Session A303
Google Tracking: What’s New at Google and Its Competitors
Presenter: Greg Notess
Presenter’s web site: http://www.searchengineshowdown.com/blog/index.shtml
The Google user interface (UI) changes all the time – even sometime from one search to the next. This is because they are continually testing and modifying the searches. In addition to interface changes, it also alters the manner in which searches are processed – both within and among their databases (web, images, news, video, etc.).
For example, with Universal Search, Google inserts video, image and news results into basic web searches. However not consistently – some search phrases bring back multimedia content, others don’t. Also, a search today might bring back a video and the same search tomorrow may not.
In another example, it has started ‘stemming’ or truncating search terms (somewhat erratically). In order to turn this ‘feature’ off, users must insert a + before a word that they want searched exactly (e.g. +Jami will not return results Jamie and Jaime).
Also, Google has altered the manner in which they process stop words. For example, a search for to be or not to be used to only search the word NOT with a note that indicated that to, be, or are all stop words and are not searched (without the +). However, now the phrase brings back relevant results with no mention of stop word processing.
The advanced search screen has changed, too. It now auto-populates the search terms. This is helpful because it clearly shows users the query syntax of their search parameters. In addition, they have added region search (countries, actually) and it is presumed that this searches similarly to the localized google for that country (e.g. google.ca for Canada).
There are many more changes ongoing all the time. Some of them are formalized into trials that you can access here: http://www.google.com/experimental/. But don’t get too attached, they can disappear! I learned this earlier this year when the left-side menu for refining search results disappeared. I was using it to compare with the UI changes that EPA is hoping to possibly implement within their site search.
While it can be frustrating that Google changes things around constantly, I think it is more valuable than damaging. After all, it’s search, it’s not supposed to be the same thing twice. That’s why we love it – it enables us to find things when our ‘known’ sources fail us. Also, I really think that we’d be hard-pressed to find someone who actually noticed each of the changes. I use google every day and while I do notice some of the changes periodically, I am mostly focused on the information need that I use the tool for and tend to notice search features when they apply to my needs. And I do this for a living! The majority of the users simply utilize the tools that are available and if they use or don’t use particular features, Google responds by either retaining, rearranging or removing them. In our information rich world, I would wager that response to user need is of more value to our users than predictability.
Session A304: What’s Hot in RSS & Social Software
Presenter: Steven Cohen
Presentation Web Site: http://stevenmcohen.pbwiki.com/CIL2008
Showed what’s new in RSS and how optimizing the opportunities to manage having information pushed to you in order to increase your productivity. Including blogs, news, even court decisions (Justia.com), RSS can be used to customize your professional (and personal) reading so that it is delivered to you inbox or your feedreader in the ways that work best for you.
I use my Google Reader to keep up with library, web design, and government information blogs. The presenter showed even more tools for finding relevant information that has been pulled together in a unified interface using syndication. For example, LibWorm.com is a site that indexes library-related blogs and news sources, and it provides RSS feeds, so use it for keeping current on even those blogs to which I don’t individually subscribe. For example, I can set up a feed for a query on taxonomy at Libworm and as content is indexed that includes that term, they will be sent to me in my reader (http://www.libworm.com/rss/librarianfeeds/userfeeds/userssqu=taxonomy.xml). Could prove to be really, really useful.
Many sites are beginning to syndicate some of their content, however Steven also demonstrated a tool that can be used to syndicate pages that do not (yet) ncorporate feeds. By entering a URL at page2RSS.com, you can find the recent updates/changes to any page.
Session A305: Findability: Information not Location
Presenters: Mike Creech & Ken Varnum, University of Michigan
Presentation Slides: http://www.slideshare.net/KenVarnum/cil2008
I found this session to be particularly useful because it showed the way that a large organization dealt with the problem of having multiple sites. EPA has accomplished one part of this (look and feel), however the global navigation piece is still something that is under construction.
Each of the individual libraries’ at University of Michigan had developed their own website independently. There were 33 sites served from lib.umich.edu with about 52,000 pages of content. Due to the information silos this had created, there was no unified sense of place or context. This made things difficult for users trying to find what they needed and leading to the common refrain from both external and internal users: I can’t FIND anything.
The long term goal for the web site is to provide a more effective search/browse solution, break down the silos of information, create an ordered and consistent navigation scheme, and provide users an opportunity to build pathways that the libraries do not see. To solve this problem, which had been created over many years, they decided to take a phased approach. Their first priority was to create consistent navigation and branding for all library websites. This would have the immediate effect of simplifying site navigation for users (no matter their entry point), bring a common look and feel to the web sites, and extend the MLibrary brand.
In order to achieve this goal, they created a uniform template that included a unified architecture – global navigation – and graphic design. An added bonus to providing a uniform template was the opportunity to add Google Analytics to each page on the web site. Google Analytics provides rich site-use data including the most- and least-used pages, user behavior patterns, and more.
Local autonomy was preserved for page content which allowed the construction of secondary navigation structures.This means that none of the pages had to LOSE anything. It was about making the site easier to use, not taking away from the site-owners. Additionally, during the transition the pages remained either static html pages or driven by independent database applications (i.e. only unified in appearance, for the benefit of the users, but not unified in the data architecture).
To help determine their design/IA, they conducted focus groups with faculty, staff, librarians, and various user bases asking them what they like and dislike about the site, what they like about other websites, etc. Participants revealed that they thought the site was far too busy or cluttered. Additionally, the most common complaint was that they had a hard time searching for and finding known information.
In addition to focus groups, they also used an online survey to ask for user feedback. In addition to the full survey, they also put up a one-question survey that would randomly appear to users on the library’s website. The survey asked one of two questions: “What did you come to this page to do?” or “Why do you come to the library’s website?” They got almost 10,000 responses over 2 weeks. Users also responded in a consistent way that pointed to an overarching need or a problem with the site; the most common responses included the words ‘search’ and ‘find.’
To design the consistent global navigation, the Information Architecture team reviewed the navigational structure of the separate sites to identify common elements. These common elements were then deemed useful to include as part of a unified menu. For example, if every library had a global link to the online catalog, simply placed in a different area or with a different graphic design (color, font, icon), a link to the online catalog could be moved to exist in a uniform location across all pages thus making it easier for users to locate. Links that are unique to specific web pages can be retained, however the will exist within a secondary navigation structure in the page content area. The purpose is not to remove information, but to provide better context for it. This will result in an increased sense of community and improved findability.
Another key element of making the site friendlier to its users is syndication. This enables users to access their information in ways that are most useful to them. Anything you can search in the new site is an RSS feed. All of their APIs are available to the public for further development. They have also developed and incorporated a social bookmarking tool called MTagger (apparently everything at UMich has to start with the letter M. I mean the Mletter M). The tag cloud is part of the standard template and is available on all of the library’s web pages. It has been up for about a month and they have close to 1,000 tags and over 300 people who are tagging. It has helped users and staff make connections across the information silos that they didn’t know were there. It has also help the IA folks learn more about the manner in which users are describing information. It is providing feedback for future improvements while also being extremely useful to users now.
Communication is key to helping to maintain support for these changes. They post updates to the libraries’ email newsletter and maintain a team blog with information about the project’s planning and progress.
Interestingly, there was a question asked about negative feedback from the librarians during this process indicating their aversion to change — however the UMich guys responded that the only consistent negative feedback they have gotten has been that the change has not been fast enough!! Maybe we’ve turned a corner! As we all become more advanced web users, we have changed our expectations for the web and the value that we place on it – which could me that we’ve changed our expectations for the way that the web affects our work. Best news I heard all day!
