Faculty Senate Resolution Regarding the Gulf Park Library June 10, 2005
The USM Gulf Park Library is the architectural “jewel” of the Gulf Park campus. The open, beautiful 3rd floor of the library is the main repository of the library's books and contains almost sixty percent of the building's study seating. An existing plan calls for subdividing the north wing of the 3rd floor into classrooms at a cost of $200,000 - $250,000. An additional amount would be necessary to restore the library back to its original condition after classrooms are constructed on the campus.
For the following reasons the USM Faculty Senate resolves that all plans for converting portions of the library at Gulf Park to temporary classroom space be halted.
- The academic program need for library collection and study space is so great, especially given the 20 percent average annual growth being projected by the Gulf Park Master Planning Group, that the library conversion would hamper the delivery and quality of programs at Gulf Park , the main USM center on the Coast.
- The 3rd floor of the library is the main repository for its books. The 3rd floor classroom conversion would impinge upon space for collection development and severely curtail space for current stacks and faculty/student study, in clear violation of the American Library Association square footage per student standards, and this during a SACS reaffirmation period.
- Even the architects and planners acknowledge that the conversion would raise noise and foot traffic to the point where it would interfere with the normal function of the library.
- The library conversion would violate the spirit of the “Bricks to Books” campaign by which the USM community, staff, alumni, local corporations and other supporters pledged tens of thousands of dollars to the library as it was planned and built. The University's acceptance of these monies for the library is a sacred trust with those contributors.
- The perceived classroom crunch at Gulf Park results largely from the lack of any coordinated inter-college academic scheduling process for USM-Gulf Coast . The Gulf Park Advanced Education Center (AEC), Holloway Complex and the former Business College Building classrooms are demonstrably underutilized during the day. If properly coordinated and scheduled, these existing classroom spaces would ease the crunch that supposedly necessitates the library conversion.
- The “Executive MBA (EMBA) Program” that the library conversion was planned to accommodate appears to be permanently tabled and the Dean of the College of Business publicly stated that no dedicated classroom space for the EMBA was going to be necessary at Gulf Park since on-campus class meetings for such a program would be limited to weekends when the AEC, the prime classroom space at Gulf Park, is very lightly used.
- Infrastructure-dedicated monies slated for the library conversion could be better expended on either renovation of other existing space into classrooms or for the acquisition of portable classrooms.
Further, the Faculty Senate resolves that instead of converting library space to classrooms the administration pursue some or all of the following alternatives.
- Determine whether additional on-campus space will soon become available for classrooms (for example, in Elizabeth Hall).
- Determine whether space is available for temporary use as classrooms at nearby churches and hotels.
- Acquire portable classrooms for deployment at Gulf Park , either as classrooms, or as auxiliary space (such as for the bookstore, or offices) or both.
- Establish a USM-Gulf Coast scheduling authority to assure optimum coordination and use of available space, thus spreading classes over more daytime periods and over all four nights, and eliminating the two nights a week classroom crunch that ostensibly requires the library conversion.
Appendix 2
Faculty Senate Resolution Regarding the Hardy Hall Auditorium June 10, 2005
Hardy Hall Auditorium is a large, open multipurpose room which looks out over the Mississippi Sound. Currently, much of the Hardy Hall Auditorium is slated to be converted into a bookstore.
For the following reasons, the USM Faculty Senate resolves that plans for the conversion of the Hardy Hall Auditorium into a bookstore be halted.
- Hardy Hall Auditorium is an excellent location for large meetings and get-togethers. Unlike the AEC Auditorium, Hardy Hall Auditorium has a flat floor without fixed seats, making it adaptable for large or small conferences, luncheons, award ceremonies and meetings. A similar space does not exist on the Gulf Park campus.
- The Hardy Hall Auditorium has excellent acoustics and is amenable as a venue for plays, recitals, concerts, and other similar programs. Its use in fine arts activities also enhances the importance of the USM Gulf Park campus as a link to the coast community. For example, the USM Gulf Coast Civic Chorale uses this auditorium for concerts.
The modification of the Hardy Hall Auditorium into a bookstore will make it unusable for the purposes listed above. The Faculty Senate therefore resolves that the USM administration halt the conversion of the Auditorium into a bookstore. We recommend that a portable (modular) building be rented or another space used until a more permanent bookstore is built.
