Testing an Academic Library Website for Usability with Faculty and Graduate Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives - This usability study was developed to observe faculty and graduate students’ reactions to a recent redesign of the University of Kansas (KU) Libraries’ website. The redesign included new navigational features, introduction of a federated search tool, a quick search box on the front page, and research subject pages. The study also provided the opportunity to observe the practices of faculty and graduate students in locating and retrieving information on the Libraries’ website. Methods - Ten participants (five faculty and five graduate students) representing diverse disciplines were solicited for the study. Participants were required to access the Libraries’ website to answer a series of questions regarding new and updated features of the website. Observational analysis using Morae™ software was conducted and interviews with each participant provided details of their opinions on how these new features would influence their research and teaching activities. Results - Most of the participants either did not notice or ignored the major website changes. Links to and locations of commonly used resources (e.g. catalogue; databases; e-journals) had been changed minimally, and the faculty and graduate student participants gravitated to those familiar features to complete tasks. Prior to the study, participants had not accessed the new discovery tools; however, once previewed, responses to the tools’ utility were generally favourable. After using the federated search tool on a familiar topic, several participants noted that, when directed to databases they had not previously considered, they were able to locate citations they had missed in the past. Observers noted pitfalls in navigating the site such as inconsistent underscoring of links, ambiguous terminology, and unclear icons meant to expand subject heading lists. Unexpected searching behaviours were observed, including inconsistent and lack of conceptual understanding in searching for e-journal content. Conclusions - This study provides evidence regarding the usability of a library website with a population already familiar with library resources. It demonstrated that faculty and graduate students are not interested in experimenting with new discovery tools but are amenable to their potential value to undergraduate students. The recent trend toward minimizing content and links on websites satisfies this population, one which is already comfortable with the basic attributes of a library’s website.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.025 | 0.051 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".