When I opened the site on NPR’s “Look At This: Demolished”, my initial thought was “wow, there is a lot going on.” I was overwhelmed at first, but after looking at the page for a minute, I became more and more intrigued. The picture on the main page was a young boy on a swing; he didn’t look happy or sad; this made me excited to read the rest. The information on the first page gave me a feel of what the site was going to be about, housing in Chicago.
The colors on the site worked really well together and were appealing to the eyes, this made it easier to stay interested. When I went to explore the site, I had difficulty figuring out how to navigate it. There was a home button but no menu. After going around the page I finally found a translucent arrow that when I put my cursor over it, it turned white. I just clicked the right button on the slides until I was back at the beginning again. The arrows are on the both the left and the right so you can go back or forward.
I really enjoyed going through the site, which turned out to be mostly a slide show. The information on the slides was sad, but yet informative. Other than the content of the site, I liked the layout. It was amazing how buildings and people were edited in and out. By editing out the building, people, and other objects, it really helped tell the story. The pictures were moving and helped impact the actual information. Another aspect that I enjoyed was that it was not too wordy, the pictures were worth 1,000 words.
The navigation on the site was a little frustrating because, without any menu, I was not able to go to a specific page. If I wanted to find a specific page I would have to use the left and right arrows. Which were big enough for me to click when I brought the site up on my mobile device. Without a menu, I find that sites are much more difficult to navigate and generally frustrate the user.
This website did not follow many of the guidelines. It wasn’t very user-friendly. There was no menu, which is impractical for a website. It also was not very easy to navigate, due to there being no menu.
Usability Test on Another Person
I had my roommate Jake look through the site. When he opened it, he saw the picture of the child on the swing, which intrigued him to continue on the site. The title on the main page was powerful and the picture helped even more he said. He had a difficult time the arrow to go to the next page, which he found frustrating. Finding information to contact the creators/producers/reporters of the site was difficult. He did find that the buttons (arrows) were easy to click, he found this helpful. Even though he did not like that there wasn’t a menu, he thought that the layout was great. Without the menu, he still found that the website was mostly user-friendly. It took him about 4 minutes to find the authors and was confused when he found them that there wasn’t any contact information. Overall, even though he felt that it was irritating to not have a menu, he enjoyed the site.
Jake and I ended up having the same experiences while using the page. He found it difficult to figure out the site at first because of there not being a menu, which was the same for me. He actually found the contact information quicker than I did, it only took him about 4 minutes and it took me 6.
Three things that should not be changed about the site are the graphics, which help tell the story. The short blurbs about the pictures, making it easy to follow along but not too overwhelming. There should also not be a change in the layout because it works really well to get the point across.
Three things that should be changed to the website is the navigation. It is frustrating for people to use a site when there isn’t any navigation. Also, there should be contact information in more detail and easier to find. If someone really enjoyed the pages and wanted to know more, they would be able to contact someone. The last thing that should be changed is the lettering. I found that it was somewhat difficult to read the letters because they were small.