L571 Class Related Information

The information on this page specifically has to be included for the "Information Architecture for the Web" class, so the web author can get a great grade from the professor. After the class is finished, this page will be removed.

Website Planning

Link to my preliminary plan

At this page, you will find the description of how I originally planned this website.

Back to Top

Formative Evalution

The Observations

My formative evaluation was done through observations from adult peers. None of them were part of the L571 class. The results of the evaluation are posted below.

From Tara G.E.

" The "Community Information" link goes nowhere -- there is no information. Yellow on blue
is hard to read. In the link "online resources," some of the links aren't clickable. The
lines of text are pretty wide and might be more readable if the columns of text were more
narrow (rather than across the width of the whole screen). "

From Carrie S.

I looked over your website and I think it is going pretty well. I like the color scheme.
Many times websites are black and white and thus boring. If there are other colors used it
can become difficult to read. The blue with the yellow writing is easy on the eyes and
interesting.

The links all seem to work and are easy to follow. Your buttons are labled well and I know
the type of information I will find. I like all the information you have on the site about
the happenings in the classroom. As a somewhat soon to be parent (with any luck), I
appreciate the idea of being able to find the classroom management plan and to know what
the kids are being taught.

The inclusion of the titles and break down of the curriculum and even the ISBN numbers is
great. I like the idea that I know what the students are learning. It is a good reference
for others who might be teaching a youth church or even starting a new youth program at
their own church.

The info about the camps are great too. You have included a great amount of information that
I think is rare to find. Your site is easy to follow and understand and is extremely
informative.

I like the layout. In fact, the only issue I have with it I don't think you have control over.
The adds from Geocities on the side are obnoxious in that I had to keep closing it each time
I went to a new link. That gets old since I kept going through each link and it covered some
of the info thus causing me to have to close it or use a slide bar! Great job, I am thouroughly
impressed.

From Jeff M.

Easy to navigate due to the main navigational bar on the left. Navigation links are specific,
and cover most areas that are of interest to one who is interested in New Hope. Sub-navigation
bars inserted in each different page point the viewer to specific areas easily.

The layout is extremely simple and low key, but in this case this works because it is
highlighting a children's website. In other genres this may not work as well because of the
specific field of interest.

Photo credits underneath main pictures should be a smaller font then the general text and
italicized.

The color scheme is bold and the site is easy to read, but in my opinion may be a bit too bold.
A more "baby blue" color would be easier on the eyes and more inviting.

From Aimee T.

1)  navigation

Your site is very easy to navigate.  The "outline" that takes you through different areas is
really easy to see since it is in different colors and on the left side of the homepage.  In
addition, the larger font and different colored text on each link site makes it easy to jump
to information a person would want to read.  The lines underneath each section (e.g., the ACTS
page) make it even clearer.  It would be great if the text could be even brighter yellow and
the underlines more bold for those of us who are very visual and need the extra support to weed
things out.  I would also suggest putting the headings (e.g., Memory Verses etc. on the ACTS
page) in the same color as those below.  At first, I thought it was different info., then
realized it was the same but a quick way to jump you down to itl.

2)  content

Your site has very useful information without being overly wordy. I was extremely impressed by
the clarity of the photographs.  If I was interested in putting children of my own in the
ministry at your church I would be more excited about the programs offerred because there is
visual proof of the fun events they have.  I could see the people in charge and what they looked
like to which would be great so (if I attended your church) I would know faces in case I had
questions about anything.

3) technical aspects

I didn't encounter any problems except sometimes the pictures did not show up the first time I
visited a link.  I think that may have been my computer though. 

4)  other areas
On the pages without information (community service) it might be good to write something
ike "under construction" or "updates soon" so that viewers know their computers aren't just acting
up and not showing them something (like those of us who have questionable computer quality!).

What I did with the evaluations

I did listen to what my peers had to say. I was able to fix some of the content pages that did not have content on them yet. In some cases, I chose to delete the page until such time in the future I could choose to add content to it. I was able to make smaller picture files so the pictures would load faster and easier.

Some of the evaluations conflicted with each other. I think I would need a larger sample to see if more people needed the font size, style or color changed. I also had someone mention the size of the text frame being too large. I could make a small text frame, but then the length of the page would be longer. I am glad for the advice, but I'm not sure what to do with it yet.

Back to Top

Validation Discussion

CSS Validation

My CSS validation had warnings but no errors.

Coding Validation

I had a border color on the table that outlined my template page. The W3C Validator didn’t recognize the command “border color.” I removed the border color from the template, and any other border color command I found. Some of my images needed “alt” tags, and I added those. Those were my only errors. Otherwise, the validation was wonderful.

Accessibility Validation

Index page - cleared with warnings but no errors.
At this point, the Webfire XACT program decided to boot me off every time I tried to validate another page.

Back to Top