This paper was presented at the Association for Education in Journalism and
Mass Communication in San Antonio, Texas August 2005.
If you have questions about this paper, please contact the author
directly. If you have questions about the archives, email
rakyat [ at ] eparker.org. For an explanation of the subject line,
send email to
[log in to unmask] with just the four words, "get help info aejmc," in the
body (drop the "").
(Feb 2006)
Thank you.
Elliott Parker
====================================================================
Web Presence of Universities:
Is Higher Education Sending the Right Message Online?
by
Elizabeth M. Will
&
Coy Callison
Assistant Professor
Texas Tech University
College of Mass Communications
Box 43082
Lubbock, TX 79409-3082
(806) 742-3385
[log in to unmask]
Please address all correspondence to the second author.
AV Needs: Overhead Projector
Paper submitted for review for presentation at the 2005 annual
meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass
Communication in San Antonio, Texas. Paper submitted to the Public
Relations Division.
Web Presence of Universities:
Is Higher Education Sending the Right Message Online?
Abstract
Web sites of the 3738 U.S.-based colleges and universities were
sampled and analyzed to determine how higher education employs the
internet to communicate to key publics overall and students in
particular. Analyses revealed prospective donors are the most
often-targeted public followed by faculty/staff. Prospective and
current students followed. In better news to students, the five items
students most often seek on the Web were the five most common items
linked from university home pages.
Web Presence of Universities:
Is Higher Education Sending the Right Message Online?
Since the early 1990s, the use of the Internet has grown tremendously
and has become widely accepted as a compelling communication tool
(Ng, Parette, & Sterrett, 2003; Poock & Lefond, 2001; Teach-nology,
2003; Washenberger, 2001). The Internet's effectiveness can be seen
by the large increase in its usage. The Pew Internet & American Life
Project (2005) has tracked the growth of Internet usage in the United
States from just under half of American adults in 2000 to about 63%
of adults at the end of 2004.
Of these adult users, college students constitute a heavily involved
segment. Approximately 93% of college students access the Internet in
a given month, and the number of student users is expected to
increase from 15.2 million in 2003 to 16.4 million in 2007
(Greenspan, 2003). Researchers have suggested that college students
adapted to the Internet immediately (Abrahamson, 2000), and they are
"one of the most Internet-connected demographic groups" (Aiken,
Vanjani, Ray, & Martin, 2003, p. 182).
As experienced Internet users, students go online for a variety of
reasons, ranging from checking e-mail to shopping (Greenspan, 2003).
In addition, students are researching and applying to colleges
online. Reports show that the Web ranks second only to campus visits
as the most important source for researching colleges (Abrahamson,
2000). Embark.com, a provider of Web-based services for educational
institutions reported an increase of more than 140% in the number of
online undergraduate and graduate school applications it processed
from July 1, 1999, through January 1, 2000, in comparison to the same
period a year earlier ("Report", 2000). Students have also revealed
that they would visit a university's Web site when thinking about
transferring to a particular university, searching for special
information about their hobbies or interests, wanting to use some
entertainment features at the Web site (e.g., live radio station), or
wanting to obtain various specific types of information (e.g., online
library and bookstore, research pages, employment) (Mechitov,
Moshkovich, Underwood, & Taylor, 2001).
This popularity of the Internet and university Web sites then
suggests that institutions of higher learning should put real effort
into using the new medium as a communication tool. One way colleges
and universities can take advantage of Internet popularity among the
student-aged population is to have Web sites that provide the
information students want in an easily accessible manner (Mechitov et
al., 2001; Raisman, 2003). Research has shown, however, most college
and university Web sites are poorly designed and reflect poorly on
their hosting institutions, and poor image is not something higher
education institutions want at a time of shrinking academic budgets
and increasing competition (Raisman, 2003). It has even been
suggested that prospective students who find a Web site disappointing
associate their e-experience with the quality and functioning of the
institution itself and may terminate all inquiries about the college
(Abrahamson, 2000). The primary purpose of this research then is to
determine whether higher education institution Web sites are
fulfilling the online needs of students, the most important audience
of schools (Cutlip, Center, & Broom, 2000; Wilcox, Cameron, Ault, &
Agee, 2003) through an investigation of homepage organization and content.
Literature Review
Content analysis of Web sites is nothing new. In fact, analyses of
corporate sites have been common (see Callison, 2003; Esrock &
Leichty, 1998, 2000), most focusing on Fortune 500 companies. The
fact that corporate Web sites and academic Web sites have similar
purposes, such as a desire to build the image of the institution,
suggests that analysis of college and university sites is in order.
Poock and Lefond (2001) were some of the first to focus on university
and college Web sites. They did so by examining through focus groups
and surveys how 55 college-bound high school students perceive
college and university Web sites. Fifty-five high school students
answered a questionnaire addressing their opinions of the Web sites.
More importantly, participants were given the opportunity to list
information they expected to find when visiting a college or
university Web site. Information was also gathered from the students
through focus groups. Discussions in focus groups related to
students' Web habits and opinions regarding the content and design of
college and university Web sites. The students were then given Web
addresses for specific universities and were asked to find specific
information.
Results revealed content was the most important element of a Web
site, with 97% of participants rating it as important or very
important (Poock & Lefond, 2001). The researchers found that students
expect to find information about course offerings, admissions, majors
or degrees offered, athletics, extracurricular activities and campus
life, among other items. When students were unable to locate desired
information, they became frustrated, and some even considered
terminating their visits to Web sites that did not provide the
information sought.
