Webmonkey 2

Web Monkey 2 User Experience Submitted to, Submitted By, of the Submitted on, [July 31st,   INTRODUCTION: The target website under consideration is the BSITM portal.
The User Experience design document would formally be divided into a mentioning of the users that would interact with the website, an account of the possible scenarios that would incur if and when each type of user would interact with the web portal and finally a comparative analysis of the intended website with other similar web portals available online.
DETERMINING AUDIENCE
Seeking a user experience before making a website is inevitable since it results in the formulation of an unambiguous and properly documented definition of audience. The possible audience that would visit the BSITM website would be:
Students
Prospective Students
Current Students
Past Students
Instructors
Prospective Students’ Parents/ Guardians.
The weightage given to each of the respective users mentioned above would be such that the portal would be accessed 85% by students, mainly current students. Then around 14% of the site’s usage would be by the course instructors and facilitators and lastly the parents of prospective students may access the site for information acquisition. This last accessing of the website would be about 1% of the site’s total access.
CREATING SCENARIOS
STUDENTS
Prospective Students
The students would attempt to pursue information regarding the structure of programs and their respective course outlines. The details regarding the credit structure of the courses and their prospective time tables can also be pursued by prospective students.
Current Students
The current students would attempt to pursue their existing course enrollment possibilities by searching the list of courses there are eligible to take or those which are being offered to them. Moreover, the learning portal for the enrolled courses and the access to the virtual library would also be via the proposed system. The financial profile of the current students as well as their fee payment history would also be maintained as part of the current user profile menu and can be accessed whenever required by the students.
Past Students
The BSITM proposed website would be accessible to the students who have passed out. The history of their study tenure, the issuance of transcript and online library access would be available to such students.
INSTRUCTORS
The Instructors would be handling the lecture disposition and assignment/quiz postings by students on the BSITM portal. The Instructors may even become a part of the online group discussions regarding their active courses.
PARENTS OF PROSPECTIVE STUDENTS
The information regarding the courses being offered in the BSITM program, the credit hours’ reference list, the instructors’ list would all be accessible for information.
COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS
Other websites having similar domain topics like BSITM need to be evaluated for architectural strength. This would eventually create proper awareness of what other websites are up to. Browsing already done work often results in better thought streaming and enables generation of even better thoughts for usability.
In order to compare the BSITM website we are building we compare its provisional state with the BSITM web portals of two other universities. The Web Url being used for comparison are:
Comparison Site 1: TRIDENT UNIVERSITY BSITM web portal (http://www. trident. edu/bsitm-course-catalog)
Comaprison Site 2: WORLD OPEN UNIVERSITY SITM Web Portal. (http://www. wouonline. us/? bachelor-of-science-information-technology-management, 90)
Comparison Site 3: The BSITM web portal being designed by us.
The chart ahead shows the comparative analysis:
Site 1
Site 2
Site 3
General Site Features
Site Design (1-10)
5
2
5
Navigation (1-10)
4 frames
2
4
Bookmarkable URLs
Layout (1-10)
4 frames
3
4
Look and Feel (1-10)
6
8
7
Advertising Allowed
Personalization
Personalization Start Pages
X
Email Newsletter
X
X
Saved Searches
X
X
Technology
JavaScript
X
Java

This practice of reviewing analysis should be constant and should continue even after the BSITM website has been constructed. This would enable the proper evaluation of the functional website against the competing websites. It would therefore be evident how well your website is scoring against its competitors. Since websites evolve after they come into execution and also with the passage of time, it is essential that a periodic evaluation of the competing websites should be conducted.
Result
The result is that the BSITM website constructed is posing fairly against its competitors however it does need certain changes which should be incorporated in its next update.
REFERENCES:
Morville, P., Rosenfeld, L., & Rosenfeld, L. (2007). Information architecture for the World Wide Web. Sebastopol, CA: OReilly.