Ultimate Directory of Services
// March 13th, 2006 // Technology Bits
With the many diverse services we offer our users in higher education providing an easy way to find them can often be a challenge. Many institutions have attacked this issue in a series of ways varying degrees of success. It was with this in mind that I’m sure led Middlebury College to develop a service they call “Go”.
This creative solution basically attachs services to keywords to services. These keywords can then be simply appended to the URL ‘go.middlebury.edu’ or just ‘go’ on campus. For example, someone on campus can simply type ‘go/registrar’ and immediately get where they want to go. According to some of their IT guys, this idea started quietly and gradually. The underground movement soon picked up and go became a very poplular service. I can see why.
As an added benefit, they have created a “GOtionary” which is presented to you if you enter a keyword they do not have linked to a service, or you can simply browse it by go directly to go. To add to the power of this system, Middlebury also solicits constant feedback about what should be added to their “GOtionary”. They’ve also created a browser toolbar to bubble up the power of go into their users browsers.
A more common approach for many institutions is to build a monolithic portal application structure where all the various services are linked in (hopefully) appropriate locations. This is a model we at Plymouth State University have operated under for years. This approach has been successful for us, but I think it is interesting to compare the two. These are the questions I ask anyone reading:
Which is more scalable?
Which is more flexible?
Which is more user-centered?
Which rewards repeat users?
Which most intuitive?
What are the learning curves for each, if any?
Are there major drawbacks to one over the other?
Are there major benefits to one that I am glazing over?
Which is the right solution?
Remember, we’re talking purely about findability of services and ease of accessing them. Not about integration, security, identity management, or any of these types of things.
2012 