This is a joint blog with reflections from Katie Spearman and Mel Batcharj from the User Experience Service who attended the conference.

This year the conference was online

The ContentEd conference this year was a two-day event held completely online. There were some definite pros to this approach – there was a packed line up of speakers from all over the world, with sessions for different time zones. This meant that you got the benefits of gaining the perspectives and presentations from universities and speakers that wouldn’t have been able to attend in person.

The event was really well organised with a full schedule and also hosts for each presentation, who facilitated live Q&As at the end of sessions to create a community feel.

Katie’s reflections

Tracey Playle kicked off the conference with a keynote talk:

Content strategy trends education marketers can’t ignore

In her talk Tracey asked the question ‘What are the survival tools we need to bring to our content strategy and approach, to make sure our audience engage with us?’ particularly when zero-click behaviour is on the rise.

She then focused on ten different tools within a metaphorical tool kit. There were many noteworthy points in the talk, but a couple in particular which I took away were:

Optimising our content for Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI)

The rise in zero-click behaviour means users may not actually find themselves on your website but instead looking at AI summaries or listening to voice assistants which have (hopefully) drawn the information from your website. This means it’s necessary for us to rethink some of our approaches to website content to make sure it is best placed/optimised to perform well for generative engine/machine understanding, otherwise known as Generative Engine Optimisation (GEO). Tracey helpfully put it like this:

We need to stop thinking about our content as a destination and more of an information source.

Tracey reminded us that content authority and trustworthiness continue to be as important as ever in our quest to reach and engage with our audiences. However, content structure needs as much consideration to make sure it performs in the age of Generative AI. The importance of using correct Schema mark-ups so content types can be easily identified was discussed along with perhaps re-thinking our previous often negative assumptions on the use of FAQs, which Generative AI sources seem to look out for.

‘Metrics re-imagined’

Another key takeaway for me was Tracey’s insight into re-thinking approaches to metrics when it comes to evaluating how well your content is performing as web user behaviour evolves and changes. For example, will website traffic and usage still be a reliable metric? Should we be placing more emphasis on AI visibility and search ranking / performance, in a bid to assess whether the content is being seen / used by Generative AI platforms, tools and technologies? This definitely provided some interesting food for thought.

Content starts with design: How UX thinking can transform student recruitment

Another highlight of the conference was Absolute Nexa’s talk about the work they did with Queen Margaret University. The talk focused on the powerful impact of taking a UX-led approach to their course page redesign.

“UX decisions shape perception before words are read”

There was an interesting discussion around the importance of choosing the right structure for content and how often the success of the content hinges on UX decisions taken early in the process, such as ensuring a clear content hierarchy and navigation to enable engagement and action. Therefore, mapping user journeys and creating an effective structure / navigation before writing content is crucial.

Continuing the theme of structure, the talk provided a good reminder to consider whether mobile-first layouts should be our primary focus, depending on audience preference. Often, it’s the desktop layout that receives the most attention, with mobile responsiveness sometimes seen as more of an afterthought. However, given the rise in people using mobile to obtain information and complete tasks, should mobile be prioritised?

Aligning teams early

Another useful reminder from the talk was the benefits of bringing together content, design and development teams early on in the process to achieve the best results. Often this can help to break silos and allow for more open collaboration. It also means that everyone understands the goals, audience needs and success measures from the start. The talk also touched on the value in testing (both accessibility and usability) continuously throughout the process, which can only be done if the right teams are involved from the outset.

This resonated as the UX service often repeats a similar message when working with colleagues from across the University. We advocate for an approach where the user is considered from the outset, if you want to achieve a truly user-centred approach. This is much harder to achieve towards the tail end of a project, when significant work has already completed and there is more limited scope to influence outcomes.

Mel’s reflections

Stop looking sideways: How thinking outside your category drives innovation

Anthony Hill from Flinders University delivered an engaging session on the value of looking beyond your own industry for inspiration. 

He opened with a Where’s Wally analogy to illustrate how brands often believe they stand out, while audiences see a blur of similar tones, visuals, and messages, particularly in higher education. The result is what he referred to as a “sea of sameness.” He argued innovation doesn’t come from benchmarking competitors, but from looking outward to industries that have transformed by redefining what their audiences value.