Web site organization was almost as critical as content. More
specifically, students reported it was important that Web sites be
organized by target audiences, meaning homepages should have links
for "prospective students" and "current students." Poock and Lefond
(2001) described organizing the homepage by target audience as "the
most efficient and effective method for providing information to
prospective students" (p. 19).
The student participants also reported it was easier to find needed
information if they understood the terminology used for links.
Students found sites that used "academic programs," "departments,"
and "schools and colleges" to be confusing because the wording was
unfamiliar to a high school audience. Organizing the Web site by
target audience and making the information readily identifiable
creates "virtually intuitive" sites, which produces the most
effective Web sites (Poock & Lefond, 2001, p. 18).
During their search for information, students also became frustrated
when they had to go deeper than three levels to obtain information.
The researchers suggested fewer levels with more information per
level to allow easier site navigation. Search features were popular
among students familiar with the Internet, yet the search function
rarely yielded useful information. Additionally, 88% of the students
rated Web site download speed as important or very important.
Students indicated slow connection or download speed would be the
primary reason why they would terminate a connection with a Web site.
Thus, Poock and Lefond (2001) suggested providing a text-only format,
giving users the option to bypass slow-loading graphics. They
concluded that doing so makes Web sites "more user-friendly,
increases the effectiveness of the site, and reduces the likelihood
of terminating the connection before the information loads" (p. 19).
In addition to making suggestions about Web site organization and
content, Poock and Lefond (2001) offered several steps colleges and
universities can take that would increase the likelihood of students
browsing the Web to apply for admission. First, they recommended
making the application for admission easy to find and accessible by
placing it on the homepage or within the first link under "for
prospective students." Second, they advised colleges and universities
to design prospective student sections with a strategic purpose,
which involves "visually intuitive site architecture, limiting
graphics to the enhancement of environmental content, accommodating
slower modem speeds, and perhaps most importantly, providing clear
and easy access to admission content" (p. 20). Third, the researchers
suggested that Web designers include information that is tailored to
individual applicants. College and university Web sites "that can
serve each visitor individually will be the key to establishing and
maintaining relationships with students in the digital realm"
(Williams, 2000, p. 18). Finally, the researchers stated that
colleges and universities should engage in market research to
identify factors that are unique to individual colleges and
universities (Poock & Lefond, 2001).
Based upon Poock and Lefond's (2001) study that employed high school
students, Ng et al. (2003) asked 129 graduate students to evaluate
the Southeast Missouri State University's School of Graduate Studies
and Research Web site after performing a series of tasks. The
evaluation questionnaire addressed several areas, including content,
organization, navigation, friendliness and organization of content by
target audience of college and university Web sites in general.
Participants were also given the opportunity to list information they
expected to find on college and university graduate school Web sites.
A separate set of questions pertained to SMSU's School of Graduate
Studies and Research Web site. Participants were asked to rate
specific criteria that were grouped primarily in the following
categories: ease of navigation, speed, site organization, content,
and availability of further information. Participants also had the
opportunity to provide comments after each category was evaluated.
The students noted that they appreciated search functions, site maps
or indices, and "easy and hassle-free access to application materials
and downloadable forms" (Ng et al., 2003, p. 247). Data analysis
showed that graduate students found the following Web site
characteristics as being important (from highest to lowest ranking):
organization, ease of navigation, content, download speed,
organization by target audience, first impression, and emphasis on
graphics, which was consistent with the findings of other studies
(Abels, White, & Hahn, 1997; Mechitov et al., 2001, Poock & Lefond, 2001).
The participants deemed the university Web site to be effective
because it provided easily accessible information related to their
needs; it was "logical and easy to maneuver" and "clearly organized"
(Ng et al., 2003, p. 246). The researchers noted the primary changes
that needed to be made pertained to the search feature and graphics
design on the homepage. Because organization was rated as most
important by the students, the researchers suggested "a Web site
should be logically organized and easy to maneuver" (p. 250).
Although participant age differed, the information participants
expected on a school Web site was similar between the Poock and
Lefond (2001) and Ng et al. (2003) studies. Both discovered that
students expect to find information about academic programs, majors
or degrees offered, courses offered, faculty and staff, tuition and
other expenses, enrollment, financial aid and funding, among other
items. Both sets of researchers addressed the importance of Web site
content, distinctiveness of sites, ease of navigation, organization
by target audience, impact of graphics, site architecture, and speed
of download.
Conducted by Mechitov et al. (2001), another study analyzed the
criteria college students used to form positive or negative
perceptions of university Web sites. Thirty-one undergraduate
students were asked to evaluate 13 Alabama public state university
Web sites by answering a 27-item questionnaire. In addition to
completing the questionnaire, students were asked to identify sites
they preferred most and to provide ideas regarding standards for an
effective academic Web site. Additionally, they were asked to find
information, such as admission, tuition, online applications, and
departmental organization on the university Web sites and to record
how difficult the information was to locate. Results suggested
information was often buried within Web sites and was difficult to
uncover. Likewise, participants reported that information appearing
in multiple places on a site often conflicted.
Ultimately, the authors rated each university Web site on ease of
access to admissions and tuition information. The completeness of
information was also rated according to the availability of
descriptions of colleges and departments, courses, syllabi and
schedules and information on admissions and tuition. Easy access to
information showed a significant correlation (.80) with the overall
rating of the Web sites. Yet, the correlation between completeness of
information and the overall rating of the Web sites was much less
pronounced (.51), suggesting that students were more concerned with
ease of navigation than the quality of that information once located.
