If I remember correctly, Google has a way for you to add in "search my site capabilities" into any website.

However, search capabilities are no substitute for a good navigational structure.

On a technical note, Google first has to find and index the site's pages. Search KairosNews for "google" and you get only 5 results, while using the Kairos search feature I found about 80 references in "comments" and 60 in "articles". (Incidentally... were I a total newbie, I wouldn't know the difference between "comments" and "articles," and I wouldn't know that a hit in "article" is probably more promising... but the "comments" results displays first. Fortunately, the material on Kairos is all sorted by categories.)

It also seems to me that the formulae that Google uses to rank pages wouldn't work as magically if all the information Google used was taken from one source -- that is, if we search only University A's web pages, we'd get information on what the administrators and recruiters thought was most important about University A, but Google draws its strength from noticing what all kinds of other web authors (including, much to Andrew Orlowski's dismay, webloggers) think is notable about a page.

Expert web users tend to get more quickly to the level of impatience that drives us to the search button. I think expert web users are also better at spotting bad design.

Clancy describes a scenario where a web visitor is "looking for a certain department's page," but navigation would be very important for someone who is not searching for a specific bit of information, but rather browsing through a school's site in order to get a feel for its philosophy and otherwise absorb its aura. Navigation can also help teach a newbie the structure of an information space.

While Google is wonderful, I don't think it should or ever will replace navigation. One of the reasons I'm thrilled to be experimenting with weblogs in education is that weblogs free newbie hypertext authors from having to make the kind of navigational decisions that can result in their pages being unusable. Some people simply aren't gifted designers, and up to now, these folks ended up with web pages that look like they were designed in 1996. (I really like the content of Teacher, Teacher, for example, but the design does not inspire confidence.)

Isn't google also relying on the fact that sites have navigation systems built in (e.g. links)? Doesn't pagerank only work effectively if a site has been heavily linked? Also, I think Google tends to be ineffective in cataloging database-driven sites.

Here we go:

University searches are already available through Google.

And there are both free and business packages for providing Google searches of individual sites.

Many of the sites I have trouble with are those that replace typical navigation with organization by demographic groups. Like "Students, Faculty," etc -- I'll select "Faculty" thinking, "Oh, this is a list of faculty." But then that turns out to be faculty resources like Webmail, local HR department, etc.

The UF registrar tries to organize in this manner, and I find it nearly completely useless.

Anyway, usually on such sites I don't jump to Google but to local search.

cbd.

Yeah, UNCC does that too. Annoying as hell. But not as annoying as the fact that they've added a cheesy Clay Aiken photo to the random images on the home page (just keep hitting refresh if you don't see it), complete with a link to the American Idol Homepage.

I guess I should keep my patience, but often I lose it and say heck with it, Googling the thing I'm looking for will get me to it more quickly. Maybe that's a new standard for Web site usability--is the navigation so quick and easy that Googling the thing you're looking for wouldn't be faster?

TrackBack from Open Artifact:

I teach several different web development courses in community college. One of the topics I focus across all of the courses is usability. Structured, consistent navigation designed to provide users a sense of where they are, and how they may get to w...