Teen Models Web

👉🏻👉🏻👉🏻 ALL INFORMATION CLICK HERE 👈🏻👈🏻👈🏻

The official research journal of the Young Adult Library Services Association
Robin Naughton, Digital Systems Manager, Library, New York Academy of Medicine
Naughton, Robin. Teen Library Website Models: Identifying Design Models of Public Library Websites for Teens. Journal of Research on Libraries & Young Adults 6 (2015): n. page. Web. .
This paper identifies and seeks to understand website models of U.S. public library websites for teens, also known as teen library websites (TLWs). TLWs are sections of public library websites devoted to teens and only teens. Few studies have focused on TLWs, and exploring this aspect of public libraries provided an understanding of how public libraries address teen needs via their websites. TLWs were identified from the 2009 Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) data file, a downloadable Excel document of all data available from the IMLS Public Libraries Survey.[1] Using web content analysis, 60 TLWs were analyzed in 2012 and reanalyzed in 2015 to understand any changes over time. Four website models were identified, with the majority of TLWs adhering to the Reading Model, a text-heavy website with limited interactivity and media content. In addition, the results showed that in 2012 some public libraries moved from one website model to another while others no longer had TLWs in 2015. These findings suggest that there will be shifts in website design, but website models and access can be a guide to navigating changes. The paper concludes with a list of evaluation questions for best practices in designing TLWs.
The Pew Internet and American Live project tracks Internet use by US teens (12–17 years old). Since 2000, the data shows that Internet usage increased with 73% of teens in 2000, 87% in 2005,[2] 93% in 2009,[3] and 95% in 2012.[4] Mobile access is also growing, with 74% of teens using their mobile devices (smartphone, tablets, etc.) to access the Internet.[5] In today’s mobile-first environment, access to the Internet has extended beyond the traditional laptop and desktop computer to include mobile devices and gaming consoles (PlayStation, Xbox, etc.).[6] In order to address teen information needs in the design and development of public library websites for teen users, public libraries will need to consider the teen context and methods of access to the public library website.
The goal of this research is to identify and understand current website models of public library websites for teens (teen library websites, aka TLWs). Public libraries have developed sections of their websites devoted to specific user groups such as children, teens, seniors, and so on. Generally, research in this area has focused on children and adults.[7] Few studies have focused on teens and specifically TLWs. Using web content analysis to identify and document current website models of TLWs in 2012 and again in 2015, this research highlights public library websites’ representation of teen information needs and documents changes to the TLWs since the original 2012 study.
This study explores the following research questions:
Teen information needs is a critical component to designing public library websites for teens. Researchers in this area have provided guidance on major areas of need when working with the teen population and public libraries. Hughes-Hassell and Miller researched how teens contributed to the design and development of public library websites by surveying public libraries in the United States and Canada. They suggest that library websites address teens’ needs on academic, social, and recreational levels.[8] Agosto and Hughes-Hassell looked at the everyday life of urban teens ages 14–17 and found that the typology of information needs can be mapped to prior research on teens, which helps to provide an additional area of research within the teen population.[9] The researchers also propose theoretical and empirical models regarding urban teen information needs, identifying seven “selves” (social, emotional, reflective, physical, creative, cognitive, and sexual) that make up urban teen development.[10]
Agosto offers a theoretical model based on bounded rationality and satisficing as they pertain to young people’s decision-making, providing four major determinants of their web-based decisions: personal preference, object engagement, human processing constraints, and contextual constraints.[11] Agosto’s discussion provides reasons why teen websites may fail or succeed within the teen demographic, and it emphasizes the need to understand context in order to design and develop websites for the teen population.
As a result, it is important for researchers to recognize that teens are not a homogenous group. Understanding the multifaceted teen context is the first step in designing and developing websites that respond to teens’ wide-ranging information needs.
User interface design requires an understanding of users in order to provide solutions that respond to user needs. Current designs are often based on adult views of teen perspectives rather than on user-centered research with teens, which can provide the appropriate design solutions for the user context. To combat this, Large, Beheshti, and Rahman suggest four major categories of design criteria: portal goals, visual design, information architecture, and personalization.[12] Each category draws on teen perspectives to design websites that respond to teen needs.