Finally, students reported that they saw homepage appearance as
important, that few university Web sites are well organized, that
specific information targeted at students was appreciated, and that
the worst pages provided little information, made it difficult to
locate information, downloaded slowly, and presented little
entertainment and/or graphics. Students revealed they would revisit a
university's Web site when thinking about transferring to a
particular university, searching for special information about their
hobbies or interests, wanting to use some entertainment features at
the Web site (e.g., live radio station), or obtaining specific
university information (Mechitov et al, 2001).
Based upon the student opinions, the researchers offered several
general requirements for a good university Web site. First, the Web
page must be attractive and well-designed by displaying high-quality
images of the school and providing well-identified links. Though the
students requested high-quality images and 3-D graphics, Mechitov et
al. (2001) noted the images should be designed so they do not
seriously impede downloading. Second, "an effective university Web
site should offer highly informative content and provide easy access
to it" (Ng et al., 2001, p. 658). Third, university Web sites should
include a variety of pages devoted to entertainment, such as campus
tours and student Web pages.
Mechitov et al. (2001), Ng et al. (2003), and Poock and Lefond (2001)
all used similar methodologies to determine: a) what information
students expect to find on college and university Web sites; b) what
perceptions students have of college and university Web sites; and c)
what characteristics make up effective college and university Web
sites. Students who participated in these studies found similar
information and characteristics on college and university Web sites
to be helpful.
Overall, research has determined what prospective and current
students expect to find on university and college Web sites (Mechitov
et al., 2001; Ng et al., 2003; Poock & Lefond, 2001). Little
research, however, has been conducted to uncover the extent to which
universities are meeting the needs of Web-surfing students. To date,
only one unpublished study has been dedicated to examining how
universities are using the Web to communicate with key publics has
been conducted (Silverman, 2004). In this study, Silverman examined
the Web sites of 261 American-doctorate granting universities. She
found that nearly all Web sites had a clearly labeled newsroom
targeted at members of the media. She also discovered that university
Web sites most often included homepage links to special sections for
prospective donors, followed by current students and then prospective
students. Ultimately, Silverman concluded that doctoral-granting
universities do best in communicating with the media online and do an
acceptable job of reaching alumni, students, and faculty.
While Silverman (2004) does provide the foundational examination of
university Web presence, she selects only the most resourceful
institutions for her analysis by focusing on doctorate-granting
universities. It must be assumed that the nearly 3500 colleges and
universities that do not graduate students with doctoral degrees vary
from their more well-endowed peers. As such, the overall college and
university community and the Web sites of these institutions have not
been sampled and systematically investigated to determine how the
breadth of higher education is using the Web to reach key publics
overall and students in particular. The present study seeks to
provide just such a compliment to Silverman's initial work (2004).
Research Questions
The homepage is a critical gateway to information (Esrock & Leichty,
2000) that helps establish a Web site's organization or site
architecture. Specific types of homepage organization, such as
organization by target audience and function, contribute to Web site
navigation (Poock & Lefond, 2001). For instance, students have
reported homepages that are organized by target audience are easier
to navigate than those organized by function (Ng et al., 2003; Poock
& Lefond, 2001). Because homepage organization is such an important
element of a Web site, the following question was researched.
RQ1: What percentage of the analyzed homepages are organized by
target audience,
function, or a combination?
Ng et al. (2003) and Poock and Lefond (2001) found that a majority of
participants in their studies rated organization/site architecture
and ease of navigation as very important. Additionally, students have
reported they favored college and university Web sites organized by
target audience (e.g., "for current students" or "for prospective
students") because the sites were easier to navigate than pages with
links grouped by function (e.g., "admissions," "academic," or
"research") (Ng et al., 2003; Poock & Lefond, 2001). Students felt
the institutions that provided a link specifically for them, known as
a student information directory (SID), were focusing on their needs
(Ng et al., 2003).
Organizing sites by target audience has also been deemed important
because the presence of a hyperlink for a specific audience on the
homepage demonstrates that the listed audience is important to the
organization (Callison, 2003; Esrock & Leichty, 2000; Lederbogen &
Trebbe, 2003). Because it would seem that students would perceive
university Web sites that had special headings for students as being
most interested in them as an audience, the following research
question guided the research.
RQ2: What audiences are targeted on the homepage and what is the percentage of
each audience? More specifically, what percentage of the analyzed Web sites
target students on the homepage by providing student information directories?
Students rate content as one of the most important elements of a
college and university Web site (Ng et al., 2003). In fact, content
is perceived as one of the most important elements of a Web site
regardless of who the visitors are (Abels et al., 1997; Loh &
Williams, 2002; Mechitov et al., 2001; Poock & Lefond, 2003). One
item students have specifically asked to see on a postsecondary
institution's homepage is an online or downloadable admissions
application. Because students (Ng et al., 2003) and a variety of
other audiences have reported content as one of the most important
elements of a Web site, the next question was examined:
RQ3: What functions are provided on the homepage and what is the
percentage of each function?
