Improving the Digital Experience of Student Housing at the University of Guelph

UX Strategy, Research, Service Design

2024

My Role

Design Lead

I led end-to-end redesign and migration of the website

Team

1 PM, 2 Engineers, 1 Designer

Timeline

2024 Q2-Q3

Skills

Research, Interaction Design, Product Thinking

Short on time? I got you covered.

Here's a 1 min TL;DR version

What did I do?

Led the redesign and migration of Student Housing website for the University of Guelph.

The impact I made?

Driving a 27% decrease in bounce rate, 35% drop in call inquires, and 22% reduction in email inquiries.

What did I learn from this?

Managing different stakeholder priorities, navigating time and resource constraints effectively. Gained experience in securing buy-in from engineers.

The problem

Since 2021, On-Campus Housing demand at University of Guelph jumped by 30%

The Housing website was last updated in 2012 and failed to support the universities growing needs, creating friction for users and operational inefficiencies for staff.

32% Increase in call and email inquires

2+ hours time spent daily answering questions

Costing $12,000 yearly pulling staff from critical tasks

Identifying Stakeholder Goals

Interviewing 5 key stakeholders, surveying 20 campus partners

Conducted 5, 1-1 interviews with internal leadership to gain a deep understanding of: high-level goals, resources, timeline, competitors, key metrics

Gathered 70 survey responses from other campus partners like admissions, colleges to get feedback and build early relationship

What success looks like for stakeholders?

Internal Stakeholders

1. Housing site should align with the university's official Admissions site

2. Staff should spend no more than 1 hour per day responding to inquiries via email and phone

3. Reduce repeat questions about residence features by 30%

What campus partners are saying?

External Stakeholders

Housing Impact on Student Recruitment

"We've noticed a significant impact on our recruitment numbers due to the lack of clarity around residences"

- Assistant Registrar, Admissions

Usability Concerns

Identifying User Goals

We looked at user behavior & made hypothesis

Constraint #1

With limited access to user feedback, our only option was to rely on current website analytics to find patterns in user behavior

/

01

Identifying user types through content engagement

Primary users

75% visitors on our site are Future residents
25% visitors are current residents

Secondary users

The frontline housing staff who answer inquiries from parents and students via calls and emails

/

02

Users spend 1.5 - 2 min on a page and keep jumping between pages

User Behavior

Selects a residence from the top navigation
Scans the page for 1.5–2 minutes
Chooses another residence from the menu
Repeats the scan for 1.5–2 minutes
Navigates back to the previous residence

Hypothesis

Users are scanning multiple residence pages to gather key information, possibly for comparison or shortlisting

/

03

40% of users clicked on "Email Us" within 90 seconds

User Behavior

Users hardly stayed on the page and decided to click on contact information

Hypothesis

Possibility #1: Users are not able to find exactly what they are looking for

Possibility #2: Users didn't read the information at all because of content overload

User Testing

Validating our hypothesis to understand key user problems

We focused on testing one hypothesis, as both user behaviors pointed to the same underlying issue. By exploring one, we were also able to uncover insights that helped explain the other.

What user testing revealed

Users weren’t deliberately comparing residence buildings - they were confused, overwhelmed, scanning for basic info.

They were scanning and leaving because info was hidden, inconsistent, or too text-heavy.

Key Takeaway:

We found that users were stuck at the “understanding” stage.

They didn’t even get to true comparison because the content was unclear, inconsistent, or buried.

Ideation + Design Decisions

{01} - Discover

"I’m a new student - I don’t know which residence to click on. The building names don’t tell me anything"

User Decision Making - Level 1

We chose Option 2: By Study Level because it requires the least cognitive effort for users.

Since students typically apply for residence after applying to their academic program, organizing communities by study level aligns directly with how they already think about their university journey.

User Decision Making - Level 2

We chose Option 2: By Style because it better reflects the decision-making criteria students actually care about when choosing where to live.

“Do I want a private bathroom?”
“Do I want to live in a shared space or have more independence?”

{02} - Understand

"Next, I’m trying to figure out which residence is the best fit for me"

Option 1

Providing a clear overview of residence offerings grouped by style, paired with a short blurb explaining each style type.

Option 2

Left Sidebar with Filters

Giving a tool and making things more dynamic to help students find the best residence for them based on their preferences.

Constraint #2

We chose Option 1 due to component constraints from the development team. Although the Option 2 - custom filters was our preferred choice, we faced feasibility and timeline limitations that made it difficult to implement.

{03} - Shortlist

"Now I want to shortlist residences based on my preferences and needs"