College websites were rated worse this year than the last–I’m not surprised that this is the ninth straight year of decline, and you shouldn’t be either.學院的網站被評為差，這年比上- i'm並不感到驚訝，這是第九屆，今年的跌幅，而你不應該。

TargetX is generally pretty spot-on with their weekly e-mail minute (though not targetx是一般漂亮的現場就與他們每週電子郵件分鐘（雖然不是 always 總是 ) and a few weeks ago they ）和幾個星期前，他們 wrote about a survey寫的一項調查 of 100,000+ college-bound students polled by the National Research Center for College & University Admissions.的100000 +高校約束學生調查，由國家研究中心，大學及大學入學。 I don’t know much about the NRCCUA and I know little about the methodology or criteria of this survey because I don’t care to我不知道很多有關nrccua ，我知之不多的方法或標準，這項統計調查的，因為我不小心 pay $1000支付1000美元 to find out.來一探究竟。 Point notwithstanding, their ‘enrollment power index’ purports to show approval ratings of college websites dropping year over year.點，儘管如此，他們的招生權力指數'的目的是顯示批准的評級學院網站的下降，比去年同期。

How ugly were the results?如何醜陋的人結果如何？ “Only 140 A’s, along with 713 B’s, 1,369 C’s, 635 D’s and 230 F’s. “只有140一的，隨著713 B的， 1369年C的， 635 D的230和f的。 No sites scored in the 90’s or 80’s on the 100-point scale, only 16 scored in the 70’s, and nearly one third of the schools earned scores in the 50’s or 60’s.” Still, minimalism aside, it’sa bizarre methodology which has沒有網站得分在90年代或80的歷史上100點的規模，只有16分，在70年代，近三分之一的學校所賺取的分數在50年代或60年代的“ 。仍在，極簡主義不談，這是奇怪的方法，其中有 Lawrence University’s website勞倫斯大學的網站 as the #1 website.作為＃ 1網站。 It’s not bad, it’s just… not great.它的不壞，只是…並不大。

As I see it this is because of two things : 在我看來，這是因為兩件事 ：

  1. Continual failure of college websites to meet basic needs, and不斷的失敗學院網站，以滿足基本需求，以及
  2. The increased scope of demands made by students as consumers of this web content.範圍擴大提出的要求，由學生作為消費者對這個網址的內容。

For the first, let me relate a story that I told at the college board forum and have repeated elsewhere: when I was filling out applications and getting teacher recommendation envelopes together, it took me essentially an entire weekend to find the addresses of ten school admissions offices because of inconsistencies across sites and with the common app listings.為首先，讓我涉及了一個故事，我說，該學院董事會論壇，並已多次在其他地方：當我填寫申請，並得到老師的建議，信封在一起，我花了基本上是一整個週末找到的地址10入學辦事處不一致的，因為整個網站，並與共同的亞洲漿紙上市。 Unacceptable!不可接受的！ For the second point–things like “the ability to apply online” should be givens, really, in 2007.對於第二點-的東西，像“的能力，在線申請”應吉文斯，真的，在2007年。 From carbon footprints to student stress to student outreach, anything less is untenable.從碳的足跡向學生強調，對學生的推廣下，什麼都少，是站不住腳的。

College websites have to serve a lot of different audiences in very distinct ways, but so many need not fail the grade as much as they do.學院網站服務了很多不同的受眾在十分鮮明的方法，但這麼多需要不能辜負級多，因為他們這樣做。 Hopefully we’ll see some more positive developments, though I have to ask–please don’t model them off Lawrence University!我希望我們將看到一些更積極的事態發展，雖然我要問-請不要模型，將它們趕走勞倫斯大學！ Let’s try for something a little more innovative.讓我們嘗試的東西多一點創新。