Print vs.

Web Assessment 1

Running head: PRINT VS. WEB ASSESSMENT

Print vs. Web Assessment:

A look at the Pasadena Public Library’s Web site

Angelo M. Roselle

San Jose State University

Libr 251-10

November 2, 2009

Dr. Maret
 Print vs. Web Assessment 2

Print vs. Web Assessment:

A look at the Pasadena Public Library’s Web site

Library: Pasadena Public Library (PPL)

URL: http://www.ci.pasadena.ca.us/Library/

Introduction and Background for this Assessment

I chose the Pasadena Public Library as my target for this week’s assignment because I am

currently doing a volunteer stint at the library. Recently the library has been pushing to get video

tutorials (through Camtasia screencasts) up on the Web site. Basically these tutorials are meant

to increase patron access to databases and the library catalog through the site. One of my tasks

was to create the video tutorials for the four law databases that patrons can access from the

library. Many times it seems that patrons come to the library to do their own law research, and

these databases are complex in searching functionality. It is even complicated to find the tutorials

created by the database companies such as Westlaw and HeinOnline. All this is to say that PPL

appears to be striving to make the library site more user-friendly, and I thought this would be the

perfect library to use for this assessment.

Before I get into the assessment that matches this week’s topic, I want to mention that the

Pasadena Public Library’s site has a lot of usability shortcomings, which are immediately visible

from the homepage. I do not have time to discuss the design, navigation, and overall organization

of the site; however, I want to point out that while I think video tutorials for databases are a great

idea, the Web site needs some work and this should be a priority over the tutorials. One of the

problems is that the library site is a department site of the city of Pasadena’s Web site. All of the

departments for the city of Pasadena are supposed to follow the same navigation, design, and

organization. To complicate matters, the city of Pasadena has recently changed the layout and
 Print vs. Web Assessment 3

organization of its site; therefore, the conversion from the old site to the new site for the library

is still in progress and apparent by the inconsistency throughout the pages. Other problems that

exist include inconsistent menus and navigation elements, background screen for some pages

blink when scrolling (it is black and white pixels), no “search the site” functionality for the

search box, a homepage that has a picture taking up half of the visible screen causing most of the

important content to be placed beneath the fold, and the quick links in the left panel and the

lower page all are for the city of Pasadena and not specifically for the library. These are all issues

that need to be taken into account for creating a user-friendly Web site at PPL.

Pasadena Public Library

Public libraries in the United States are used by extremely diverse populations and

demographics. Unlike a law library or an academic library where almost all library users are

usually educated and should have a good command of the English language, public library

patrons range from new US citizens with poor English skills to educated professionals. These

two examples may be the extremes of the library patron spectrum, but the diversity extends to

high school students, stay-at-home parents, low literacy adults, college students, college

professors, and even attorneys. While all libraries need to examine their site’s usability, usability

testing should be a priority especially for public libraries because of their service to such a

diverse group of patrons. The Pasadena Public Library is no different. Although Pasadena is

known as a wealthy city, the public library, with its central library and nine branches, has a

population that reflects the diversity of the city. Now, how does the Web site fair in this regard?

While it does a fairly good job in trying to follow usability guidelines, there is still more it can

do. I should note here that PPL’s Web site was redesigned as recently as early Fall 2009, and my
 Print vs. Web Assessment 4

assessment of the site after viewing the changes has shown me that PPL is in the process of

trying to make the site more user-friendly.

Simplifying Library Terminology

From the library’s homepage one can see that PPL does try to make the library

terminology on the Web site simple enough so that all library users can understand. Kuppersmith

(2009) suggests using natural language target words such as Book or Article in top-level pages or

even by providing an intermediary page with natural language. Pasadena Public library follows

this best practice guideline by using the phrase “Find a Book” in the menu on the left side of the

screen (see screenshot “Find a Book”). When a library user clicks on the option to Find a Book,

the sub-sections Search Full Catalog, eBooks & Digital Media, and New Titles List appear in the

dropdown menu. This is easy to understand then that the following sections are ways to find a

book.