Appendix 3
Appendix 4
to:
ITech Advisory Committee, Judy Isbell
from: Faculty
Senate and Technology Sub-Committee
subject: Restructured USM Web Site
date:
May 10, 2005
On Monday, May 2, 2005, the University Web site went down for an hour or two around
8:00am so that a new Web page design could be uploaded. The
implementation took the University community by surprise especially when no
specific notification had been made beforehand. If the University
community had been consulted prior to the upload of the new site, it probably
would have advised delaying the implementation of the new design until semester
break to avoid causing any confusion to students, staff, and faculty one week
before finals. Furthermore, consultation or communication might have
ensured that vital links such as the Online Course Evaluation, SOAR, and Library would
not have been omitted.
Though we appreciate the time and effort employed in this endeavor to make the
new Web site more appealing and organized, we have some observations and
questions that we hope you can address:
Questions
[Faculty Senate question are in black, Homer Coffman’s
responses are in blue]
Why were Public Relations personnel, as opposed to I-Tech Web personnel,
primarily involved in redesigning the existing Web site? Could you please
tell us their qualifications for such a project?
The department of Marketing and Public Relations is
responsible for the consistency of the University’s overall message to the
general public. So they provide marketing and public relations expertise for
strategic planning, media exposure, and marketing strategies for any event,
organization, department, or college. Marketing’s primary directive is to
sell the university. Therefore, the redesign should have primarily
resided with the Marketing and Public Relations department. iTech
personnel were involved in the development / technical aspects of the
website. The design was based on a focused study completed by the Godwin
Group and was completed in a team environment with multiple inputs on
creativity.
Judy Isbell is the director of
Web-based marketing for Southern Miss Gulf Coast and was asked by Lisa Mader to
assist this team because since she had a background in Web development and a
Master’s degree in Communications (emphasis in Public Relations earned from
Southern Miss in May 1993). She has developed the Memorial Hospital at Gulfport’s first Web site, and
developed the Web site for the Department of Marine Science at Southern Miss.
She has experience with relevant software and operating systems employed in
this redevelopment, including Dreamweaver, Photoshop, Adobe Acrobat, DOS,
Windows and Linux.
Jenny Watson, Web Developer for the Marketing and Public Relations Department,
was asked to join the team because of her extensive knowledge of the current
Web site as the webmaster for the existing top tier of university Web pages.
Her design background in both print and Web environments made her a valuable
asset to the team. Watson’s experience also includes the same relevant software
and operating systems.
The overall project was owned equally by Lisa Mader and Homer Coffman as it is
a blend of both university communications and technology resources. With Lisa Mader’s
recent departure, I will continue to drive the process with input from the
entire team.
In terms of the focus groups involved in gathering feedback for a new Web
design, why were only high school students and their parents involved as
participants? Why did the scope not include the University community so
that functionality could have been addressed?
Several sessions
were conducted (Dec. 14, 2004, Jan. 27, 2005, and Feb. 25, 2005) with a focus group of University “power users.” These
individuals are spread throughout the University system and have particular and
detailed knowledge of the needs of technology consumers at the various campuses
and teaching sites.
Current students were also questioned as a focus group during the development
phase. The Southern Style group was used as they were a ready
cross-section of students already meeting on a regular basis.
In addition to the Godwin Group information provided as part of the initial
recruitment rsearch, we conducted a targeted focus group on Web communication
with Sacred Heart students.
Why was a consultant company (Godwin) brought in to facilitate these focus
groups when a research institution like USM could have performed a similar task
with its qualified faculty and graduate students?
Godwin Group was
acquired to conduct focus group research involving student recruitment in the
fall of 2004. It was this initial study that initiated the Web redevelopment as
a top priority for the University in attracting new students. Prospective
students and their parents ranked Web sites as their first touch point with a
potential university.
Did the new Web design undergo any type of usability studies before it was
launched?
The Web Team
compiled the information received from the Godwin study, surveys of prospective
and current students, faculty, staff and the public at large as well as
conducted additional studies with internal university personnel. In addition,
an online survey was conducted in February. Usability analysis was performed
using software which analyzes captured log files. Reports generated by this
program offer “tracking” data of not only page hits and visits, but search
terms requested, times of day that users most frequent the site, and trends
site use. We found search terms particularly useful in that users were calling
information by different names than we had envisioned on the site. We did
not, however, have a working prototype open to public users for additional
usability analysis prior to the new site upload. We continue to collect log
files of user activity on the new pages and will analyze those for usage
trends.
Observations for Consideration
The following are some ideas for contemplation in the future, as well as now in
terms of making modifications to the new Web site.
1. The web survey data and graphs found at http://www.usm.edu/newweb/what.html
did not seem to support the conclusions or the design that was
implemented. For instance, a chart appears entitled Finding Info with the
subordinate paragraph that says Most of you (60 percent) said you either
found what you were looking for at www.usm.edu
with some effort or you only found part of what you needed. That's effort you
could better spend elsewhere in our opinion. The Web should serve up the
information you want... quickly.