Large et al.’s research focused on web users ages 10–13, who through focus groups reported their likes, dislikes, and suggestions for improvements of four web portal interfaces for children. From their findings, Large et al. advise that web portals should have a strong goal/focus but can include a related subfocus.[13] For example, a website can have a strong goal/focus as an educational portal, but also have a subfocus of entertainment related to the educational focus.[14]
The visual design of the user interface is an immediate, almost visceral place of interaction between the user and the system. Garrett calls it the “surface” plane of the user experience, where all the other planes come together to produce a finished design.[15] It is the first thing that users see, but visual design is a combination of research and design principles that can help to create a good user experience.[16] Large et al. found that the children preferred a catchy portal name, good use of color, non-white backgrounds, animation, graphics, large font sizes, appropriate icons for the context, age-appropriate vocabulary, clear layout, and no advertisements.[17] Overall the children polled wanted websites that kept their attention and were not boring, which is echoed in research into teen preferences as well. Teens left websites they considered “boring,”[18] particularly based on the homepage design.[19]
Another area of visual design dealt with design consistency across the website. Based on a survey of public librarians who serve teens, Hughes-Hassell and Miller found that library administrators typically want to have a consistent design through the various components of their libraries’ websites.[20] This means that many of the websites designed for youth are based on adult-looking pages that youth find unattractive. Although the librarians who responded to the survey indicated that youth were involved to some extent in the design and development process, it was not to the extent that allowed youth to have significant impact on the design. Thus, if librarians want youth to use the TLW, then they need to develop web pages with youth input throughout the design and development process.
Similarly, Valenza’s dissertation research, a content analysis of ten exemplary secondary school library websites identified by a Delphi panel of experts in school library research, found that there’s a debate between library administration policies that dictate using mandated templates versus employing creativity in designing unique school library websites.[21] On one side of the debate, Delphi members suggested that there’s a limitation in what can be done when school districts mandate templates; but on the other side, Delphi members argued that creativity can still be achieved within the context of templates while providing consistency and a point of reference in terms of the overall user location. Valenza suggests that consistency can be improved with the development of models and tools that can help to identify and evaluate school library websites.
Large et al. found that for information architecture, young web users preferred directness, keywords, subject categories, options for meta-searching, organization and possible limitation of search results based on relevance, and spell-check.[22] Information architecture is rooted in the understanding of the content and how best to build a structure that allows easy navigation and understanding of that content. Thus, one theme seen throughout the literature is age-appropriate design.[23] Age-appropriate terminology for labels and indexing can determine if children are able to understand and use the website.[24] Within the health information domain, Franck and Noble found that although there was some breakdown by age on the original Children First for Health (CFfH) website (http://www.childrenfirst.nhs.uk/), it was unclear and further research revealed the need for age-appropriate structure to respond to the information needs of children (ages 7–11) and teens (ages 12–18).[25]
The fourth category focused on personalization as a way to resolve some of the preferences and suggestions provided to youth. Personalization and customization is a theme seen throughout the literature and speaks to the need to respond to individual preferences. The terminology is sometimes used interchangeably, but personalization refers to adjustments to the user interface based on user’s information, past activities, and attributes, while customization gives the user the option and power to change and adjust the user interface.[26]
Agosto found that personal preference (choice) was important for teen website design because it offered teens the option of changing background color, turning off background music, or adjusting the site to suite their particular information needs.[27] Agosto describes teen preferences in terms of graphical/multimedia and subject content, showing that teens had strong preference for designs that catered to their own personal needs.[28] However, there is some evidence suggesting that now that teens are spending more and more time using the web and ubiquitous computing technologies, they are less interested in visual design features and more interested in using technology for fast, easy communication.[29]
The current research study used web content analysis to identify and explore current public library websites for teens. Traditional content analysis emphasizes five steps: (1) research questions; (2) research sample; (3) categorization scheme; (4) application of coding to sample; and (5) analysis and interpretation of results. Drawing from content analysis, web content analysis is an unobtrusive, systematic research technique[30] used to study websites. Using elements of traditional content analysis, web content analysis expands the method to include the dynamic nature of the web,[31] the mixture of multiple media types in communication, and the effect of the web on the traditional approach.[32] Herring proposed methods where web content analysis is the larger umbrella covering different approaches to content analysis of websites, such as image analysis, theme analysis, feature analysis, link analysis, exchange analysis, language analysis, and other methods of content analysis appropriate to the web as it continues to evolve.[33] Using web content analysis provided a systematic method of analyzing specific aspects of TLWs.
The 2009 IMLS Public Library Data Files on over 9,000 U.S. public libraries were selected as the source for data for this study.[34] Seventy-three percent of public libraries listed in the IMLS data file, or 6,801 libraries, had websites. To reduce the number of websites selected for analysis, public libraries serving three population ranges were selected for this study.
Table 1: Public Library Websites by Population Ranges
Simple random sampling[35] was used to select 20 TLWs for each of the three population ranges, for a total of 60 TLWs for analysis. Including a TLW in the sample for analysis required that the public library website had a section devoted to teens and only teens. The teen section of the public library website could not be shared with any other population group, such as children or adults.
