Page Comparison

This is based on the current wireframes.

Note: character count includes spaces and headings.

Overview/About

-          Metadata (160 char)

-          Intro (broad overview) (approx. 170 char)

-          Specialisations (list)

-          Description (strengths in the topic area) (max 585 char)

-          Learning/Teaching environment (approx. 120 char)

-          Careers/Industry (approx. 240 char)

-          Why Wellington (this will be generic and link to ‘Why choose’ (approx. 120 char)

-          Exchange (unsure if this is needed?)

-          Degree planning (should this be moved up?) (approx. 100 char)

-          Student support (unsure if this is needed?)

Study options

-          Intro  (approx. 170 char)

-          Specialisations (list)

-          Description for each specialisation (max 380 char)

-          Degrees x 2 (approx. 535 char)

-          Feature example courses (6 courses listed)

-          Careers (approx. 142 char)

-          You might like if you…(list 3 items)

Careers

-          Intro (approx. 125 char)

-          Typical employers (approx. 200 char for each example – max of 3)

-          Sample jobs (approx. 225 char)

-          Steps for registration (only if applicable)

People and stories

-          Intro (approx. 92 char)

-          Stories/bios (approx. 1150 char per profile)

Media items

-          Quote (approx.. 140 char)

-          Fun fact (approx. 115 char)

-          Promo (approx. 120 char)

-          Slideshow

-          Video

•  For character accounts assume the standard maximum can be 160 characters for any of these blocks of content.

• Too long for mobile
• Doesn't fit within current wireframes
• Possible changes to design
  • Using concertinas and dropdowns
  • About page is the longest, could a solution be to create an overview tab?

• Everyone agreed the content was too long
• There are options for concertinas and dropdowns in the design already
• If we are using show/hide functionality we should still consider first whether content can be written more concisely - the benefit of mobile first content reaches to desktop users as they often don't want to read a lot on screen.

Decision:

• Reduce the length of the content
• Retain design patterns that hide longer copy

This is referenced on every tab but also has its own tab.

Does this need to be referenced on every tab

If it does is that because of a user need or is it something that could be addressed in the design?

Can any of this be linked through to careers.govt.nz rather than re-writing content?

Careers is important because for some students this is an important driver for their decision.

Rather than a large block for careers references could be woven into other parts of the content where relevant.

Decision

Reduce the number of blocks referencing careers.

Unsure if this is a marketing driver

• This was an example of a block that would push people to richer content rather than being about exchanges being promoted on all Topics. Equally the content could have been about BA Internships.
• Having these blocks is part of marketing the uniqueness of what Victoria offers.
• The Exchange block could still be relevant for some topics - as it could be worth talking to Victoria Abroad about what subjects are more likely to be interested in exchanges.

Decision

Block patter should still be developed but these should only be used where they enhance the content for users not by rule for every single topic/page.

Content lives in a different area of the site - could look at fleshing this out as part of the BAU IA work in the 'Why Choose' area of the site.

This is a longer block and points to three places: Student Services on Future Students hub, Maori at Victoria and Pasifika at Victoria.

• Discussion that this is a very long block and probably isn't necessary to be pointing students in different directions from this page.
• The statement or something similar is still useful as many people coming from High School are told how big, unfriendly and unsupportive the university is and this isn't true and should be demystified. "New students find Victoria a welcoming place, with great student support. If you run into a problem, there will be someone who can help"
• it is problematic that three areas have been cherry picked - why isn't disability services their?

Decision

It is better to have a much more simpler block with just a heading and simple statement which could then point of to Student Services. The Student Services content on Future Students could be reviewed to ensure it works well for users.

• This looks like generic content that could be used across all topic pages
• Alternatively, there could be a smaller selection of blocks to choose from e.g. one for each campus, one about government, culture, student life etc.
• Would international need different blocks?

• Could we just push them to the Future Students hub for this?
• The content is important in this place as it is sometimes the only tangible point of difference from other institutions. The content could then push people to where this is more information.

Decision

• We will have a reduced number of blocks which can be maintained centrally - what these are and how many will come out of the work that Gabe and Alida do as they work through the content.

• It was felt this wasn't the right place in the journey to talk about customising the degree, here was a still talking about the topic.
• The way it is currently written is overselling things a bit - we aren't really highly flexible but there are some options that we haven't included in Degree Requirements as they add too much complexity for all users when they are only relevant to a few.

Decision

• This content will move to the degree/programme 'about page'

• Currently we are still looking at what content review tool we are going to use but everyone agreed it will be good to have the templates set up so they restrict content and spell out the page layout.

Rewrite one of the existing topic pages to fit the prototype and based on the wireframe approach. This could then be the basis things are worked from.

Decision

• Gabe Ryan (Unlicensed) and Alida Steemson (Unlicensed) will review 'Tourism Management' and either 'Building Science' or 'Architecture. These were chosen as they are part of the list which will be simplest to get live once we have sign-off.

• This information wasn't kept up to date as changes were made
• There could be areas of this plan that aren't being met and should have been.

Decision

• WIPII Team will review these as the content is worked on and finalise them for future development.

• People agreed they were overused
• Partly there are so many quotes in the draft content as there haven't been images and video available.

Decision

• The use of these elements will be reduced
• If images and video aren't available then we won't automatically default to quotes.
• We will potentially go live without some rich content but asked the relevant Faculty/School to work towards creating this type of content.

Decision

• Alida Steemson (Unlicensed) and Gabe Ryan (Unlicensed) will keep this in mind and come back on what they think the best approach is.