MEMORANDUM

TO:                Dr. Huatong Sun, Grand Valley State University Writing Department Professor

FROM:          Kelly McGee and Jashana Copeman

SUBJECT:   Analytical Report- GVSU Writing Department Website

DATE:          November 1st, 2007

INTRODUCTION

This memo is written to give a complete analytical report regarding the research our group has done on the Grand Valley State University's Writing Department's website. After using various methods to analyze the site, recognize its strength and weaknesses, we will now provide a summary of the project's: Objectives, Methods, Results, Discussions, and Conclusions.

OBJECTIVES

Our plan is to analyze the site from the perspective of a writing student and a writing department faculty member. Our guiding questions will be:

· What are the users looking for?

· What is important to them?

· What kind of information needs to be updated?

· What are they interested in?

METHODS

Genre Analysis

For the genre analysis, we briefly scanned over other university's writing department web sites in order to obtain a better feeling for what such sites look like and what information they provide users.  From our own knowledge and GVSU given research, we then examined the site to better understand the user profiles and purpose of the site.  We then followed the tabs and checked for consistency and repetition of information.  During this time, also made sure that information was where it should be on the site and it's placement is user-friendly and beneficial to the individual's experience.

The first thing we found was that Grand Valley is different because they actually have a writing program, not an English program which includes a writing minor like many other universities have. The two sites we compared the GVSU Writing Department websites with were:

· Western Michigan University &

· Gettysburg College.

We chose WMU because it is a West Michigan school and a university; so, we thought the two would have comparable frame of references.  We chose Gettysburg College because we felt it was of similar size and comparable in terms of number of majors and students.

User-Interface Analysis

For our user-interface analysis, we created a few different personas using our knowledge of who visits the site in order to analyze the site from their perspective. We included what content is important to them and what tasks they want to complete while at the site.

These personas included:

· A faculty member searching for available jobs &

· A sophomore-level writing student trying to find major requirements and  · a junior-level writing student looking for information on Distinction in Writing

For the first persona, we want them to be able to

· easily find job listings,

· be able to quickly see what the job requirements are &

· learn the necessary steps they should take in order to obtain the job.

The second persona should be able to

· quickly find the requirements &

· should not be confused about any of the information presented to him.

The third, and last, persona needs to be able to

· easily find a complete, clear list of the requirements and steps necessary in order to graduate   with Distinction in Writing  &

· needs to be able to get more information about what Distinction in Writing is

Swimlane Diagram

In our swimlane diagram, we hope to identify the very tasks involved in the making of this website in order to better understand who contributes to the site and how this effects its production, appearance, and usability.

With our swimlane diagram of the work flow behind the website we were able to see who does what. We learned that there are three main content publishers for the writing department website. Professor Suhn, Professor Royer and Professor Monson. Two of which have particular areas of the website that they are in control of. Professor Royer is the designated webmaster and therefore is more in control of the website as a whole. All three website contributors create text and publish it to the site but the webmaster goes further and creates pages and organizes the way the website appears to users.

RESULTS

Our research gave us a more clear insight to what works and what does not work on the Grand Valley Writing Department website. We discovered that seemingly small pieces of information being left out can result in problems for users of the website. We also came to the realization that there are slight issues with the categorization of the home page as far as the left side tabs are concerned. For the most part, the tabs are not arranged in order of importance.  Also, some of the upcoming events could be put together to clean up that section a bit. Most of the issues would be easily fixable, however.

DISCUSSIONS

In general, we found through our genre analysis that Grand Valley's Writing Department website is more understandable and user-friendly than that of many other universities, but it could still be improved upon.

Through our user-interface analysis we found that most tasks a user would come to the site for are easy to carry out because the website is laid out in an organized manner. There are obviously imperfections, such as the organization of the left tabs we mentioned earlier; certain pieces of information could be moved higher up on the list according to their importance to most users. When someone is scanning a list of links for something specific, they usually hope to see what they are looking for sooner rather than later. Nobody is eager to scroll through a list of 20 items to find what they are looking for on the bottom of the list. Perhaps links that are going to be used mostly by faculty could be designated to the bottom of the list, because a faculty member will know where everything is more than an average student will.

Something else which could be improved upon is the "scanability" of some information on the site. As our faculty member discovered in our user-interface analysis, an entire paragraph is not helpful when looking for information about available jobs. Generally website users want to be able to quickly scan through a page and be able to find information they are looking for. Computer screens are difficult to read and when the information given could easily be put into a bulleted list format, it should be.

