Usability Analysis of India's Top 20 NIRF Accredited Institution's Library Websites: An Evaluation

Abstract

To design and maintain the standard, layout, content, and speed of library websites, it is recommended to periodical assessment and implementation of library web portals to increase their usability and accessibility. The purpose of present study is to evaluate the usability, efficiency, and effectiveness of selected institution's libraries websites in terms of general information on their website, contents, features, searching, page load time, web 2.0 tools, ranking etc. On the basis of that, it is found that most of the selected institution's library websites have to more emphasis on their usability features in the terms of applications of Web 2.0 tools, web searching, multilingual options, mobile-friendly pages, page load time, etc.

Full text

1
Pre-print:
Cite as (APA 6
th
Ed.)
Verma, N. K. & Shukla, Akhandanand. (2019). Usability Analysis of India's Top 20 NIRF
Accredited Institution’s Library Websites: An Evaluation. In Keshava et al. (Eds.), 9
th
KSCLA National Conference on “Library in the Life of the User” (pp. 612-618).
Department of Studies and Research in Library and Information Science, Tumkur
University, Tumakuru.
Usability Analysis of India's Top 20 NIRF Accredited Institution’s Library Websites:
An Evaluation
Nitesh Kumar Verma
Assistant Librarian
Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University
Lucknow
Email: vermanite@gmail.com
Akhandanand Shukla
Assistant Professor
Deptt. of Library & Information Science
Mizoram University, Aizawl
Email: akhandanandshukla@gmail.com
Abstract
To design and maintain the standard, layout, content, and speed of library websites, it is
recommended to periodical assessment and implementation of library web portals to increase
their usability and accessibility. The purpose of present study is to evaluate the usability,
efficiency, and effectiveness of selected institution’s libraries websites in terms of general
information on their website, contents, features, searching, page load time, web 2.0 tools,
ranking etc. On the basis of that, it is found that most of the selected institution’s library
websites have to more emphasis on their usability features in the terms of applications of
Web 2.0 tools, web searching, multi-lingual options, mobile-friendly pages, page load time,
etc.
Keywords: Library Website, Web Usability, NIRF, World Wide Web
1. Introduction
Fast change in Information and Communication Technology (ICT) changed the role of
libraries which results in libraries to deal with new challenges and because of that libraries
are redesigning its resources and services and add more value to their services to cope up
with the changing information needs of their users. Nowadays information seekers are no
longer satisfied with traditional library resources and services as they are more bulky, time
taking and expensive. Libraries and Information Centers shifted their role from being a
storehouse of printed information resources to the provider of access based digital
information resources. A website acts as a very important platform to display its resources,
services, and easy access. Due to easy reach of electronic devices and mobile Internet data,
websites are easier to access and people more relay on them. Nowadays the usability
assessment of websites has more coverage due to its vast popularity and easy access. The
educational institution’s library websites need to be more focus on usability because it serves
a various area of users irrespective of their age, gender, category, area, religion etc. Proper
evaluation and assessment of the same are required because library website act as a bridge in
between its users and library resources and its services.
Web usability is a technique which refers to methods for improving ease-of-use during the
design process (Nielsen, 2003). The International Organization for Standardization (ISO)

