SPEC Kit 322: Library User Experience · 53
There have been several changes made based on the two studies. We reduced the number of tabs as many users
reported that they didn’t understand the difference between them. We redesigned the entire search resources box on
the home page to better highlight the key resources. The investigation of the federated articles search interface resulted
in a task force being formed to determine whether we should move to web scale discovery. We are now in the process
of implementing Summon based on the decision of this task force.
These assessment activities greatly shaped the design and furniture selections of the first phase of the Learning Studio.
It also impacted the need for an expanded cafe and the types of services offered within the studio.
This activity is too recent for changes to be seen. The task force will submit their report and recommendations for action
will derive from the report.
Too early yet for this.
User feedback directly affected the development of the new OPAC. User comments and suggestions have led to the
development of, for example, specific search facets, the layout of the site, and how search results are displayed.
Users helped clarify terminology, subject groupings, overall design (use fewer words, more graphics), simpler
navigation/flatter organization more prominent search features.
We added 80 new electrical outlets and provided wiring to 36 individual study carrels. We added a few more fixed
computers and a print station. We purchased 15 tablet-arm chairs and 10 individual study tables. We decided NOT to
install display cases in the room after the focus group participants indicated this was definitely not desired.
We are in the process of conducting further studies of the least used service points (by time and place) to decide
whether to close them or to revitalize them.
We expect to alter physical arrangements of reference, circulation, services departments/units and student computer
space. We might also relocate the building’s public entrances, loading dock, and Starbuck’s entrance.
We have changed our performance management system based on the results of ClimateQUAL®. We are in the process
of analyzing our LibQUAL+® data.
We have created a new coffee shop, upgraded furniture, changed library borrowing policies, changed collection
practices (e.g., purchasing additional e-books), and pursued new services (e.g., consortial borrowing, paging).
We rely on user testing to design any web interface and we will modify programming of search appliances and API s
based on testing.
When the economy improves and funding becomes available, work may begin on a Research Commons.
17. How would you characterize the impact of these changes on the user experience? N=63
Minor modification(s) to the existing design 25 40%
Major modification(s) to the existing design 15 24%
Complete redesign 12 19%
Other 11 18%
There have been several changes made based on the two studies. We reduced the number of tabs as many users
reported that they didn’t understand the difference between them. We redesigned the entire search resources box on
the home page to better highlight the key resources. The investigation of the federated articles search interface resulted
in a task force being formed to determine whether we should move to web scale discovery. We are now in the process
of implementing Summon based on the decision of this task force.
These assessment activities greatly shaped the design and furniture selections of the first phase of the Learning Studio.
It also impacted the need for an expanded cafe and the types of services offered within the studio.
This activity is too recent for changes to be seen. The task force will submit their report and recommendations for action
will derive from the report.
Too early yet for this.
User feedback directly affected the development of the new OPAC. User comments and suggestions have led to the
development of, for example, specific search facets, the layout of the site, and how search results are displayed.
Users helped clarify terminology, subject groupings, overall design (use fewer words, more graphics), simpler
navigation/flatter organization more prominent search features.
We added 80 new electrical outlets and provided wiring to 36 individual study carrels. We added a few more fixed
computers and a print station. We purchased 15 tablet-arm chairs and 10 individual study tables. We decided NOT to
install display cases in the room after the focus group participants indicated this was definitely not desired.
We are in the process of conducting further studies of the least used service points (by time and place) to decide
whether to close them or to revitalize them.
We expect to alter physical arrangements of reference, circulation, services departments/units and student computer
space. We might also relocate the building’s public entrances, loading dock, and Starbuck’s entrance.
We have changed our performance management system based on the results of ClimateQUAL®. We are in the process
of analyzing our LibQUAL+® data.
We have created a new coffee shop, upgraded furniture, changed library borrowing policies, changed collection
practices (e.g., purchasing additional e-books), and pursued new services (e.g., consortial borrowing, paging).
We rely on user testing to design any web interface and we will modify programming of search appliances and API s
based on testing.
When the economy improves and funding becomes available, work may begin on a Research Commons.
17. How would you characterize the impact of these changes on the user experience? N=63
Minor modification(s) to the existing design 25 40%
Major modification(s) to the existing design 15 24%
Complete redesign 12 19%
Other 11 18%