PPL does not use a specialized proper name for its catalog that users would not

understand, nor does it leave novice users wondering about the purpose of a catalog. It is Krug’s

(2006) book Don’t Make Me Think that shows how terminology of a section on a Web page

really can make a difference in causing a user to stop and think. It has to be a mindless choice,

and PPL’s use of this simplified and natural language shows the effort PPL has made in

increasing Web usability of the site. A section titled “Find a Book” is a lot more self-explanatory

than “Search WorldCat” or “Library Catalog.” As recently as May 2008 (and possibly even as

recent as August 2009), the library menu for the catalog used to have the term “library catalog”

according to archive.org, but it was changed to “find a book” probably because of some library

site usability testing.

 Print vs. Web Assessment 5

An issue that presents usability problems is the lack of a glossary for the library

terminology. I looked, but I could not find one. After browsing through the menus, I tried to

conduct a search for a glossary, but the search box only allows users to search the Library

Catalog or the City, but not the site. At least in this aspect there are problems with usability. No

glossary and no way to search the whole site. PPL should have a glossary, even if they do not

want to create a glossary themselves, they should at least provide a link to a library terminology

Web glossary.

In previous assignments, I discussed my dislike of the term “resources,” and Kuppersmith

(2009) notes this as a term that is often misunderstood by users. In addition, it seems that many

libraries like to use the letter “e” in front of the words “journals,” “books,” and “resources.”

When I started volunteering at the library in August 2009, PPL was using the term “e-resources”

in reference to databases, reference services, and the library catalog. The new term for these

services is “Electronic Resources,” which while is an improvement of “e-resources,” is still not

clear in explaining the meaning of resources.

Pasadena Public Library has a treasure trove of databases, research sites, and electronic

materials. The good news is that there are some brief descriptions about each of these resources

in an Electronic Resources list http://ww2.cityofpasadena.net/library/e-

resourcesList.asp#businessdecision, which oddly enough still has the same design as the old PPL

site. The library is still in the process of redesigning the site, because while the top-level pages

are completed in a new design, the lower-level pages are still a work in progress and have the old

navigation and page layout. Interesting! This list gives a brief description about each of these

resources, such as the type of information one can expect to find in a specific database, and the

type of user (e.g. high school, grades 4-5, etc) for the database. Date ranges for database content
 Print vs. Web Assessment 6

are also provided for a few databases, such as to differentiate between Los Angeles Times-

historical (1881-1985) and Los Angeles Times-current (1985-Current).

According to the Elsevier article How to Design Library Websites to Maximize Usability

(Jasek, 2007, p.7), it is important to provide database descriptions for digital databases because

often times users do not always know what information is contained in the database by looking at

the name. Overall I think these brief descriptions on the PPL site are helpful for users. The

descriptions are in non-technical language, and are easy to read; however, PPL needs to get on

top of the site and implement the new design throughout the entire site because these

descriptions are only available once a user clicks on the “about” link, which brings them to the

old layout.

Number seven on Kuppersmith’s (2009) list of best practices for using Library Terms

That Users Understand is to “be consistent” by making sure to “use terms consistently

throughout your website.” Because of the in-progress state of the site, there is no consistency in

the language throughout the site. While one section on the menu is termed Electronic Resources

on top-level pages, the same section on the menu still has the term e-Resources when users start

going deeper into the site (see screenshot).

Something I applaud PPL for using is the different icons (see screenshot “database access

icons”) which indicate how the databases can be accessed. The icons depict whether the resource

is for all users or only for people with a valid PPL card. In addition, there is an icon showing

whether the resource (e.g. database, catalog, or reference service) is available only in the library

or can be accessed outside of the library. Having these icons is an important way of documenting

access to the library’s services. One other icon that is useful is the “full-text” icon next to each

applicable resource; however, I think a mouseover explaining full-text would be helpful because
 Print vs. Web Assessment 7

not all users will be familiar with this term. With the use of these icons, PPL is explaining not

only the purpose of the databases, but how they can be accessed.

As I was thinking of other words that may be misunderstood by library users, I searched

around on PPL’s site and discovered that most of the places where the potentially confusing

words were used, such as reference, circulation, interlibrary loan, collection, and digital library,

there were also brief descriptions explaining the terms. These explanations from PPL’s site

(Pasadena Public Library, 2009) include the following:

1) Term: InterLibrary loan; Explanation: Borrowing materials from other libraries.