Method
Selection of Web Sites
Universities and colleges were randomly selected from a list of
higher education institutions compiled by the Peterson's Guide to
Universities and Colleges, available at petersons.com. Because
Peterson's maintains no overall single list of colleges and
universities, a database of the institutions had to be compiled. A
college and university search by location was performed at
petersons.com. Beginning at the homepage, the following selections
were made in order: "Education Search," "Colleges & Universities,"
"Find a College," "Location." Next, all 50 states in the United
States and the District of Columbia were selected so that all
colleges and universities in the U.S. and District of Columbia would
be listed. These institutions were then all copied into a database,
state by state, to create a master list. Eventually, a list of 3,738
higher education institutions in the United States was constituted.
The institutions were then numbered, and a random set of 374
institutions (10% of the institutions) was selected. In most cases,
the Web site of each institution was accessed by linking from
Peterson's list. When a site address was not included on Peterson's
list, a simple Web search using google.com was performed. If one of
the numbers selected corresponded with a school that did not have a
Web site, the next site associated with the next highest number was used.
Coders and Coding Instrument
The Web sites of the 374 randomly-selected higher education
institutions were accessed from February 10 to March 2, 2004.
Overall, sites were coded for organization and content. More
specifically, the homepage of each site was analyzed to determine
whether or not the site was organized by target audience(s),
function(s), or a combination of target audience and function. Sites
organized by target audience provided hyperlinks for specific
audiences (e.g., "Current Students" or "Faculty") on the homepages.
Sites organized by function provided hyperlinks for specific
functions (e.g., "Admissions" or "Advising") on the homepages.
If the site had hyperlinks for specific audiences on the homepage,
each of the audiences was recorded. For instance, if a site had a
hyperlink for alumni, students, prospective students, and faculty and
staff, all four audiences were recorded as present. Coders selected
from a list of 12 target audiences, which included: "Current
Students," "Prospective Students," "Students In General," "Alumni and
Friends," "Faculty and Staff," "Donors," "Community," "Media,"
"Parents and Family," "Visitors," and "Businesses and Employers."
Coders also specified additional audiences in the "Others" section.
Only links accessible from the homepage were recorded as present.
Code sheet categories will be detailed more fully in the Results section.
If the site presented functions on the homepage, each function was
recorded. A total of 183 functions were coded as present or not.
Admissions, registration, and tuition information were among the
functions coders sought. Web site development information, such as
Webmaster, copyright, disclaimers, legal terms and conditions, and
use policies, were not coded. The focus was on coding the homepage
because it has been established that Web users are often reluctant to
delve deep into a site in search of information (Middleton,
McConnell, & Davidson, 1999). It should also be noted that
introduction pages did not count as the homepage and were not
included in the analysis.
Intercoder Reliability
A primary coder analyzed all 374 sites. A second coder analyzed 37
randomly-selected Web sites within the same time period to determine
reliability. Coding decision agreement was figured by the Holsti
method. Across the 37 sites, intercoder agreement averaged .92.
Results
Homepage Organization and Target Audiences
The first research question asked what percentage of the analyzed
higher education institution Web sites were organized by target
audience, function, or a combination. Of the 374 sites examined, 295
(78.9%) of the homepages were organized by a combination of function
and target audiences, while 78 (20.9%) were organized by function.
Only one site (0.3%) was organized by target audience alone.
The second research question considered the audiences that were
targeted on the homepages and the frequency of their occurrence. The
audiences targeted on the homepage included alumni and friends
(77.4%), faculty and staff (52.4%), prospective students (45.6%),
current students (40.5%), parents and family (23.3%). Visitors
(21.6%), students in general (16.2%), and the community (11.5%) also
had sections designated for them on the homepage. Businesses and
employers (9.1%), media (4.7%), and donors (3.4%) were some of the
audiences that appeared less frequently on the homepage. Other
audiences (3.4%), including counselors (n = 3), job seekers (n = 2),
busy people (n = 1), military (n = 1), partners (n = 1),
patients/physicians (n = 1) and veterans (n = 1), were combined. When
the total number of student information directories specified for
prospective students, current students, and students in general were
combined, 64.9% of the homepages provided one or two student
information directories.
Homepage Functions
The third research question investigated the functions provided on
the homepages and each function's frequency. Functions were organized
into 17 categories, including admissions, registration, financial,
employment, administration and academic, campus, surrounding area,
general, computer and online resources, fine arts services and
resources, other services and resources, news and deadlines,
contacts, publications, recreational activities, Web site
navigational tools, and miscellaneous. Because this research
initially identified 183 functions, 17 function categories were
created by combining like functions. For instance, the admissions
office links were combined with online admissions applications
because both are closely related.
Homepage—Admissions Information
The most frequently found admissions item on the homepages was a link
to the admissions office (63.3%), followed by online admissions
applications (20.4%), downloadable admissions application (5.6%), and
get started link (1.1%). A listing of the admissions information is
provided in Table 1.
Homepage—Registration Information
Class schedule (24.1%), registrar's office (14.5%), online enrollment
(9.9%), and transcript/student record links (5.1%) were the most
frequent registration information provided on the college and
university homepages. Other registration items, including transfer
and orientation information, were more unique and occurred less than
5.0% of the time. For a complete listing of the remaining
registration items and their occurrence, see Table 1.
Homepage—Financial Information
Financial aid (34.3%) and giving information (24.1%) were the primary
financial items provided on the homepages. Links to foundation
information (9.7%) and costs of attending the institution (8.3%) were
frequently displayed on the homepages. Individually, payment and
scholarship information were found on 5.4% of the Web sites. Funding
information was supplied on 2.9% of the homepages while 0.8% of the
homepages provided tax information. A listing of the financial
information is provided in Table 1.
