they just know if the current page is more tolerable then the old based on too few a sample (hence case study).
This is not the fault of the community as it’s not their job to redesign the website, really. Yes, we all promote their input, but that is so that the “experts” can interpret their needs into a service product. After all, I want the architect to listen to me when I talk about how I want my house built, but that means in function not in construction. That’s his job. Just because students say “I don’t understand what that word means” doesn’t mean you should automatically change it. If it is important to faculty for the students to understand the term, then find a better way to present the information. I think librarians give these usability studies too much merit and do not use their own expertise enough to translate what they discover into a good plan of attack. We are the architects of the web and know where the weight bearing pages must fall.
There are also many different ways to look at usability. Try meeting disabilities standards, web standards, or basic web mainenance. If these standards are met, it’s one less barrier between the users and the content they desire. I also think that they are more scientific ways of viewing usability, as they don’t have a learning curve as human subjects do when it comes to library websites. I just don’t want to read yet another “usability study” for the design of a website which really only proves that the users just don’t know waht services are available at a library. Form a study that actually measures what you are trying to accomplish! Now if the purpose is to see if your tutorials which explain the library’s website is usable, then these studies can help you with that. But as far as navigation goes, it’s faulty.
Simonn said,
March 21, 2009 at 10:50 pm
Very interesting article, i have bookmarked your blog for future referrence. Best regards