Missing content, out of date content and poor navigation: External evaluator’s conclusions

I recently blogged about the poor evaluation that Lund’s research pages got in a recent research evaluation (although the research itself was judged, in many cases, of being world class). Now I’ve got more detail about what was wrong with the pages. The biggest usability issues are:

- Missing content

- Out of date content

- Poor navigation

I found this out by sending a questionnaire (using the very groovy Questback) to the evaluators; this got a 35% response rate which was not too shabby. Here’s a table showing the problems they encountered:

evaluators-responsesI asked them if they felt the pages they looked at added to the credibility of Lund; not unsurprisingly only about half said yes.

All the data from the survey, including the evaluator’s opinions on what should be fixed immediately.