Homepage—Employment Information
Five employment items were present on the homepages. The most
frequent employment item provided information about employment
opportunities at the institution(s) (33.2%). Only 1.9% of the
homepages presented information about being an equal employment
opportunity institution. Individually, student employment
opportunities and internships were found on 1.6% of the homepages.
The final employment item provided information about who hires the
graduates of the institution (0.5%). All items related to employment
information are listed with their frequencies in Table 1.
Homepage—Administration and Academic Information
Information pertaining to academic programs was present on 62.5% of
the analyzed homepages. Links to academics or colleges, schools
and/or departments were present on 59.5% of the analyzed homepages.
Many of the homepages provided links to the institution's library
(47.2%). Almost a quarter of the homepages provided links pertaining
to administration (24.7%) or learning/research resources (24.7%).
Links related to major or degree information were offered on 22.3% of
the homepages. A link to career services was supplied on 13.1% of the
homepages; 12.6% presented a link to the campus bookstore. A complete
listing of administration and academic information, including items
that occurred on less than 9% of the homepages, are listed with their
frequencies on Table 2.
Homepage—Campus Information
Further investigation of research question 3, which asks what
functions are provided on homepages, revealed that the most frequent
item categorized as campus information was a link to various campuses
(30.8%). Directions/maps were presented on 30.3% of homepages. Links
concerning campus tours or visits (12.6%) and virtual tours (11.3%)
were also provided on homepages. A complete listing of campus
information items is presented in Table 3.
Homepage—Information About Surrounding Area
Information about the area surrounding the higher education
institutions was visible on the homepages. Community information
(9.4%), weather conditions (6.2%), emergency information (2.9%), and
state information (1.1%) were placed in the "information about
surrounding area" category. Each item related to information about an
institution's surrounding area is listed in Table 3.
Homepage—General Information About Institution
An About "____" or "About Us" link was presented on 70.5% of the
homepages. The institution's philosophy, mission, and vision of the
institution (10.7%), a message from the president (9.4%), quick facts
(7.8%), and a welcome (6.2%) were identified on various homepages.
Links, such "Why us?" (5.6%), reputation or ranking (5.4%), and
accreditation (5.1%) occurred on less than 6% of the homepages. Table
3 provides other items pertaining to general information about the
institution, including community outreach and partnerships, which
occurred less frequently on the homepage.
Homepage—Computer or Online Resources
Of the computer and online resources offered, personal online
accounts (27.3%) appeared most frequently on the homepages. Personal
online accounts were followed in frequency by e-mail access (23.9%),
technology support (10.5%), Blackboard (9.7%) and online services
(6.4%). All computer or online resources categorized as computer or
online resources, including items that occurred on less than 5.0% of
the homepages, are listed in Table 4.
Homepage—Fine Arts Services and Resources
Four items were categorized as fine arts services and resources. The
most frequent item was the arts (6.2%), followed by museums (2.4%),
gallery (1.1%), and theatre (0.8%). These items are listed in Table 5.
Homepage—Other Services and Resources
Continuing the examination of the third research question, which
asks what functions are provided on the homepages, other services and
resources were found on various homepages. Student services and
resources were found on 27.9% of the homepages. Unspecified services
and resources (8.3%), campus ministries (6.7%), campus store or
merchandise (4.6%), health services (3.8%), and housing services
(2.7%) were also listed on homepages. Each of the services and
resources, including those that were found on fewer than 2.0% of the
homepages, are listed with their frequencies in Table 5.
Homepage—New and Deadlines
News and events were offered on 79.9% of the analyzed homepages.
Academic calendars were present on 38.6% of the homepages.
Cancellations (1.6%), exam schedules (0.5%), and "What's new?" (0.5%)
were also seen on some of the homepages. A complete listing of items
categorized as news and deadlines are shown in Table 6.
Homepage—Contact Information
Information to contact the institution was found on 86.3% of the
homepages. Campus directories (31.4%), request for information
(17.4%) and comments/feedback (10.5%) were the next most frequent
types of contact information provided on the homepages. These items,
along with other items that occurred less frequently, are listed in Table 6.
Homepage—Publications
The institution's catalog was found on 20.6% of homepages. School
media (7.5%) and student handbooks (6.2%) were also present on
homepages. These items are listed in Table 6.
Homepage—Recreational Activities
The most frequent items categorized as recreational activities were
athletics (42.9%) and campus life (33.0%). A link to extracurricular
activities was found on 10.2% of the homepages, while only 0.3% of
the homepages provided a student organization search tool. Each of
these items are listed in Table 7.
Homepage—Web Site Navigational Tools
A search tool was found on 60.3% of the homepages; site maps or
indices on 42.9%. Quick links (26.5%), a help or Frequently Asked
Questions option (12.3%), and a homepage link (10.7%) were found on
homepages as well. A complete listing of the navigational tools are
provided in Table 7.
Homepage—Miscellaneous Information
The final category, miscellaneous information, consisted of two
functions, including student testimonials (2.7%) and women in
technology (0.5%). Both of these items are listed with their
frequencies in Table 7.
Discussion
The first research question asked whether Web site homepages of
higher education institutions were organized by target audience,
function, or a combination. The majority of the Web site homepages
were organized by a combination of functions and target audiences.
