IA Feedback - Usability Prep - GI Bill Comparison Tool redesign

[mnorthuis]

VFS acceptance criteria

• [ ] Let VSP know when the Must feedback has been incorporated
• [ ] Leave any comments for feedback you decide not to take
• [ ] VFS team closes the ticket

Thoughts/questions

Feedback

• Must = the feedback must be applied
• Should = the feedback is best practice
• Consider = suggestions/enhancements

MUST:

URLs and breadcrumbs:

• The existing URL is incorrect in production and must be fixed for the main tool landing page as well as the child pages.
  • Create redirect request issue to redirect old URLs to new and ensure users do not encounter 404s. This work could be done to the existing tool prior to the launch of the redesign if desired.
• The breadcrumbs in the prototype are inconsistent or missing and must be added.
• A new URL and breadcrumb must be established for the new compare page.
• Here are some recommendations for URLs and breadcrumbs
  • Main tool
  • www.va.gov/education/gi-bill-comparison-tool/
  • Desktop: Home > Education and training > GI Bill school comparison tool
  • Mobile: < Education and training
  • Search results
  • www.va.gov/education/gi-bill-comparison-tool/[search-parameters]
  • Desktop: Home > Education and training > GI Bill school comparison tool
  • Mobile: < Education and training
  • Compare schools
  • www.va.gov/education/gi-bill-comparison-tool/compare/
  • Desktop: Home > Education and training > GI Bill school comparison tool > Compare schools
  • Mobile: < GI Bill school comparison tool
  • School detail page
  • www.va.gov/education/gi-bill-comparison-tool/school-details/
    • Replacing "/profile" in URL with something more descriptive of what is shown and ensure its not confused with a user's profile.
  • Desktop: Home > Education and training > GI Bill school comparison tool > School detail
  • Mobile: < GI Bill school comparison tool

Navigation, user flow and findability

• "Refine search" page (mobile only) - Is this intended to be a separate page or a hidden panel that is displayed? The implementation approach will impact URLs, breadcrumbs, H1s, and accessibility. Determine implementation and then adjust URLs, breadcrumbs and H1s as needed.
• "Refine search" page (mobile only) - Users must have way to exit out of this "page" - such as a back link, breadcrumb, or close option - currently there isn't one in the prototype.
• "School detail" page - The on-page nav bar is a new navigation component/pattern, user feedback is required prior to implementation to ensure users understand:
  • Its purpose and how it works - i.e. where they have been taken when its clicked
  • The type of content they will find in each section based on the link label
  • How to get back to the top or navigate between sections
• "Compare schools" page - on desktop there is a breadcrumb and a "return to search results" link, on mobile there is only one link in the breadcrumb position labeled "return to search". Navigation components/methods must be consistent - use the same method of returning to search results on the compare page as is used on the school detail page.

Should:

• We generally do not recommend branding a tool, or giving it a proper name. Would recommend potentially eliminating the branded name from this tool and look at a more task-based title for consistency with other tools on the site. Breadcrumbs might look like:

  • School detail page: Home > Education and training > View school GI Bill benefits > School detail
  • Compare schools page: Home > Education and training > View school GI Bill benefits > Compare schools
  • If you did make this change, it would potentially alter the URLs recommended above.

• Include a findability task in user testing to validate current placement within education hub and that users are able to locate the tool within VA.gov. Look for how users navigate to the tool - by search or on site links? If searching, what terms do they use to search for it? If using links, which links are most frequently used.

Consider:

• None

VSP directions

• Update "Issue Title"
• Link to collab cycle touchpoint meeting epic
• Add to the Feedback pipeline on the VSP Product Support board
• Add your feedback
• Add assignees based on collab cycle touchpoint
  • Design Intent: VFS designer, VFS PM (optional), yourself (optional)
  • Usability Testing Prep: VFS PM, yourself (optional)
  • Staging Review: VFS PM, yourself (optional)

[amyknox]

Thanks for the input @mnorthuis ! Quick question for you on the recommendation: We generally do not recommend branding a tool, or giving it a proper name. Would recommend potentially eliminating the branded name from this tool and look at a more task-based title for consistency with other tools on the site.

What's the rationale for not having branded names for tools on va.gov? What are the anticipated negatives if the Comparison Tool were to retain its branded name?

We're working through the rest of it and will let you know if there are any other questions.

[mnorthuis]

Hi @amyknox, valid question! We generally discourage creating a branded name for tools/benefits for a few reasons - they usually don't fit with our plain language and writing guidelines, it creates inconsistencies in how we label links and URLs, internally branded names don't always resonate with our users or make it clear what something actually is, branded names tend to change frequently as "campaigns" change, etc. I know this tool has been around for quite some time, which is why its not listed as "must" feedback, but wanted to mention it in case there was any flexibility in altering what we label the tool.