2
defines usability of a product as “the extent to which the product can be used by specific
users to achieve specified goals with ‘effectiveness’, ‘efficiency’ and ‘satisfaction’ in a
specified context of use.” According to Nielsen (1999) “with the swift development and
increasing use of the World Wide Web as both information-seeking and an electronic
commerce tool, web user interface studies grow in significance. Poor interface functionality
is one potential cause for web usability meltdown.”
2. Review of Literature
Many studies have been already conducted in this area, but few of them were selected for the
present study. Iqbal & Warraich (2012) reveals that Punjab University Library website is
somehow encouraging in the terms of their five scaled criteria i.e. ‘affect’ and ‘efficiency’
which is basically performance measurement of the website. Pant (2015) in his study finds
that there is a need for overall usability improvement of the website in terms of efficiency.
Central Science Library website does not fully meet their requirements of an ideal website.
Some features like notice board, site search facility, list of services, FAQs and user guides
were the most sought-after features which needs to be enhanced. Yoon et al. (2016) found
that the library websites are not easily approachable for visually impaired screen reader users.
The most common accessibility barriers encountered were issues of information architecture
and usable Web design, rather than errors in coding. Verma & Shukla (2017) in their study
found that 66% selected central universities libraries websites have maintained 50% of total
web usability features and rest were not. Further, central universities libraries websites of
North-Eastern region are trying to build library websites but without having proper usability
features which give the sense that they are still in the primitive stage.
3. Research Objectives
The objective of the present study is to analyze and evaluate the usability analysis of India’s
top 20 NIRF ranked Institute’s library websites. The study is conducted to find out, usability
features and problems of selected libraries’ websites and rank them as per their usability
analysis score.
4. Scope of Study
The present study is confined to India’s top 20 National Institutional Ranking Framework
(NIRF) ranked institute’s library websites. The NIRF was approved by the Ministry of
Human Resource Development and launched by Honorable Minister of Human Resource
Development (MHRD) on 29
th
September 2015. This framework outlines a methodology to
rank institutions across India. As per the NIRF-2018 ranking, top 20 Institutes were selected
for the present study which is as follows:
Table 1: Top 20 NIRF Ranked Institutes
SN Name of Institutions Abb. Used
Total NIRF
Score
1
Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru
IISB
82.16
2
Indian Institute of Technology, Madras
IITM
81.39
3 Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay IITB 79.20
4 Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi IITD 73.97
5 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur IITKGP 71.39
6 Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi JNU 67.57
7
Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur
IITK
65.39
8
Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee
IITR
64.93
9 Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi BHU 63.52

3
10 Anna University, Chennai AUC 62.82
11 University of Hyderabad, Hyderabad UOH 60.54
12
Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati
IITG
60.16
13
Jadavpur University, Kolkata
JUK
59.68
14 University of Delhi, Delhi UOD 58.69
15 Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Coimbatore AVV 58.46
16 Savitribai Phule Pune University, Pune SPPU 58.24
17 Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh AMU 57.78
18 Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal MAHE 57.37
19
Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi
JMI
56.18
20
Bharathiar University, Coimbatore
BUC
55.08
5. Methodology
In the present study, the checklist/ parameters evaluation method was used. The checklist/
parameters have been prepared on the basis of available literature and previous studies. On
the basis of prepared checklist/ parameters, during 14
th
to 27
th
October 2018, the selected
institution’s library website was visited and noted the usability features as per the prepared
checklist. Online automatic evaluation tools were also used to get brief results. On the basis
of prepared checklist/ parameters and for bias-free and easy answering, the obtained results
and scores were structured in two variables i.e. Yes = 1 and No = 0. By scoring points, the
selected library websites were categorized and ranked with the help of suitable statistical
package.
6. Data Analysis and Interpretation
The checklist/ parameters were divided into heads and sub-heads for proper arrangement and
after that tables were prepared on the basis of checklist head wise, and their gained scores
were plotted on the table. The data analysis of the present study are as follows:
Table 2: About their Library Website
SN
Institutes
Separate
website/web page
Webmaster e-mail
Browser related
information
Multi-Lingual
Options
Website map
Website update
date
Visitor Counter
Total
%
1 JMI 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 100.00
2
U
O
H
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
5
71.43
3
U
O
D
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
4
57.14
4
AMU
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
4
57.14
5 IITM 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 3 42.86
6 IITB 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 3 42.86
7 JNU 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 3 42.86
8 IITG 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 3 42.86
9
IISB
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
28.57
10
IITD
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
28.57
11 IITKGP
1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 28.57
12 IITR 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 28.57
13 BHU 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 28.57

4
14 JUK 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 28.57
15 AVV 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 28.57
16
SPPU
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
28.57
17
MAHE
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
28.57
18 BUC 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 28.57
19 IITK 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 14.29
20 AUC 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 14.29
Total 20 18 3 2 2 6 3
Table 2 reflects that, all 20 selected institute’s libraries have their own library website/
webpage and out of them 18 have webmaster email, 3 of them have browser-related
information, 2 of them have multi-lingual library websites and website map, 6 of them have
website/page update date and time and 3 have the visitor counter information. From the seven
selected criteria, Jamia Millia Islamia (JMI) library is on the top having all the criteria
followed by University of Hyderabad (UOH) library with 5 points (71.43%), University of
Delhi (UOD) library & Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) library with 4 points (57.14%),
IIT Madras (IITM) library, IIT Bombay (IITB) library, Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU)
library & IIT Guwahati (IITG) library have 3 points (42.86%) and IIT Kanpur (IITK) library
& Anna University (AUC) library having only 1 point (14.29%).
Table 3: General Information about Library Website
SN
Name of Institute
Contact Us link on
Homepage
Library services via
the website
Working Hours
News & Updates
Library Collection
Membership &
overdue charges
Rules & Regulations
ICT Infrastructure
Library Staff
Links to Web-OPAC
List of New Arrivals
Link to IR
Library Committee
Plagiarism
Total
%
1 IITM 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 100.00
2 IITD 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 100.00
3
IITK
GP
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
14
100.00
4
JNU
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
14
100.00
5
U
O
H
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
14
100.00
6 AMU 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 100.00
7 IITB 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 13 92.86
8 IITK 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 13 92.86
9 IITG 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 13 92.86
10
U
O
D
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
13
92.86
11
IITR
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
0
12
85.71
12 IISB 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 11 78.57
13 MAHE 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 11 78.57
14 JMI 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 11 78.57
15 AUC 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 10 71.43
16 JUK 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 10 71.43
17
BHU
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
9
64.29
18
SPPU
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
9
64.29
19 BUC 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 8 57.14

