Page Comparison

Project update

• Following the circulation of a project update on 10th August (including topic and subject groupings) and the topic content strategy circulated on 14th August, there were no immediate questions or feedback from the group.
• Charlotte Deans did some she had some feedback about the groupings but would pick this up in a subsequent meeting scheduled with Paul later that week.

Topics and subject groupings

• Paul provided a brief update on progress of the topic and subject groupings, and noted that the most recent groupings would be circulated with the meeting notes.
• The group were reminded that the topic pages would be replacing the current subject pages. The structure of topics and subjects support navigation purposes, but the very top level 'mega area/topics' would not have any content, beyond a list of links to the associated topics.
• The process to map programmes to subjects was explained, with the initial focus on the few undergraduate programmes the university provides.  
• Currently no more than 2 undergraduate programmes match to a topic or subject area.
• The complexity will be more apparent at postgraduate level where over 120 programmes may be relevant.
• It was queried whether topics would work well for taught masters programmes and would future students look for them here.
• Terminology was raised around the use of programme and qualification. Kristina noted that she favoured the term qualification.

Background

• Chrissi presented the background of the development of the wireframe and how it had transitioned from the word documented previously presented at this meeting.
• Key points were why use a wireframe, which included the speed of development, ease of change and to demonstrate key ideas.
• The wireframe presented a mobile first approach, and further developments may look different from a desktop perspective.
• The content developed was in line with the topic content strategy which had previously been circulated to the group, however it was noted there were in inaccuracies in the content to demonstrate variations.
• The blocks of content shown in the wireframe can be optional and opportunities to seek iterations of release around priority content is being discussed.

The wireframe

• The wireframe for the topic architecture was presented to the group.
• They key navigation aspects, labeling of content, and structure of the 4 core areas were discussed.
• Anne presented the content in line with the strategy and its aims.

Testing

• A/B testing with students would be considered as the next steps, where students are given different ways to access to absorb information and comparing the two results.

• The undergraduate degree content strategy was tabled at the meeting.
• Academic terminology was raised again. This document refers to degree, whereas at postgraduate level the term programme is used.
• Degree planning was noted as important in person, but should it be possible for a student to enrol without this on some of the more simple degree structures?
• Adrienne noted that the online enrolment will be asking students to set up a programme of study for their entire degree upfront.

• The group agreed for future meetings 1.5 hours will be allocated to ensure sufficient time to discuss each item.
• Chrissi noted that the schedule of the meeting aims to be monthly, however is not booked far in advance to ensure the meetings are booked with an agenda in mind to utilise everyone's time well