This suggests that the higher education institutions realize the
importance of targeting audiences on the homepage. Perhaps, the
remaining institutions who organized their homepage only by function
should consider designating areas for specific audiences on their
homepage to create a more complete Web site and to adhere to what
students have reported they need.
The second research question considered which audiences were targeted
on the homepages and the frequency of their occurrence. The audience
targeted most frequently on the homepages was alumni and friends,
followed by students (all three types combined). Faculty and staff,
parents and family, and visitors had fewer links specified for them
than alumni and friends and students.
The fact that alumni and friends were targeted most often suggests
that institutions find alumni and friends to be more important than
students and the other audiences. This finding also implies that
postsecondary institutions view their Web sites as a way to keep
connected with their alumni, which can boost donations to an
institution's endowment or foundation. From simply looking at
university Web sites, it might also be assumed that the institutions
are more interested in obtaining money from alumni than attracting
new students or providing services to current students, faculty and
staff, parents and family, or visitors. Although many institutions
did provide links specifically for students, perhaps more
institutions need to provide links to student information directories
on their homepage to show that students are the most important
audience of the institutions, as Cutlip et al. (2000) and Wilcox et
al. (2003) have suggested.
Of the three types of student audiences targeted on the homepages, a
link for prospective students was most frequent. This finding
indicates that the institutions have designed their Web sites to be
more of tool for student recruitment than an administrative or
educational tool. Creating a Web site with more administrative or
educational tools might be of more benefit to current students. While
recruiting new students is important to higher education
institutions, it is equally important for institutions to build good
relationship with current students because they will be alumni one
day. Having "free-flowing communication" is one way to create strong
relationships between the institution and students (Cutlip et al.,
2000, p. 544). To create a communication pathway with students,
colleges and universities can provide a Web site with a "current
students" link on the homepage. Also, it should be noted that the
inclusion of different student directories is not an either-or
proposition. Web sites can accommodate both audiences, and show each
the value placed upon it by the institution.
It is also interesting to note that a link for students in general
was recorded less frequently than links for prospective and current
students, suggesting colleges and universities feel it is important
to have specified sections for different types of students on their
Web sites. Providing separate sections for different types of
students might be more helpful to students than providing one section
for all types of students, because each student type has differing
needs. For instance, convincing prospective students to attend a
university or college requires different information than providing
current students with the materials they need to succeed.
The third research question examined the functions provided on the
homepages and each function's frequency. A wide variety of functions
were recorded on the homepages. By comparing the items recorded in
this study to the items students have reported they expect in
previous studies, 33 common shared items emerged. The items included:
a link to the admissions office; an online or downloadable admissions
application; admissions requirements; financial aid; costs of
attending the institution; scholarships; other ways to obtain
funding; student employment opportunities; internships; academic
programs; colleges, schools, and departments; major or degree
information; course information; policies, rules, and regulations;
directions or maps; information about the surrounding community; an
"About Us" link; philosophy, mission, or vision of the institution;
quick facts, such as the history and size of the institution; a "Why
us?" link; graduate data or statistics; downloadable or online forms;
housing services; news and events; academic calendar; contact
information for the institution; faculty and staff contact
information or Web pages; athletics; campus life; extracurricular
activities; search tools; and site map/index. Each one of the 33
items, with the exception of the admission requirements, was found on
at least one of 374 homepages. Students reported they expected to
find contact information, news and events, a link to the admissions
office, and information about the institution and their academic
programs. Surprisingly, these items were the five most frequently
found items on the homepages. This implies institutions seem to
intuitively know some of the information students expect to find on a
college or university Web site, and the institutions are making an
attempt to provide desire content.
Although the institutions supplied some of the items students expect,
few provided an online or downloadable admissions application on the
homepage, possibly the most important homepage item. Having an easily
accessible admissions application is presumably one of the more
important items a Web site can provide because the application is one
of the first steps all students must complete before attending a
particular institution. Providing the application on the homepage
could also increase the likelihood that students would apply for
admission. Despite the application's importance, only about a quarter
of the homepages provided an online or downloadable application for
admission on the homepage. Some of the institutions included in this
analysis may have provided applications in buried levels of the Web
site. Yet, research has shown that content is most appreciated when
it is easily accessible. The best way to make the application easily
accessible is to list it on the homepage (Poock & Lefond, 2001).
More than 60% of the homepages provided an "academic programs" link.
Almost 60% of the homepages provided a link to "colleges and schools"
and "departments." Despite their high frequency on the homepages,
students, especially high school students, have explained that links
titled "academic programs," "departments," or "colleges and schools"
are confusing. Colleges and universities might consider re-naming
these links "academic majors," or another term new students can
understand. Doing so could help students navigate the Web site more easily.
Another function students appreciated on college and university sites
was a search tools and site maps/indices (Mechitov et al., 2001; Ng
et al., 2003; Poock & Lefond, 2001). More than 60% of the homepages
supplied a search tool, and fewer than half of the analyzed homepages
provided a search function, implying institutions know it is
important to provide some type of navigational tool.
