.png)
Noom- Health Tech App
Problem:
Solution:
The Literacy Council of Reading-Brooks' website consisted of numerous usability issues, causing an unpleasant experience for their users. Their overall website health score was rated at a 41%.
​
Redesign 80% of website to improve overall usability.
Project
In August 2023, I was one of two researchers contracted by LCRB to improve the usability of their website design.
Objective
Collaborate with web designer to resolve usability issues and identify the best way to restructure the website.
Tools
-
​Screpy- AI Website Analysis Tool​
-
Google Sheets- Heuristic Evaluation
-
Looppanel- Transcription & Analysis
-
Google Slides- Insight Report
My Process
Week 1: Heuristic Evaluation and Website Analytics
-
Since LCRB was not tracking any metrics for their website, we used an AI analytic tool called Screpy to gain a general idea of the website's health. It scored a 42/100 due to numerous usability issues including broken links and missing titles.
​
-
Conducted a heuristics evaluation which revealed 24 usability issues, 10 of which I classified as "Major Issues".
Week 2: Research Plan and Recruitment
-
Created a research plan to evaluate usability in more depth.
-
​We focused on evaluating how well users understood the content and were able to navigate the website to find the information they wanted.
-
Example of discussion questions:
-
​​"What information is important for you to find on the website? Why?"
-
"What about the process stood out to you as you searched for xyz?"​​​​​​​
-
-
​
-
Recruited 8 participants for in person usability testing at LCRB including students, instructors, and community members.
Week 3-4: Testing and Analysis
-
Recorded usability sessions and analyzed the qualitative data using Looppanel.
Cleaning the transcripts and organizing our session notes
Tagging key quotes and identifying insights
Week 5: Recommendations To LCRB Board and Web Designer
The usability test revealed many areas of improvement. When presenting the information to the LCRB Board, they were shocked, stating that there was incorrect information, discontinued programs, and documents on the website that they were unaware of. We recommended the following changes:​
-
​Create more detailed content using simplified terms to address users' questions and account for low english literacy.​​
“For me? The title. The Title is confusing. Maybe for me I am learning English. Maybe this expression “getway” for you like English speakers is ok. for ESL student, For me it's confusing. I would prefer how become citizenship or become citizenship.”
Participant Quote
-
Improve accessibility for non-native english speakers by adding accurate translations in multi languages.
"LCRB does serve a primarily Spanish speaking population, but it's also unfair to other cultures or languages because we do intermittently have Chinese students, Russian students, Vietnamese students, French, Haitian students."
Participant Quote
-
Reorganize website into categories based on the type of user (student, instructors, and businesses) and group relevant topics together.
“Okay, is that program for people that are interested and have some study in health care? I need to read to know if I okay or wrong...it's hard to know what is for the students and what is for the partner or another group of people."
Participant Quote
-
Create a more consistent, professional, and appealing design flow to appear more credible & representative.
"Like, bland. This website feels like it's designed by the people who make the Pennsylvania government website. It's giving, like, are you actually going to read what I submit or not?"
Participant Quote
Next Steps
-
Menu navigation was a major point expressed during usability testing. In order to identify the most effective ways to organize the menu, we want to conduct a card sorting test.
​
-
We also plan to re-evaluate the website health score and send a survey to measure user satisfaction following the completion of the website redesign.