Also, we found through our swimlane diagram that the production of the site may contribute to its confusing and almost haphazard layout.  If the production crew had more communication between them and collaborated on ideas, editing, and layout, the overall flow of the website could be improved.  Instead of writing, previewing, and publishing, the process could involve a group effort, which in turn would help the overall feel and user-experience for this site.

CONCLUSION

Our results will benefit users because we can now see areas for improvement that were not easily visible before. We have a better understanding of specific tasks users will come to the site to complete and who is in charge of making sure those tasks are easily accomplished. We learned that the site is much more user-friendly towards writing students who know a bit about the services and programs available on campus. In order to make the site more user-friendly toward non-writing students or newer writing students a few of the programs would need more clarification of requirements and the organization of the homepage could be rearranged.

APPENDICES

Genre Analysis

We decided to take a look at a few other writing department websites from other universities. The first thing we found was that Grand Valley is different because they actually have a writing program, not an English program which includes a writing minor like many other universities have. For example, Western Michigan University offers a Creative Writing program under their English Department. The website for which was visited in order to see what information another university felt was pertinent. This website contained a decent amount of information about writing events and publications including: the history of the program, faculty in the department, events, and the location of the campus; however, we found no information on requirements for the program. We feel information concerning major/minor requirements are important because that is information a lot of students would need to have easy access to. This website turned out to be difficult to navigate, confused us as visitors, and lacked any sort of visual appeal or excitement.

The second website visited was the English Department site for Gettysburg College. They offer a minor in writing, under their English Department. This site was much more put together than the first, and much easier to read as well as navigate. They included information about major and minor requirements as well as a course listing and information on their honors program. All of this is extremely important but not always enough information for curious students or faculty. They also included information on extracurriculars, their writing center, upcoming events within the department, a listing of their faculty and department news. However, this site was mildly dull to look at, and had no visuals whatsoever.

User-Interface Analysis

The first persona used was that of the faculty member searching for available jobs in the department. We want them to be able to easily find job listings, be able to quickly see what the job requirements are and the necessary steps they should take in order to obtain the job.

Fran Faculty went to the home page for the writing department website. Upon quickly realizing that the left tabs would guide her through the site she found the tab labeled "Job Opening." She clicked it and was brought to a page listing two jobs available at the university. One for an assistant professor of professional writing and another for an assistant professor of creative writing. What the jobs were was very clear and popped out at her. But the job description, requirements and application steps were in one large paragraph just beneath the job title which made it difficult to organize the information in her mind. She had to slowly read through in order to figure everything out.

The second persona was the sophomore-level writing student trying to find information about his major requirements. He should be able to quickly find the requirements and should not be confused about any of the information presented to him.

Sophomore Stu also began at the writing department home page. He quickly spotted the left tabs which would direct him to different areas of the site and after a moment of browsing he saw the "Writing Major" tab. Placing his mouse over the tab, additional tabs were brought up. They included, "Writing Major", "Creative Writing Emphasis", and "Professional Writing Emphasis." Sophomore Stu specializes in Professional Writing so he clicked on that tab. He was pleased to find a simple, clear-cut list of the courses he is required to take in order to graduate. Stu proceeds to sign up for classes for the following year and plans a meeting with his advisor a few weeks later. When meeting with his advisor, he is told that although the website gave him the list of major requirements, there are two more courses he needs to take! When he was admitted to Grand Valley there were two more requirements for Professional Writing majors, but they were recently removed. Since they were requirements when he was admitted into the program, they remain requirements for him. Sophomore Stu wishes someone had mentioned this to him before he signed up for classes.

The third, and last, persona we used was that of a junior-level writing student looking into doing Distinction in Writing. She needs to be able to easily find a complete, clear list of the requirements and steps necessary in order to graduate with Distinction in Writing, which she has recently heard about from other writing students. She also needs to be able to get more information about what Distinction in Writing really is.

Jenny Junior begins at the writing department home page. She first sees the text about the writing department and browses through it. When she notices the left tabs she browses them until she finds "Distinction in Writing." She promptly clicks on it and is brought to a page which describes in detail what Distinction in Writing is and some preliminary steps in the program. As she reads through the text, she comes upon a list of "Components" to the program and upon clicking them she discovers an outline of activities that could help her complete the program. Jenny decides that she is able to graduate with Distinction in Writing and contacts her advisor to further discuss it.