Conclusion
This investigation provides a glimpse of how higher education
institutions are using the Web to facilitate student relations. A
greater part of the homepages were organized by a combination of
functions and target audiences, suggesting that the higher education
institutions realize it is critical to target audiences on the
homepage. Further analysis of the homepages revealed alumni and
friends, followed by students, are the most important audience to
colleges and universities. If this result does not represent the true
feelings of colleges and universities, university Webmasters should
consider providing more links specified for students on their
homepages to show the importance institutions place on them. Of the
students targeted on the homepage, prospective students were targeted
most often, suggesting postsecondary institutions view their Web
sites as a promotional or recruitment tool. Additionally, when
searching for the items students expect on homepages, it was
determined that the items are not provided on a consistent basis, but
it should be noted that items most often requested by students are in
fact appearing most commonly on college and university Web sites. The
results of this study provide a framework universities and colleges
can employ to compare their sites to the typical and ideal. In the
end, the present study shows that efforts are being made to use the
Web to communicate to students and provide the online information
this demographic seeks, but the need for improvement exists.
References
Abrahamson, T. (2000). Life and death on the Internet: To Web or not
to Web is no
longer the question. The Journal of College Admissions, 168, 6-11.
Abels, E. G., White, M. D., & Hahn, K. (1997). Identifying user-based
criteria for Web
pages. Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and
Policy, 7(4), 252-262.
Aiken, M., Vanjani, M., Ray, B., & Martin, J. (2003). College student
internet use.
Campus-Wide Information Systems, 20(5), 182-185.
Callison, C. (2003). Media relations and the Internet: How Fortune
500 company Web
sites assist journalists in news gathering. Public Relations Review,
29, 29-41.
Cutlip, S. M., Center, A. H., & Broom, G. M. (2000). Nonprofit
organizations, health
care, and education. Effective Public Relations, 8th ed., 537-551.
Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
Esrock, S. L., & Leichty, G. B. (1998). Social responsibility and corporate
Web pages: Self-presentation or agenda-setting? Public Relations
Review 24(3), 305-319.
Esrock, S. L., & Leichty, G. B. (2000). Organization of corporate Webpages:
Publics and functions. Public Relations Review, 26(3), 327-344.
Greenspan, R. (2003). College Students Surf, Spend. Retrieved March
23, 2004, from
http://www.clickz.com/stats/big_picture/demographics/article.php/1583871
Lederbogen, U., & Trebbe, J. (2003). Promoting science on the Web:
Public relations
for scientific organizations—Results of a content analysis. Science
Communication, 24(3), 333-352.
Loh, C. S., & Williams, M. D. (2002). What's in a Web site? Student
perceptions.
Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(3), 351-363.
Mechitov, A. I., Moshkovich, H. M., Underwood, S. H., & Taylor, R. G. (2001).
Comparative analysis of academic Web sites. Education, 121(4), 652-662.
Middleton, I., McConnell, M., & Davidson, G. (1999). Presenting a
model for the
structure and content of a university World Wide Web site. Journal of
Information Sciences, 25(3), 219-227.
Ng, C. K., Parette, P., & Sterrett, J. (2003, June). Evaluation of
graduate school Web-site by graduate assistants. College Student
Journal, 37(2), 242-260.
Peterson's. (2004). www.petersons.com. Retrieved March 24, 2004.
The Pew Internet & American Life Project. (2005). Internet: The
mainstreaming of online life. Retrieved March 30, 2004, from
http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/Internet_Status_2005.pdf
Poock, M. C., & Lefond, D. (2001). How college-bound prospects
perceive university
Web sites: Findings, implications and turning browsers into
applicants. College & University Journal, 77(1), 15-21.
Raisman, N. A. (2003, February 14). Ah, what rotten webs we weave.
Chronicle of
Higher Education, 49, p. B17.
Report shows increase in online college applications. (2000, March).
T.H.E. Journal.
Retrieved October 18, 2003, from
http://www.thejournal.com/magazine/vault/A2683.cfm
Silverman, D. A. (2004, August). Reaching key publics online:
University public relations practitioners' use of the World Wide Web.
Paper presented at the meeting of the Association for Education in
Journalism and Mass Communication, Toronto.
Teach-nology, Inc. (2003). Developing a school district Web presence.
Retrieved
September 23, 2003, from
http://www.teach-nology.com/tutorials/district_web/print.htm
Washenberger, M. (2001, September). Classroom Web sites and student
success. T.H.E.
Journal. Retrieved October 27, 2003, from
http://www.thejournal.com/magazine/vault/articleprintversion.cfm?aid=3616
Wilcox, D. L., Cameron, G. T., Ault, P. H., & Agee, W. K. (2003).
Education. Public
Relations: Strategies and Tactics, 7th ed, 434-450. Boston: Pearson Education.
Williams, B. G. (2000). To the personalized go the prospects. The Journal of
College Admissions, 166, 12-22.
Table 1
Frequency of admissions, registration, financial, and employment
information on homepages
Items Percentage
Admissions Information
Admissions office 63.3%
Online admissions application 20.4%
Downloadable admissions application 5.6%
Get started 1.1%
Registration Information
Class schedules 24.1%
Registrar's office 14.5%
Enroll online 9.9%
Transcript/Student records 5.1%
Academic advising 4.8%
Transfer information 1.9%
Orientations 1.3%
Registration process 1.1%
Semester information 1.1%
Enroll by telephone 0.3%
Financial Information
Financial Aid 34.3%
'Giving' link 24.1%
Foundation 9.7%
Costs 8.3%
Payment information 5.4%
Scholarships 5.4%
Funding 2.9%
Tax information 0.8%
Employment Information
Employment opportunities 33.2%
Equal employment opportunity institution 1.9%
Student employment opportunities 1.6%
Internships 1.6%
Who hires our graduates 0.5%
Note. Only Web sites organized by function(s) or a combination of
target audience(s) and function(s) were included the percentages.