However, the graph that actually appeared on the site
indicated that much more than 60% could find part or all of what they were
looking for. That being the case, why were any of the links found on the
initial USM Web site changed on the new design?
A careful look at
the bar graph shows that the y axis extends beyond 100 representing actual
numbers rather than percentages. We used actual responses as the
plot points for the bar chart and used the percentage of total responses in the
more analytical commentary.
Here are the numbers for the graph:
|
|
# replies |
# replies |
# replies |
# replies |
# replies |
|
|
Yes, easily |
Yes, but it took some effort |
Only found part of it |
No |
I was just browsing |
|
|
66 |
111 |
32 |
27 |
5 |
As noted in
the table, the percentage of total, 46 (it took some effort) and 13 (only found
part of it) come to 59 percent. The implication is that people were struggling
to find what they needed online. Our effort is to try to make that easier by
instituting a two-pronged entry to the top web pages – either major
informational links (About Us, Programs of Study, etc.) or personal links
(Prospective Students, Current Students, Faculty, Staff, etc.). Even if a new
user doesn’t know how to find what they are looking for, they should be able to
recognize “who they are” in relation to the University and find relative links
there.
Had we also included the people who said they couldn’t find what they were
looking for at all, another 11 percent, that figure would have been even higher
at 70 percent.
2. Notify the university community with an exact
date at least a week prior to new implementations so people aren't taken off
guard by the changes.
This was a complete
oversight regarding communication of the exact date of the changes. Our
notifications to the campus were through the Student Printz as well as the USM Mailout.
Admittedly, the Web Team never indicated the time frame as to when the changes
would take place. We welcome additional suggestions for mechanisms of
communication.
3. Implement changes during semester breaks
and/or on weekends not during work hours and not one week before finals.
I fully agree with
this suggestion and will use this as a guideline with future changes.
4. Use university focus groups to decide 1st
and 2nd tier page content and links. For instance, on
the "Faculty and Staff" page, services such as Bookstore, Dining,
Health Services, etc., could be eliminated and placed on the page labeled
"Services." A faculty focus group could have helped identify
links for inclusion and elimination.
Links that are
designed on the branch pages are always available for change consideration. The
navigation in the initial plan was designed with the assistance of our focus
groups. The web team always accepts suggestions. We have made numerous
revisions to the web pages already, and always expect to make adjustments for
improvements.
5. These are general observations and feedback
that we, the Technology Committee, have received from faculty members, staff,
and students:
a. Use basic design rules in deciding color
content of pages - the half white/half gold colors used in the content listings
of 2nd tier pages suggest two different content areas (the sections
do not reflect any sort of recognizable navigational hierarchy).
b. Place links to integral places on the
university campus on the Home page and in a visible place (e.g., Academics,
Administration, Libraries, Soar, Online Evaluations, Directory, etc.)
c. Employ style sheet coding to ensure consistent
text sizing for all browsers.
d. Font size is too small. Difficult to
read for those with vision complexities.
e. The link for Campus/Teaching Sites gets lost
above the picture explanation on the Home page. It looks like a header
for the caption information.
f. Colors and design elements are
used to indicate one thing in one place, but used to connote another in
different place. For instance, an arrow is used to point to the caption on the
Home page. However, it is not a link. That same arrow is also used
to indicate a link on the Campus/Teaching Sitespage. Thus, consistency in
design and navigation are important to prevent confusing users.
g. Avoid using all capital letters for words such
as the main menu links (e.g., PROSPECTIVE STUDENTS AND PARENTS) on the Home
page. In addition, these main menu links should not run onto two
lines.
h. Main menu links on the Home page should stand
out (not with capitalized letters). For instance, some of our students
did not know that the text were actually links (also the dim color is not that
obvious with the gray color). The Button format with the links would have
been much better.
i. Need to ensure that Web
pages meet ADA Compliancy. Right now, they do not appear to meet
the ADA standards for accessible design.
j. Graphics on the main page
are not professional and change each time a person enters the site. This
may cause confusion among amateur computer users.
k. Missing buttons and links can be found
throughout the various pages.
l. The rotating pictures on the
front page are nice but don't reflect the diversity of our campus.
I appreciate all
comments and will take them into serious consideration and will discuss them
with the web team. I would encourage feedback regarding the missing
buttons and links so that those may be corrected as soon as possible. All
the web pages were explicitly tested to ensure ADA compliance within regulated standards. If
this is found to be different than the software has indicated, we would
encourage feedback in that area as well.
We hope that you will take these recommendations under consideration.
Sincerely,
USM Faculty Senate Technology Committee,
On Behalf of the USM Faculty Senate