5
20 AVV 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 6 42.86
Total 20 20 20 18 19 17 18 16 20 12 17 14 10 12
As per Table 3, all the selected institute’s libraries have contact us, library services via the
website, library working hours on their library website/page. There are 19 institute’s libraries
have information about their library collection, 18 institute’s have news & updates and rules
& regulations on the library website, 17 institute’s library have membership & overdue
charges and list of new arrivals on their library website, 16 institute’s library have mentioned
ICT infrastructure, 14 institute’s library have linked their institutional repository on their
library website, 12 institute’s library have working Web-OPAC and information about
plagiarism testing and 10 institute’s library have mentioned their library advisory committee
on their library website. IITM library, IITD library, IITKGP library, JNU library, UOH
library, and AMU library have all the 14 features, IITB library, IITK library, IITG library,
and UOD library have 13 features, only IITR library has 12 features and AVV library has
very fewer usability features from the selected parameters.
Table 4: Searching Features
SN
Name of Institute
Catalogue Search box
at homepage
Search box should be
wide & clearly visible
Site search is easy to
access
Total
%
1 AMU 1 1 1 3 100.00
2 JMI 1 1 1 3 100.00
3 IISB 1 1 0 2 66.67
4 IITB 1 1 0 2 66.67
5 IITD 1 1 0 2 66.67
6
JNU
1
1
0
2
66.67
7
IITK
1
1
0
2
66.67
8 IITR 1 1 0 2 66.67
9 UOH 1 1 0 2 66.67
10 IITG 1 1 0 2 66.67
11 AVV 0 1 1 2 66.67
12 SPPU 1 1 0 2 66.67
13
MAHE
0
0
1
1
33.33
14
IITM
0
0
0
0
0.00
15 IITKGP
0 0 0 0 0.00
16 BHU 0 0 0 0 0.00
17 AUC 0 0 0 0 0.00
18 JUK 0 0 0 0 0.00
19 UOD 0 0 0 0 0.00
20
BUC
0
0
0
0
0.00
Total
11
12
4
Searching features on the websites enable visitors to get their desired information easily and
comfortably. As per Table 4, we can say that from the 20 selected institute’s library websites,

6
11 have their catalog searching facility on their website, in which only 4 institute’s library
provides their library website searching facility. AMU library and JMI library have all the
three searching features and IITM library, IITKGP library, BHU library, AUC library, JUK
library, UOD library, and BUC library have no search box on their library websites.
Table 5: Use of Web 2.0 Tools
SN
Name of
Institute
Social
Networking
YouTube
Twitter
Blogs
Wikis
Total
%
1
AVV
1
1
1
1
1
5
100.00
2
IITB
1 1 1 0 0 3 60.00
3
AMU
1 1 1 0 0 3 60.00
4
MAHE
1 1 1 0 0 3 60.00
5
JMI
1 1 0 0 0 2 40.00
6
BUC
1 0 1 0 0 2 40.00
7
JNU
0
0
0
1
0
1
20.00
8
UOH
0
0
0
1
0
1
20.00
9
IISB
0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00
10
IITM
0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00
11
IITD
0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00
12
IITKGP
0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00
13
IITK
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00
14
IITR
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00
15
BHU
0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00
16
AUC
0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00
17
IITG
0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00
18
JUK
0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00
19
UOD
0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00
20
SPPU
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00
Total
6 5 5 3 1
Web 2.0 technology acts as a platform which offers many more services on comparison to
traditional web technology. It refers to more advanced services which encourage
collaboration, communication and information sharing. From the five most popular web 2.0
tools only 6 selected institute’s library websites use social networking sites, 5 institute’s
library use YouTube and Twitter, 3 of them uses Blogs and 1 uses Wikis. As per Table 5,
AVV library uses all the 5 web 2.0 tools, IITB library, AMU library, and MAHE library uses
3 web 2.0 tools, JMI library, and BUC library uses 2 web 2.0 tools. JNU library and UOH
library uses only 1 web 2.0 tool and rest of the 12 institution’s library didn’t use any web 2.0
tools.
A ranking system set by www.alexa.com, a contributory of www.amazon.com, the rank is
calculated by the alexa.com by using a combination of average daily visits to the selected
websites and number of page views on the selected sites over the past 3 months globally. The
site with the highest combination of visitors and page views may be ranked #1. As per the