The sampling unit for the data collection is the “teen website,” where website refers to the teen homepage and all supporting pages. The term “website” is used for single or multiple web pages for the teen section. Some websites are dynamic and can change rapidly over time with no guarantee that today’s content will remain tomorrow. As a result, stable versions of the websites were needed for consistency in the analysis. Researchers printed out the websites as a means of capturing a snapshot of the data at a given period of time.[36] The printouts provide the stability that the researchers needed to do a systematic content analysis but may miss some of the dynamic content that the website provides. For this research, stability was achieved through rapid data collection,[37] where data is collected quickly and efficiently with a goal of minimizing change that may occur over time and achieving a stable data set, which is necessary for a systematic review of the data. Screenshots of three levels were recorded. The first level was the main public library website homepage, the second was the TLW homepage, and the third was all secondary links from the TLW homepage that were internal to the website. Links to external websites were not recorded. As an additional measure and to account for the dynamic nature of the web, a local digital version was archived.
A subset of websites was reviewed to identify features and themes pertaining to the research questions, a necessary grounding for a systematic analysis. An additional source for structuring the analysis was achieved through a review of the human-computer interaction (HCI) research literature with a particular eye toward elements of user experience,[38] information architecture,[39] [29] and user interface design.[40] Loosely building on Garrett’s five planes of user experience (strategy, scope, structure, skeleton, and surface),[41] Large et al.’s design criteria,[42] and other HCI research literature,[43] the organizing structure used to develop a coding system included website presence, information architecture, visual design, and personalization and customization. A database was developed to store the data and assure coding consistency.
Library websites generally fall within the informational website type because the main goal of the library website is to provide information to its users. As informational websites, the analysis looked at the nature of the designs of the current TLWs based on the structural and functional organization of the website. Four website models were identified: Reading, Media-Oriented, Portal, and Information Discovery.
The Reading Model (fig. 1) is predominately a text-based content representation design, where information is presented as paragraphs or blocks of text throughout the user experience. The website may include text, images, and links, but overall there is a limitation to what the user can do beyond reading the information on the screen and clicking a few links. The content appears static and, depending on the visual design of the website, it can also appear as if it transitioned from a printed document directly to the screen with little change or interactivity.
In 2012, 34 TLWs (57%) were identified as Reading Models, and in 2015 that number dropped to 30 TLWs (50%). This suggests that current TLW designs need to consider the meaning of presenting a Reading Model to a teen population that prefers not to read and considers large blocks of text “boring.” Reviewing the TLWs in 2015 showed that there is some movement in shifting from a Reading Model to another model that provided more options for teens.
In 2012, 6 TLWs (10%) were identified as Media-Oriented Models, and in 2015 that number increased to 7 TLWs (12%). It is not a significant increase, but it suggests that current TLW designs are still in the process of becoming Media-Oriented by incorporating available media technologies that could enhance the user interaction and experience. The Media-Oriented Model provides teens with alternative means of interacting and accessing information on the TLW.
The Portal Model (fig. 3) is a category-based design of the TLW homepage that provides teen users with sectional breakdowns of available content. Teens must click a category to access available resources. The Portal Model includes interactive content and varied media types. It can have elements of other design models such as Reading or Media-Oriented Models.
In 2012, 14 TLWs (23%) were identified as Portal Models, and in 2015 that number increased to 20 TLWs (33%). This suggests that there is a significant shift from other models to the Portal Model. The Portal Model provides teens with an easy way to identify the available category of content and then drill down to access more specific information.
The Information Discovery Model (fig. 4) provides teens with all available information and dynamic updates on the TLW homepage. Teens get information immediately and only click when they want additional information.
Figure 4: The Information Discovery Model
In 2012, 6 TLWs (10%) were identified as Information Discovery Models, and that number decreased to 3 TLWs (5%) in 2015, a 50% drop. This suggests that some public library websites are creating alternative models with dynamic content but may still be struggling with the Information Discovery Model.
The distribution of the website models by library population service area showed that the Reading Model appeared most frequently in the current TLWs of the largest and smallest population range in the study. The Reading Model also represented the dominant model identified.
Since 2012 some TLWs were redesigned, and in a number of cases the redesign shifted the TLW from one model to another (fig. 5). There were shifts from the Reading Model to the Media-Oriented and Portal Models. There was only one TLW that shifted from a Portal Model to a Reading Model. Two Media-Oriented TLWs shifted to the Portal Model. There were no TLWs that shifted to the Information Discovery Model from another model, but three TLWs shifted from the Information Discovery Model to the Portal Model. Taken together, this suggests that there will continue to be changes in pub
Teen Like Hard Xxx
Stepmom Sex Blonde
Sestra Brat Sex Massaj
Vintage Interracial Sex Picture
Cerita Sex Istri Exhibit
Teen Models (@teenmodelphotos) • Instagra…
Teen Fashion Videos | Watch Teen Fashion Video Clips on Fa…
Teen Library Website Models: Identifying Design Models of ...
Teen Fashion Video: Child Model Helga | Young Web Models ...
fantasia models - de búsqueda - Yahoo Search - Búsqueda Web
Category:Russian female models - Wikipedia
Yandex
Dogpile.com
Teen Models Web