-min.png)
Introduction
The Transfer Credit Tool (nicknamed TC Tool) is a web tool for users planning to transfer course credits to the University of Michigan (e.g. transfer students or students taking summer courses at another school) to find the equivalency of the transferred credits. A previous version existed but the design was not considered ideal, so our team at the University of Michigan Information and Technology Services was tasked with redesigning a new tool to replace it.
As a UX Analyst intern at the time, I conducted a heuristic evaluation of the existing tool and worked with two fellow UX Analyst interns to determine areas of improvement. We conducted user interviews, tested prototypes with users, frequently met with web developers and our project manager to assess development problems, and attended meetings with our clients (the Office of Undergraduate Admissions) to ensure we were meeting requirements. The duration of the project was from May 2019 to August 2019, and our redesigned version launched during the Fall semester of 2019.
Problem Statement
A prospective student needs to find out if their courses will transfer from their current school in order to attend the University of Michigan.
Research, Design and Development Process Overview
Initial Research
We started out by reviewing user feedback for the existing tool that had been gathered from feedback forms and conducting comparative evaluations. Each designer on the team chose around 3 schools from a list of universities with similar tools to research. We then compiled our findings to form a conclusion of the areas of improvement for UMich's tool. We also created proto-personas to shed light on how the tool might be designed to solve potential user problems.
What are our users' definitions of the term "transfer student"?
For the next step, we interviewed a total of 6 participants with the goal of understanding how our users might perceive the term "transfer student". The rationale for this research was that while the majority of users would likely be students attending another college/university planning to transfer to the University of Michigan, the tool would also be used by University of Michigan students who attended courses at another school (eg. summer courses) or are transferring to another department. Thus, we wanted to make sure the language and designs we use would be able to encompass the mental models of each type of user. The backgrounds of our participants also included at least one of each type.
Initial Designs
Based on our initial research, we each started sketching out ideas for an initial design of the tool. We then reviewed our designs together, going over the strengths and weaknesses of each, and proceeded to create two versions of low-fidelity prototypes.
Sketches and prototypes created by Janel Ilar, Imani Tarpeh and Benjamin Yu
Research Part 2 - How would users interact with the search bar? & What are the strengths and weaknesses each prototype has in regards to user flow and understandability of language?
Following the completion of our two versions of prototypes, we entered the next phase of research. For this part, we conducted usability tests with 8 participants. The participants were split into two groups, with each group testing one version of the prototypes. We also split participants with and without transfer experience evenly between the groups. All participants were presented with some warm-up questions (mainly to assess the participants familiarity with using transfer credit tools), a user scenario, a set of tasks to complete, and a few follow-up questions.
Important Findings
1. Some users preferred typing directly into the search fields while others preferred to make a selection from dropdown lists.
2. The terms "subject" and "course" could cause confusion for users due to the overlap of perception regarding their meaning. We should provide clear indication to users that they should select a subject as in the sense of a broader academic field, and then a specific course from the list of courses within that field.
Important Findings
1. Some users preferred typing directly into the search fields while others preferred to make a selection from dropdown lists.
2. The terms "subject" and "course" could cause confusion for users due to the overlap of perception regarding their meaning. We should provide clear indication to users that they should select a subject as in the sense of a broader academic field, and then a specific course from the list of courses within that field.
Research Part 3 - Are users able to interpret the search results?
With the insights gathered from Research Part 2, we were able to settle on one refined version of the prototypes. Next, we added our initial design for how user search results might be displayed to the prototype and conducted another round of usability tests with 5 of the previous participants. The testing protocol had the same structure as what we used in Research Part 2 but with different scenarios, questions, and tasks.
Important Findings
1. Icons such as "checkmarks" and "X"s placed next to each course greatly helped users to recognize whether a course was transferable.
2. Being able to sort the courses in the search results by course number/level could be helpful to users.
Important Findings
1. Icons such as "checkmarks" and "X"s placed next to each course greatly helped users to recognize whether a course was transferable.
2. Being able to sort the courses in the search results by course number/level could be helpful to users.
Final Design
Based on the findings we gained from each round of research, we arrived at our final design. In it, users are required to select a State (typing + typeahead) first, then select an External College/University (also typing + typeahead). The field for External College/University is initially grayed-out to indicate that it is inaccessible until the user has selected a State. If the user is transferring departmental credits within the University of Michigan, they can switch by clicking the U-M Course tab.
Search results display the courses from the external school and their equivalent course at the University of Michigan. It also displays a transferability status with colored icons and an area for additional comments for each course.