7
Fig.1, Alexa traffic rank shows that IITM is on the top followed by IISB, IITK, and IITKGP
etc.
Fig. 1: Alexa Traffic Rank
“Google PageRank Checker or Google PR Checker is one of the few methods that you can
use to determine the relevance or importance of a particular web page. Important or more
significant pages tend to receive a higher PageRank which are also more likely to appear at
the top of the search engine results. The Google ranking of any page is based on the
backlinks; the better quality backlinks the higher is the Google PageRank”. As per the Fig. 2,
IISB library, UOH library, AMU library, JMI library, and BUC library having 6
th
Page
Ranking; JNU library, BHU library, UOD library, AVV library, SPPU library have 7
th
Page
rank. Rests of the library websites have the highest Page Rank 8.
88130
69915
59561
56155
50098
43850
32176
27472
24438
15017
12056
11745
8224
7099
6376
6126
5708
5297
2443
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 90000 100000
BUC
UOH
AMU
JMI
BHU
MAHE
JNU
AVV
IITR
AUC
IITG
IITD
SPPU
IITB
UOD
IITKGP
IITK
IISB
IITM

8
Fig. 2: Google page rank
(From analyze.websiteoptimization.com @56K connection rate and output is in seconds)
Fig. 3: Page Load Time
6
6
6
6
6
7
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
9
9
0 2 4 6 8 10
IISB
UOH
AMU
JMI
BUC
JNU
BHU
UOD
AVV
SPPU
IITD
IITKGP
IITK
IITR
AUC
IITG
MAHE
IITM
IITB
14.59
20.18
24.05
25.59
38.37
67.00
80.64
81.42
85.18
87.20
112.57
125.73
131.10
203.22
209.66
299.99
300.025
300.14
300.26
390.39
0.00 100.00 200.00 300.00 400.00 500.00
UOH
SPPU
BHU
UOD
MAHE
AUC
JMI
AVV
IISB
IITG
JNU
BUC
IITD
AMU
IITM
JUK
IITKGP
IITK
IITR
IITB

Fig. 4:
The principle of “saving the time of the reader” was codified in 1931 as one of
Ranganathan’s “Five Laws of Library Science.” Ranganathan’s defense of the user’s time
finds new
expression today through the web, where a fast library website can save the user’s
time. The page load time depends upon basically three components of the website i.e. Page
weight, page requests and page structure.
loading website/page with 14.59 seconds followed by
library with 24.05 seconds and U
“
The desktop version of a website might be difficult to view and use on a
version that’s not mobile-
friendly requires the user to pinch or zoom in order to read the
content.
Users find this as a frustrating experience and are
Alternatively, the mobile-
friendly version is readable and immediately usable.
selected library websites, only
42
compatible with mobile browsers.
Table
6:
SN
Name of
1.
AMU
2.
JMI
3. U
O
4.
IITB
5.
JNU
6.
IITD
7.
IITG
8.
MAHE
9.
IITM
10. U
O
11.
IITK
12.
IITK
Mobile
Incompatible
58%
9
Fig. 4:
Mobile Compatibility
The principle of “saving the time of the reader” was codified in 1931 as one of
Ranganathan’s “Five Laws of Library Science.” Ranganathan’s defense of the user’s time
expression today through the web, where a fast library website can save the user’s
time. The page load time depends upon basically three components of the website i.e. Page
weight, page requests and page structure.
As per the above table, UOH library
has
loading website/page with 14.59 seconds followed by
SPPU
library with 20.18 seconds, B
library with 24.05 seconds and U
OD library with 25.59 seconds.
The desktop version of a website might be difficult to view and use on a
mobile device. The
friendly requires the user to pinch or zoom in order to read the
Users find this as a frustrating experience and are
likely to abandon the site.
friendly version is readable and immediately usable.
”
42
%
of the websites are Mobile friendly and rest
compatible with mobile browsers.
6:
Web Usability Score – Rank wise
Name of
Institute
General
Information and
Library services
About IIMs
library websites
Searching
Features
Web 2.0
applications
Total
AMU
14 4 3 3 24
JMI
11 7 3 2 23
O
H 14 5 2 1 22
IITB
13 3 2 3 21
JNU
14
3
2
1
20
IITD
14
2
2
0
18
IITG
13 3 2 0 18
MAHE
11 2 2 3 18
IITM
14 3 0 0 17
O
D 13 4 0 0 17
IITK
GP
14
2
0
0
16
IITK
13
1
2
0
16
Mobile Friendly
8
42%
Mobile
Incompatible
11
58%
The principle of “saving the time of the reader” was codified in 1931 as one of
Ranganathan’s “Five Laws of Library Science.” Ranganathan’s defense of the user’s time
expression today through the web, where a fast library website can save the user’s
time. The page load time depends upon basically three components of the website i.e. Page
has
the fastest
library with 20.18 seconds, B
HU
mobile device. The
friendly requires the user to pinch or zoom in order to read the
likely to abandon the site.
”
From the 20
of the websites are Mobile friendly and rest
s are not

