Here are some of the key recommendations we made based on this round of user testing:
	The screen design was far too cluttered.  Users were looking for a Google-like search box with very little text.
	Combining searching and browsing in the current presentation, on one screen, did not work.
	“e-Reference” was not important enough to users to keep as a name and would no longer make sense as we added functionalities to the system and interface.
	As they had with e-Reference, users still expected article level searching from the front page, and now that we had this capability, we needed to present it in an intuitive way.
	I do not have screen shots of the prototype that was available for the November round, and, in the interest of time, I will skip ahead to what the interface looks like now, post-launch.  To encapsulate, the near twenty users in the second round found the interface easier to understand and had suggestions for more minor design adjustments.