2) Term: Collection Development Policy; Explanation: Selection and evaluation of

materials.

3) Term: Circulation Desk; Explanation: From borrowing books in person, to our

automated check-out service, find out what other services our circulation department

provides.

4) Term: Reference; Explanation: Have a question? Need a book borrowed from another

library? Find out how the reference department can help you.

This is not to say that the library is using the perfect terminology for all its services. Common

library terms such as circulation, reference, and hold requests are used frequently throughout the

site, and I think that this is a problem prevalent through most public library Web sites; however,

PPL does do a decent job of either giving a short explanation or listing the various services that

users can partake of through a circulation desk or a reference desk. This adheres to

Kuppersmith’s (2009) best practice number four, “Enhance or explain potentially confusing

terms.”

Tutorials and Help

 Print vs. Web Assessment 8

PPL’s tutorial videos, a topic I mentioned in the introduction section of this paper, have

issues that I can speak of from my personal experience as a volunteer in the library. Currently

there are not any “tutorials” on the Web site to the best of my searching yesterday. Over the last

two months, the library has been working to create tutorials for the most used databases, and the

databases and research resources that have the most problematic self-service issues. Using

Camtasia software, librarians, with the help of LIS interns, are recording short screencasts

(including voice and captions) that will explain the simply steps involved in using specific

databases or how to access specific resources.

My task was to develop a video tutorial storyboard for helping users to get to the actual

tutorials for the law databases in those external sites. Checking PPL’s site this morning, I see that

the tutorials are not yet available; however, I can say that in the staff meetings and tutorial

creation handouts, we were all instructed about using terms that users would understand and

about the importance of keeping the screencast tutorials short and to the point. I read over some

of the tutorial scripts in the draft phases of the project, and I think the library will do a good job

of creating these tutorials. There did not seem to be library terminology used that did not have an

explanation. Using databases, especially law databases, can be overwhelming for even the tried

and true library patrons (Westlaw is the prime candidate for my wrath); therefore, simple

instructions that even novice users can understand are necessary, and this is what the tutorials are

supposed to present. I expect that these tutorials will be up sometime next spring, and I think that

by creating these tutorials PPL is trying to make the databases more accessible.

One language issue that I would like to point out is the wording of the link to the user

guide for one of the law databases. Actually, this is what happened. When the librarian I was

working with at PPL told me to create video tutorials which would show users how to get from
 Print vs. Web Assessment 9

the PPL electronic resources page to the law database tutorials, I asked if it would be simpler

just to create a link directly to the tutorials from the electronic resources page instead of showing

users how to get there through a video tutorial. We both agreed that this made sense, and we

asked the IT department to help us put the user guides and tutorials as a direct link. Looking at

the Web site today, I see that the IT department did put a link to the user guide for OnLaw

database; however, the link is called “help” and not “user guide.” I think this is a problem

because the language is not descriptive. If I was a user wondering how to search, and this was the

first time I happened to come across the database, I would probably be more apt to click on a link

titled “user guide” than a link titled “help.” This shows how librarians need to be in close

communication with the IT department when organizing or adding content to Web sites.

Having help access points throughout a library’s Web site is extremely important. Jasek

(2007, p. 7) notes that having a “help” link in the same location on every page provides

consistency and lets users know how to find help when needed. It is sad to say, but PPL does not

have easy access points to help. Usually a help link would be in the upper right corner of every

page or at the bottom of every page; however, because PPL is part of the city’s site, the bottom

portion of the page is taken up by links to the city and the top screen only has a search box.

There is a “contact us” section that users can link to from the homepage, a reference question

section for emailing a reference question, and a couple of other pages that have contact

information such as phone and fax numbers, but there is not consistent help sections. This is not

acceptable. With such a complex library system, library site, and numerous databases available,

“help” links need to be prominently displayed on every page.

