The SURVEY

SUMMARY OF RESPONSES.

Not many. 7 with comments; 2 just votes.

POSITIVE :

• "Text only" link approved. ( "Text only" page not mentioned. )
• Current page is good.
• New button font good.

NEGATIVE :

• Research group logos ugly on current page.
• Research groups shouldn't be on front page.
• Overloaded.
• Too many cryptically-labelled buttons.
• Couldn't see logos.

SUGGESTION :

• Change the CDMTCS icon - text too small.
• Put research group links in same style as current page.
• Less graphic stuff is good. ( 2 )
• Short list of important pages for visitors in the middle.

IRRELEVANT ( we'd asked for views only on the layout ) :

• Permit direct links to course pages ( www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/415.105SC ).
• Use politically correct vocabulary ( course, University of Auckland, etc. ).
• Too heterogeneous, poorly designed.
• Buttons on left reproduce buttons on right.
• Names of new buttons not very good.

REVIEW.

Not many people were sufficiently interested to respond, but most of those who did gave us comments as well as ( or instead of ) votes.

Two of those commented mainly on the content of the pages, despite our specific request not to.

Three people were significantly ( English, not statistics ) unhappy with the current site -

• "... vote for ... less graphic ..." ( but also "The current page looks neat" );
• "... overloaded ... too heterogeneous";
• "... sprayed with cryptically labelled buttons".

Only one person commented on the text-only page, but perhaps that was because it wasn't there when the others answered.

Vincent reported the votes : N votes for specimen N. As the main differences were in the research group logos, that's presumably a 5:1 vote for the logos - though one vote for specimen 2 specifically says "Research group logos don't belong here". Maybe 4.5:1.5 ?

CONCLUSION.

We've gathered a few anecdotal comments, but not nearly enough to draw significant ( statistics, not English ) conclusions. The safest guesses are that a less fussy front page would be acceptable, but that the research group logos should stay there, more or less as in specimen 3.

I suggest that the next job is to think about the content. Then when we've decided what should be there, we can make a new front page to suit that and try again.

The usage statistics will be helpful, but they're not sufficient by themselves. Though there are comparatively few people enquiring about enrolment information ( for example ), it shouldn't be hard to do so. The statistics will tell us more about how to make things easier for the residents.

Vincent Chung and Alan Creak,
June, 1999.

Go to Information;
Go to Computer Science.