Question 6 – What pieces of the LIS website work, aren’t present or could be improved?
I think this is an important question – and will help us design a better LIS website – but it may need to be tweaked a little to clarify intent.
Can we change “aren’t present” to “does not work” or “not there”? The term “aren’t present” caused confusion during testing.
Change the word “pieces” above to “features”?
Maybe add “(optional)” to the comments column?
Can we clarify the category terms/text? There is some confusion about intent/meaning.
Library guides – change to library research guides and catalog?
Service availability – change to system availability alerts?
Technical documentation – change to computing guides or how-to guides?
Multimedia – what are we asking?
Hours – change to library hours/hours of service?
Project updates – define intent?
Staff accomplishments – this is clear – and important (is it part of staff info?)
Emergency procedures – this is clear – and important
Organizational information – Combine staff stuff, org goals and info into 1 category? Or was the intent to ask about each one?
Tagging – change to tags, reviews, ratings?
Calendars – what are we asking about?
Search – change to search box?
Organizational goals – see above
Staff information – are we asking about the directory?
Is location information referring to buildings and/or people?
Add the following categories?
Wiki and blog?
Help, who to contact for what?
Question 6 – What pieces of the LIS website work, aren’t present or could be improved?
I don’t think changing “aren’t present” to “not there” really clarifies. The issue is: do we want people to search for features of the website while taking the survey? If we don’t – we want to know what they already know about – then rewording to “not familiar with” would be better.
I think Barbara has a point. ‘Not Present’ infers that you may want to check on something before answer the question. Using ‘unfamiliar with’ or ‘not familiar with’ seems to work better for me based on the quetion being asked.
I’m fine with changing the labels of the items as described by Elin. I also like Barbara’s suggestion of changing “aren’t present” to “not present”. The point of the question is specifically to see whether there are features of the site that people think don’t exist, so I would disagree with softening it to “not familiar with”.
People generally shold not be browsing the site while taking this survey. That defeats the purpose of surveying their subconscious perceptions of the site. What use would it be for someone to hunt around for a feature on the site while taking this survey, then check a box that says they found it? The point is that people haven’t been using that feature and don’t know its there and that’s what we’re trying to figure out.
REVISITED Friday 17th!
OK we’re sending this out Monday. it bother me that we can say “I don’t know what this means” to some of the parts of Q6. If we don’t know what exactly we’re asking, neither will the people taking the survey & we won’t know what their answers mean either! So here once again is the list of Q6 questions as they stand right now, with my interpretations and rewordings. Let’s use this to tweak without taking more meeting time. I know meeting time is very limited, but again sending out a survey where the questions are ambiguous is really a waste of all the time we put in already!
ADD – Space availability searching
Help – who to contact
Technical documentation -> Computing help documentation
Emergency procedures
Staff information -> LIS departments staffing information
Staff accomplishments
Library research guides
Location information -> Services/Departments locations
Search -> LIS website searching
Tagging
Organizational information -> LIS organizational structure(??) – move to next to staff information
Service availability
Calendars -> LIS events calendar (or what?)
Hours of service