Research and Instructional Technology Website

Top takeaways from this research included:

1. Users typically broke cards out by research services, instructional services, and support services. Users were overwhelmed by the number of services available to them and breaking up services first by more general categories and then by research step/more specific categories seemed to ease concerns about the amount of services available. 

   • Lab’s recommendation: Separate services out between research and instructional services from the start on the RIT website homepage. This gives users a choice between two easy categories to start looking for what they need.

2. Users were unsure what some services were and needed more context upfront. Users felt that many of the cards could be placed in multiple categories depending on how they might utilize the service (e.g. storing vs sharing data). Users were also unsure what some of the services were.

   • Lab’s recommendation: Add a blurb about each service under the service title that gives users an idea of what the page is about before they click on it. OR, use the IA of the site to provide context for users (e.g support services vs. learning technologies)

3. Users felt many of the services belong in more than one group. Users noted that many of the services/cards could be categorized in more than one group. They stated that it depends on how a service is being used, or what specific aspect of the service the card is referring to. For example, is the service titled "3D Printing" referring to the act of doing it or is it referring to the technology behind it? The answer to that question would affect where the service should be categorized.

   • Lab’s recommendation: Consider adding multiple navigation paths in the information architecture of a page if it is particularly hard to categorize. According to best practices, some repetition in IA is good for users, but be careful not to offer too many navigation options