10
13.
IITR 12 2 2 0 16
14.
IISB 11 2 2 0 15
15.
AVV
6
2
2
5
15
16.
SPPU
9
2
2
0
13
17.
JUK 10 2 0 0 12
18.
BUC 8 2 0 2 12
19.
BHU 9 2 0 0 11
20.
AUC 10 1 0 0 11
After completing analysis of all the selected libraries websites/pages web usability features,
total scores have been calculated for top 20 NIRF ranked institute’s library website and based
on obtained web usability scores rank were generated in which Aligarh Muslim University
Library website has the highest score (24) for web usability features whereas Anna
University, Chennai & Banaras Hindu University Library website has the least score (11)
resulting the last rank amongst all top 20 NIRF ranked institution’s libraries websites.
7.
Conclusion
The library websites/pages of any institutions serve as a great platform for publishing their
resources and also help to provide information to their remote users. The library website
information needs to evaluated and analyzed regularly to make it more usable and updated.
The present study reveals that all the selected institution’s libraries have their own
website/page but the information needs to be upgraded in the terms of web browsers related
information, multilingual options so that they can serve the variety of users. They need to be
more focus on the usability of their websites rather content gathering. They have to put more
information related to their library and its resources, services, and use more web 2.0 tools to
reach the number of users, as approximately more than 50% of the selected libraries are not
using it. They need more work on their library websites/pages load time as it saves their users
time and makes their website/page more mobile-friendly. After evaluation and analysis,
Aligarh Muslim University Library website has the highest score (24) for web usability
features in library website whereas Anna University Library website & Banaras Hindu
University Library website has the least score (11) resulting in the last rank amongst all top
20 NIRF ranked institution’s libraries websites.
References
Google Page Rank Checker. (n.d.). SmallSEOTools. Available at
https://smallseotools.com/google-pagerank-checker/?
Iqbal, M., & Warraich, N. F. (2012). Usability evaluation of an academic library website: A
case of the University of the Punjab.
Pakistan Journal of Information Management &
Libraries
, Vol. 13. Available at
http://journals.pu.edu.pk/journals/index.php/pjiml/article/view/777
Is your website Mobile friendly? (n.d.). FrontlineMobi. Available at
http://www.frontlinegrafix.com/frontlinemobi/index.html
Nielsen, J. (1999).
Voodoo usability
. Alertbox. Retrieved from
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/991212.html
Nielsen, J. (2003).
Usability 101: Introduction to usability
. Alertbox. Retrieved from
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20030825.html

11
Pant, A. (2015). Usability evaluation of an academic library website: Experience with the
Central Science Library, University of Delhi.
Electronic Library
, 33(5), 896-915.
Verma, N. K. & Shukla, A. (2017). Usability analysis of central universities libraries
websites of North-East India: An evaluative study.
Journal of Advanced Research in
Library and Information Science
, 4(4), 37-41. Available at
https://doi.org/10.24321/2395.2288.201711
Yoon, K., Dols, R., Hulscher, L., & Newberry, T. (2016). An exploratory study of library
website accessibility for visually impaired users.
Library & Information Science
Research
, 38(3), 250-258.