Making three training programmes comparable at a glance

The problem

An optometrist deciding between a residency, a fellowship and an observership is making a serious commitment of time and money. They are not browsing. They want to know duration, entry requirements, what they will actually do day to day, and what they hold at the end.

Presented as three separate pages of prose, that decision requires reading everything and holding it all in your head. Most people give up and email to ask, which turns an answerable question into an admin task for the institute.

The approach

The programme pages were structured so the same facts appear in the same place in the same order for every track. That sounds obvious and is surprisingly rare. Consistent structure is what makes comparison possible without a table — the applicant learns the shape once and can then scan the others.

Content structure was the bulk of this engagement, more than the visual design. The question driving every layout decision was: can somebody choosing between these three tracks tell them apart quickly, without opening three tabs?

Writing for a professional audience

This is one of the few projects where simplifying the clinical language would have been the wrong call. The audience is qualified optometrists; binocular vision and neuro-optometric rehabilitation are their working vocabulary, and writing around those terms would read as evasive rather than accessible.

The clarity had to come from structure instead — precise terminology, plainly organised. That is close to the opposite of the approach taken for Caring Vision Therapy, where the readers are parents encountering the same field for the first time. Same discipline, two entirely different registers.

International applicants

Programmes draw applicants from outside India, which means the site is often loaded on connections and devices nobody in the office is testing on. Fast load and a layout that holds up on a small screen matter more when your reader is several time zones away and cannot simply call to ask.

What was involved

• Content architecture across three programme tracks
• Consistent page structure to make programmes comparable
• Custom design and front-end development
• SEO structure for programme and specialisation searches
• Mobile-first build for domestic and international applicants

Other work