A Division of Royall & Company
Insights for Institutional Website Design
May 2006
© 2006 by University Research Partners. All rights reserved. The data and information contained in this report are proprietary to
Insights for Institutional Website Design
Research conducted by Royall & Company’s University Research Partners shows that many accepted theories about website architecture and content are in conflict with the needs of students and parents – and can in fact stand in the way of helping institutions achieve their enrollment goals, and serve their prospective student populations
effectively.
Since Royall & Company and University Research Partners are exclusively focused on undergraduate student recruitment, we will concern ourselves with the needs, priorities, and habits of one highly significant audience for any institutional website: high school students who are seeking information about colleges of potential interest to them. Who’s your audience?
When considering one’s own website, the first necessary step is to determine what discrete groups comprise the ‘audience’ of the site, and in what priority. All too often, institutional websites are designed more for internal constituencies than external ones. To some extent, institutional websites (.edu) are difficult to navigate because they seek to fulfill the needs of all possible audiences. Faculty, staff, current students, alumni, and prospective students are all expected to use the same website as an information source despite the differences in the information needs of those groups of individuals. One approach to solving this common problem is to develop a separate intranet for faculty, staff, and students. This enables the institutional website to speak to the primary audience of prospective students. Taking this step may be a challenge for many institutions as it is not uncommon for various schools and departments to develop their own sections of the website within the primary site. To the extent that a single team of designers can create the site, or at a minimum develop architectural and design elements that must be followed by all site components, the site’s usability will be enhanced.
How do students use websites vs. information in other media?
Our research (as well as all pertinent research from other reputable organizations) shows that general college websites are used by more students than any other source of
information. About 80% of college-bound high school students use institutional websites (i.e., the general .edu website) as an information source during their college search – more than any other information source. Personal letters and email messages from admissions officers were both used by 73%. When information is considered important to the college search, print publications are most preferred, followed by a school’s website.
What does this mean for you? Print publications and information provided on your institutional websites should be complementary. Students want and use both.
Where do high school students most naturally go?
Prospects do not always use the admission website – it is typically second to the general dot-edu site. When students visit an institutional website, their inclination is to go directly to the main dot-edu page. Once there, they may view the admissions section of the site as only for those who are in the process of applying. Consequently, prospects may miss much of the information they are searching for.
It is, therefore, imperative that admissions officials work with developers for the general website to ensure easy (and obvious) access to admissions-related information.
Do high school students of different ages need different things from your website? Students from different classes are likely using college websites in different ways. Sophomores and juniors report similar patterns and likely use the websites to develop their short lists of schools. They might use websites to answer these questions: Where can I get in? What schools can I afford to attend? Will I be able to study in my area of interest? Seniors have already been through this screening process. They are using websites to inform their decision of where to apply, to develop a strong application, and to make a final choice from among schools in their consideration set. Some of the topics will be the same ones they viewed as sophomores and juniors at the websites of those schools on their short lists. However, their evaluation of where a college stands with regard to those topics will be different.
Seniors are likely to spend more time to get the information they need; the implied deadline for decisions related to college search and choice will change their perceptions of the effort required for information search and the benefits of that search. Because sophomores and juniors are still in the screening mode, their search effort will be less extensive compared to seniors, and the perceived benefits of search will be lower.
This is an important point for institutions that wish to acquire a place on sophomores’ and juniors’ short lists as a preemptive tactic for increasing yield among seniors in future years. The answers to these most critical questions must be clearly available, and intuitively architected for maximum visibility; they must be easy to find and require little search effort.
“Cool!” vs. easy: Which one wins?
Our research suggests that college-bound high school students view websites as sources of information. They are not particularly interested in sites as sources of entertainment. In fact, when a website’s design appears to sacrifice functionality and ease of navigation for a “cool” look, students are irritated. For this reason alone, a website should never
The value of a website from an information source perspective stems from ease of navigation as much as content. For many institutions, the information is there. Students just can’t find it (or they won’t take the time to find it). Some students indicated that if it takes more than two or three clicks to find what they are looking for, they will just give up and move on. The website should be designed to lead the user to the actions you desire. That’s one reason why having an easily identifiable “Apply Now” link on the home page is important.
A website should never sacrifice usability, and intuitive architecture, for better looking/“cooler” design.
Things to do – and things to avoid:
The following suggestions should increase site “stickiness” by enhancing the search experience for visitors.
o Make navigation easy
o Use outlines and bulleted lists as reference to more detailed information o Use roll-over navigation
o Include a strong “search” functionality on the home page o Include an “Apply Now” option on the home page
o Include links to the key questions prospective students want answered: 1. Can I get in?
2. Does this school offer the major I want? 3. Will I be able to afford it?
o Organize important information as FAQs
o Minimize the use of “clicks” to get to valuable information o Ensure that headings are meaningful to visitors
o Be consistent in the “look and feel” within the site
o Keep the admissions pages consistent visually with the general website o Pay attention to the size of fonts used—make sure the content is easy to read o Use images and/or icons to represent functions or content
o Select colors carefully (visually pleasing) o Keep it simple; don’t crowd the pages Frequent mistakes include…
o Requiring that students provide substantial personal information to inquire online. This substantially limits the number of student inquiries you will receive online.
o Listing majors and concentrations by the university’s organization rather than in a simple, intuitive, alphabetical listing. Most high school students don’t know where to find specific majors in a complex research university
o Requiring students to ‘register’ or establish an ‘account’ in order to view the online application for admission. Students often simply wish to browse the application to get a sense of its difficulty and the time it will require. Requiring that they set up accounts will mean that some students simply choose not to apply. Students do not hide their animosity toward the use of pop-up windows and required registrations to access site information. o Failing to provide an online profile of the most recent freshman class. While students don’t seek out college websites for entertainment, there are possible components that increase site stickiness through their interactive or entertainment focus. Students like access to features such as current student biographies, profiles of the typical week in the life of a freshman, message boards, virtual campus tours, and website
personalization options.
Lastly, institutions should make access to the application (whether a printable download or an online application) available on the institutional home page or on the very first level of the prospective student section. Applications that are not easy to find increase the likelihood that prospective students will terminate their use of the website and decrease the likelihood that they will apply.
How can I stress-test my own website?
The easiest way is to do what students do – go to the .edu site (not admissions!) and type “Apply” or “application” in the search box. Is your application for admission turned up by this search? Do the same with the words “Get info” and “visit” and see what your search engine returns. The results may surprise you – in good ways and bad!
Where are there some good examples of these practices?
Some institutional websites can be viewed as reflective of “best practices.” Review the following for some ideas: Northland College (www.northland.edu), Simmons College (www.simmons.edu), and Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (www.rpi.edu). An example of an institutional website that successfully integrates the needs of different audiences is that of The George Washington University (www.gwu.edu).
