Any views expressed within media held on this service are those of the contributors, should not be taken as approved or endorsed by the University, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the University in respect of any particular issue.

Future student online experiences

Future student online experiences

Sharing the work of the Prospective Student Web Content Team

Audit of fees content – what we uncovered

Our audit of college, school and subject area websites highlighted the importance of following the new guidance we’ve just produced for web publishers.

In addition to our user research and analytics work which has informed the delivery of new fees-related provision, we conducted an audit of tuition fees content on school and colleges websites through April 2020.

We found many instances of duplicated, out-of-date and factually incorrect fees content.

More detail about the audit findings on the Communications and Marketing wiki (login required)

Issues uncovered

The audit covered 32 subsites and 370 pages containing fees-related information. We focused on colleges, schools and subject areas, and left out some programme and research group microsites.

Tuition fee directly stated on school websites

We saw numerical figures for tuition fee rates explicitly stated in 19% of cases.

In a small number of instances, simple typos meant the wrong fee was listed, or there were obvious contradictions between stated costs and the same costs available, for example, in the degree finder fees table.

Out-of-date tuition fees on school websites

Some fees that were directly listed on pages were from previous academic years (so not relevant to prospective students). In other instances, while fees were not directly stated, links directed students to fee tables from previous academic years.

Copy that could be misinterpreted

Language is very important when dealing with tuition fees content. Copy written in a particular way can convey incorrect messages to students. For example, we found the heading ‘cost per year’ on a postgraduate taught part-time programme, which suggested fees remain the same each year (when they increase).

Formatting and style guide issues

Beyond accuracy and clarity issues, we also saw lots of style and quality related issues including:

  • naked URLs used instead of link text – very poor for accessibility and search performance
  • headings not formatted correctly – again an accessibility and search performance issue
  • broken links – reducing confidence in our content and prompting extra enquiries

Improving our website experiences

We’ve just published guidance for website managers. Following these simple steps will eliminate these issues and reduce risk and content management overhead in future.

Guidance for University web publishers on fees-related content

1 reply to “Audit of fees content – what we uncovered”

Leave a reply

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>


Report this page

To report inappropriate content on this page, please use the form below. Upon receiving your report, we will be in touch as per the Take Down Policy of the service.

Please note that personal data collected through this form is used and stored for the purposes of processing this report and communication with you.

If you are unable to report a concern about content via this form please contact the Service Owner.

Please enter an email address you wish to be contacted on. Please describe the unacceptable content in sufficient detail to allow us to locate it, and why you consider it to be unacceptable.
By submitting this report, you accept that it is accurate and that fraudulent or nuisance complaints may result in action by the University.