A sneak peak at Georgetown University’s new and improved website

After collecting input from students and faculty about what they wanted out of a redesigned website and looking at boring wire frames, the Office of Communications, which is overseeing the redesign of Georgetown.edu, has finally received three full-on design concepts from its developer, Happy Cog.

The concepts, entitled “Wayfinder,” “Clarity,” and “Warmth,” respectively, each feature a floating footer that will “provide targeted content and links to specific audiences,” Communication’s Scott Anderson writes.

Students will see links like MyAccess and HoyaMail, for example, while faculty and staff will see links to “MyAccess, Access+, governance and others.”

“Please let us know what you like — and don’t like – about each design,” Anderson asks, “and let us know which one you prefer. What were your first impressions when you see the designs? Do the designs convey a sense of what Georgetown is all about?”

We’ll start with “Warmth,” the last concept: it’s ugly as sin. But Vox is a big fan of “Clarity.”

13 Comments on “A sneak peak at Georgetown University’s new and improved website

  1. The second one looks the best I would say.

    However, the real issue with the website is the terrible search feature (how can a google-powered search feature searching “_____” yield fewer useful results than simply googling “______ georgetown” to find what I want on the website?) and the absurdly high amounts of broken links. If they fix those two, then I’ll be a happy camper, even if it looks as ugly as Warmth does.

  2. Clarity is the best one- the other two look like bad WordPress designs.

  3. Somewhere between Wayfinder and Clarity is what I want. (Clarity looks a bit too much like the JSTOR interface or something like that, though I’m a big fan of the fancy small-caps buttons at the top.)

  4. Gotta agree with Vox, Clarity is the best. Warmth looks like the homepage of an antebellum national historical site.

    My one concern is all of them look exactly like every new site Obama people are making. Whenever I see that shade of blue on a website, I just feel inspired. So maybe that was a conscious choice after all.

  5. I like Clarity, but Warmth may be the best functionally. Yes, the colors are very ugly, but those can be changed.

    The whole bottom panel is very gimicky. They should trash that completely.

  6. I agree with Vox; Clarity is the best one. I hope this website redesign includes the GSAS website; it currently looks like it’s from 2001. Having applied to 12 graduate schools this year, I can say with certainty that Georgetown’s website is perhaps the most outdated of them all. It makes the university look bad.

  7. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I believe the blue was chosen because, you know, Gtown “blue and gray.”

  8. I’ll take the consensus that warmth is horrible. But I’d actually prefer wayfinder. It places the emphasis on the main tabs (i.e. academics, admissions, etc.), rather than the “featured topics” (i.e. “connecting globally,” “pursuing excellence,” etc.) like Clarity does

  9. Pingback: Vox Populi » A fourth potential design for the new Georgetown.edu

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>