(N = 373)
Table 2
Frequency of administration and academic information on homepages
Items Percentage
Administration and Academic Information
Academic programs 62.5%
Academics/Colleges, Schools, Departments 59.5%
Library 47.2%
Administration 24.7%
Learning/Research resources 24.7%
Major/Degree information 22.3%
Career services 13.1%
Bookstore 12.6%
Course/class information 8.3%
Policies/rules/regulations 5.4%
Graduation requirements 2.7%
Course search 2.4%
Grades 1.9%
Thesis/Dissertation information 0.3%
Note. Only Web sites organized by function(s) or a combination of
target audience(s) and function(s) were included the percentages.
(N = 373)
Table 3
Frequency of campus information, information about surrounding area,
and general information about institution
on homepages
Items Percentage
Campus Information
Various campuses or institutions in system 30.8%
Directions/maps 30.3%
Campus tours/visit 12.6%
Virtual tours 11.3%
Facilities information 3.2%
Campus safety 2.9%
Event center/Student union/University center 2.1%
Videos about institution 1.9%
Parking 1.6%
Transportation 1.3%
Campus construction 1.1%
Campus police 0.8%
Information About Surrounding Area
Community information 9.4%
Weather conditions 6.2%
Emergency information 2.9%
State information 1.1%
General Information About Institution
About the institution or "About Us" 70.5%
Philosophy/mission/vision of the institution 10.7%
Message from the president 9.4%
Quick facts (history/size) 7.8%
Welcome 6.2%
Why us? 5.6%
Institution's reputation/ranking 5.4%
Accreditation 5.1%
Community outreach 4.6%
Partnerships/partnering 2.7%
Campaign for the institution 2.4%
Development 1.9%
Board of trustees/regents 2.9%
Diversity 1.3%
Economic development 1.3%
Graduate data/statistics 1.1%
Self-study 1.l%
What others are saying about us 0.8%
Advancement 0.8%
Student profile 0.5%
What's a Jesuit college? 0.5%
College/university relations 0.5%
Note. Only Web sites organized by function(s) or a combination of target
audience(s) and function(s) were included in calculating percentages. (N = 373)
Table 4
Frequency of computer/online resources on homepages
Items Percentage
Personalized online account 27.3%
E-mail/WebMail Access 23.9%
Technology support 10.5%
Blackboard 9.7%
Online services 6.4%
WebCT 4.3%
Photo albums 3.5%
WebCam 3.2%
Downloadable/Online forms 2.9%
Other Internet links 2.7%
Campus intranet/Web 1.6%
Tell a friend/Send this page to a friend 1.6%
Downloads 1.3%
Blogs (online journals) 1.1%
Online bulletin board 1.1%
Computer virus information 1.1%
Guestbook 1.1%
Bookmark this page 0.8%
Online Forums 0.8%
Online student portfolios 0.8%
Online student poll 0.5%
Chat online 0.5%
Net notes 0.5%
Computer store 0.3%
Screen savers, wallpaper and skins 0.3%
Online classifieds 0.3%
Note. Only Web sites organized by function(s) or a combination of
target audience(s) and function(s) were included the percentages. (N = 373)
Table 5
Frequency of fine arts and other services and resources on homepages
Items Percentage
Fine Arts Services and Resources
The arts 6.2%
Museum 2.4%
Gallery 1.1%
Campus theatre 0.8%
Other Services and Resources
Student services and resources 27.9%
Services and resources (not specific) 8.3%
Campus ministries/Prayer request 6.7%
Campus store/Merchandise 4.6%
Health services 3.8%
Housing services 2.7%
Counseling services 1.6%
Dining services 1.6%
Faculty and staff services 1.6%
Student's rights and responsibilities 1.6%
Support services 0.5%
Corporate services 0.5%
Disability services 0.5%
Note. Only Web sites organized by function(s) or a combination of
target audience(s) and function(s) were included the percentages.
(N = 373)
Table 6
Frequency of news and deadlines, contact information, and publications
on homepages
Items Percentage
News and Deadlines
News and Events 79.9%
Academic calendar 38.6%
Cancellations/Closings 1.6%
Exam schedules 0.5%
What's new? 0.5%
Contact Information
Contact information for institution 86.3%
Campus directory 31.4%
Request for information 17.4%
Comments/Feedback 10.5%
Faculty and Staff contact information or Web pages 9.1%
Ask-a-Student 0.8%
Publications
Institution's catalog 20.6%
School media (newspaper, radio/TV) 7.5%
Student handbooks 6.2%
Note. Only Web sites organized by function(s) or a combination of
target audience(s) and function(s) were included the percentages.
(N = 373)
Table 7
Frequency of recreational activities, Web site navigational tools,
and miscellaneous information on homepages
Items Percentage
Recreational Activities
Athletics 42.9%
Campus life 33.0%
Extracurricular activities 10.2%
Student organization search 0.3%
Web site Navigational Tools
Search tool 60.3%
Site map/Site index 42.9%
Quick links/Shortcuts 26.5%
Help/FAQs/Q & A's 12.3%
Homepage link 10.7%
Miscellaneous Information
Student testimonials 2.7%
Women in technology 0.5%
Note. Only Web sites organized by function(s) or a combination of
target audience(s) and function(s) were included the percentages.
(N = 373)
|