Chucking Information
 Print vs. Web Assessment 10

Now we come to “chunked” information. When a library provides the information in a

“chunked” format, it is making the content on the site easier to read. This is where I ran into

problems when assessing PPL’s site. Lynch and Horton (2009) state that “chunking can help

organize and present information in a modular layout that is consistent throughout the site.” All

of our readings over the last 10 weeks discuss the importance of consistency and its necessity for

good usability. PPL does not provide consistency. I did not realize how many lower-level linked

pages have the old PPL Web layout and organization. It is really confusing to go from one

navigation, menu, and page layout on one page and then click on a link and be taken to another

page layout with a totally different color scheme, menu, and navigation.

The content on some of the newer designed pages appears to be “chunked” in a logical

way that is easy for a user to read and scan. On other pages (e.g. Circulation Services) the page

may be a bit long, which requires scrolling through the content, but the breaking up the content

with bullet points and in an outline format (e.g. fee schedule section) allows for easier reading

and scanning of text. It was Krug (2006, p. 31) who discussed how creating a clear visual

hierarchy is necessary to ease scanning of page content. By dividing the content on the PPL site

into readable chunks, PPL is creating a visual hierarchy. The press releases section is a good

example of how organizing information in smaller chunks is a good way to organize and present

the information. The title of the press release followed by a short description of the press

release’s content makes for easy scanning.

Not all the pages are displaying content in this form. Some of the older page layouts still

have longer paragraphs that are not properly chunked information in my opinion, making reading

and scanning more difficult. Usability.gov’s Reading and Scanning guidelines state “Enhance

scanning by providing clear links, headings, short phrases and sentences, and short paragraphs.”
 Print vs. Web Assessment 11

I think overall PPL does follow this guideline. Paragraphs are separated with headings and these

headings are usually in a different color than the text. White space also aids in showing a clear

distinction between sections and chunks of information. The use of bullet points and the outline

layout of content enhances scanning and reading for users.

Conclusion

As I have mentioned several times throughout this assessment, Pasadena Public Library’s

Web site is a work in progress. It seems that they have recently been transitioning from an old

site to a new and improved site. This new site seems to be providing a lot of the necessary user-

friendly elements and also seems to follow the usability guidelines that we have been reading

about this week. I do not know if a usability test was conducted or if a team of librarians

discussed the necessary usability changes needed and made recommendations; however, I do

know, from comparing the current site to the old site on WayBackMachine on archive.org, that

the changes made were deliberate and actually match many of the site usability enhancements

that were needed.

There are several issues that PPL needs to consider further and implement as soon as

possible. These issues include creating or linking to a library terminology glossary, providing a

clear “help” link in a consistent location throughout the site, finishing tutorials and making sure

that the language is not too technical, allowing the search engine to search the site, and provide

consistency in design and layout throughout all pages of the site. The Pasadena Public Library is

on the right track, but it should continue to test its site with actual users to make sure that it is

providing the best service and usability it can.

 Print vs. Web Assessment 12

References

Archive.org. (May 2008). WayBackMachine. Pasadena Public Library. Retrieved October 30,

2009, from http://web.archive.org/web/20080502104631rn_1/

www.cityofpasadena.net/library/

Jasek, C. (2007). How to design library websites to maximize usability. Retrieved October 25,

2009, from http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/librariansinfo.librarians/lc_home#

pamphlets

Krug, S. (2006). Don’t make me think: A common sense approach to Web usability (2nd ed.).

Berkeley, CA: New Riders.

Kuppersmith, J. (2009). Library terms that users understand. Retrieved October 25, 2009, from

http://www.jkup.net/terms.html

Lynch, P. & Norton, S. (2009). Organizing your information in Web Style Guide 3rd edition.

Retrieved October 25, 2009, from http://webstyleguide.com/wsg3/3-information-

architecture/2-organizing-information.html

Pasadena Public Library. (2009). http://www.ci.pasadena.ca.us/Library/

Usability.gov. (2005). Reading and Scanning. Retrieved October 31, 2009, from San Jose State

University, School of Library & Information Science, Fall 2009, Maret 251-10, Angel 7.4

LMS site: https://liffey.sjsu.edu

 Print vs. Web Assessment 13

Screenshots

1) Old Pasadena Public Library Website

2) New Pasadena Public Library Website

 Print vs. Web Assessment 14

3) Find a Book

4) Database access icons

 Print vs. Web Assessment 15

5) Old menu still accessible through some lower

lower-level pages