Using familiarity and cross-pollination to design 

Anthony reminded us that users don’t experience the web in sectors. They shop, stream, travel and book online, and those everyday interactions shape their expectations long before they reach a university site. I often find myself wishing a helpful pattern I’ve seen elsewhere existed in the system I’m currently using, and that kind of cross-pollination is exactly what Anthony encouraged. 

This is where he introduced the idea of Jakob’s Law: people spend most of their time on other websites, so they expect yours to work in familiar ways.

Jakob’s Law 

Anthony framed this as an opportunity, rather than a limitation. He gave examples of how his team borrowed patterns from outside the sector that felt intuitive and familiar: 

• Interactive cards and toggles inspired by Apple. 
• Filtering and search behaviour from travel sites. 
• Highlight animations, like those found in Google search summaries. 

These changes resulted in course pages that better matched how students naturally browse and make decisions. 

Borrowing brilliance

Anthony closed with Picasso’s idea that “good artists borrow, great artists steal”, not to encourage imitation, but to show that creativity can come from reimagining what works elsewhere.

In our own UX work we often ask, “Have you used something like this before?” Familiarity builds confidence and surfaces user expectations. Anthony’s talk reinforced that innovation doesn’t always require invention; sometimes the most effective solutions come from blending successful ideas from beyond our own sector.

Mind the (inclusion) gap: Creating digital content that includes everyone

Tracey opened the session by reminding us that inclusion isn’t something you solve once, it’s something you return to regularly as your audiences, tools and contexts evolve. This framed Zuzana Voskarova’s talk well. As Digital Engagement Officer and EDI ambassador at University College Dublin, she focused on why inclusion matters and how everyday content decisions can either welcome or exclude people.

Inclusion and belonging in digital spaces 

At its core, inclusion is about belonging, helping people feel represented, respected, and confident that the content is for them. Zuzana emphasised that digital spaces are often only one part of how people connect with us. If those touchpoints aren’t inclusive, people can be excluded long before they reach our services. 

Zuzana highlighted how small oversights add up – missing alt text, uncaptioned videos, inconsistent language. Individually they seem minor, but together they can create digital spaces that feel unwelcoming. This echoed something we often say within the UX team, small adjustments (such as adding alt text) can make a big difference.

A different example that stood out was Zuzana showing her name misspelled numerous different ways. It was a simple illustration, but a powerful and relatable one! A person’s name is a core part of their identity, and getting it right is a basic act of respect. It was a reminder that inclusion isn’t limited to web content, but it shows up in everyday interactions, from emails to internal systems. Those small details also shape whether people feel recognised and respected.

Practical tips to make a difference

Zuzana also offered practical, actionable tips. A few that stood out around inclusive language specifically:

• Avoid terms that unintentionally carry bias (for example, using “normal” as a comparison).
• Favour people-first language where appropriate, such as “person with a visual impairment.”
• Ask when you’re unsure, respectful curiosity is better than assumption.

Shared challenges and sharing the responsibility

She also addressed the underlying challenges: unconscious bias, stereotypes, and the tendency to treat accessibility as a final “check” rather than an integral part of the process. What resonated strongly was her message that inclusion is a shared responsibility. This aligns closely with how we approach things in the UX Service. Accessibility has been central to recent projects and training. We’ve made real efforts to frame it as a shared commitment across the whole web community and not a final-stage checklist. Her point that inclusivity requires continuous learning also felt especially relevant. It isn’t something you complete, it’s something you practise and evolve.

Overall reflections

It’s the first time we’ve attended a completely online conference over two full days. You inevitably didn’t get quite the same feeling as you do when attending a conference in person, where you often revel in the opportunity to network and chat with people between sessions.

Screen fatigue did also kick in at times. However, given the current financial climate in the Higher Education sector, we appreciate that the format allowed people to save on travel costs and still benefit from all the knowledge sharing, that perhaps we wouldn’t have been able to benefit from otherwise.

It’s also great that all the sessions were recorded. There was a lot of information packed into the two days, so it’s a real benefit that we can catch talks we missed, and revisit ones of particular interest in the future.