Structural study, not the visual design. This is a deliberately plain walkthrough of one thing: the information architecture. It is not what the redesign looked like, and it is not any university's real site. The actual hi-fi prototype is on the case study. Every program name, statistic, and outcome here is invented sample data.
IA study · department site navigationSample data · no real institution

People

The old site had five people categories, with emeritus faculty listed above advising. "Find who to email about changing advisor" was the worst-performing task in the study.

Advising
Course planning, changing advisor, degree audits
Highest-traffic contact on the old site, buried four levels deep
Faculty
Who teaches what, and their research areas
Kept, but demoted below advising
Department contact
General enquiries and visits
Merged three near-duplicate contact pages

Advising

One contact point for course planning, changing advisor, and degree audits, reachable in a single click from any page. On the old site this was four levels deep under "Academics", and only 22% of participants found it.

Faculty

Sample Faculty A
Accessibility and assistive technology
Sample Faculty B
Human-centered security
Sample Faculty C
Information architecture and findability
Sample Faculty D
Applied statistics and data communication

Faculty entries are deliberately unnamed placeholders. Structure is the point here, and inventing academics with real-sounding names and research areas would not be.