Although I am an engineering major, I do appreciate that some things can have an aesthetic value that is greater than their pure utilitarian value. Artists have served to enrich our lives throughout history. However, if a device is supposed to serve a purpose, it must address that as well as its aesthetic concerns. For example, a bridge can be a work of art, but if it does not also let people safely pass, then although it succeeds at being art, it fails at being a bridge.
Over the last semester, one thing that I have found to follow this pattern of improving aesthetic value but failing to perform its task is the new WebCT, RPI LMS, or Blackboard, depending on what page you’re viewing at the moment. The developers have given the software a visual overhaul that makes it much more pleasing to see. Unfortunately, the changes they made hinder its intended application of submitting and discussing coursework.
For example, WebCT now insists on loading a Java applet every time you attempt to log in to the system. I don’t think I’ve ever used a WebCT feature that would require a Java applet, but my web browser freezes up for a good 10–15 seconds each time I visit the site. While this may not seem like a long time, if an assignment’s deadline is approaching—if you remember, WebCT is primarily supposed to handle assignment submissions—this can cause a big problem.
Unlike liberal arts schools, which tend to be almost completely dominated by computers running the Windows and Macintosh operating systems, RPI has a significant population that runs Unix and Unix-like operating systems. In fact, we have AIX and Solaris machines for student use. WebCT does not support these systems. While this would normally be just a moderate annoyance, at RPI I have taken a course that requires Linux kernel drivers to be written—a task that cannot be completed in either of the supported browsers for WebCT. I cannot understand why it is so difficult for the people that write the software for WebCT to stick to web development practices that will not crash my web browser when I try to submit my homework.
WebCT’s problems affect not only the students that use it, but also the instructors that manage WebCT courses. I have heard multiple professors complain that WebCT did not post their grades to students, or that it wouldn’t let them display statistics. Now while this may be “user error” on some part, shouldn’t the developers of WebCT design it so that a professor that has a Ph.D. in Computer Science can figure out how to use it? It seems as though the interface, though featuring rounded corners and smooth gradients, was not designed with the intent that people other than the developers of the software would have to use it some day.
What makes the new system better than the old version that was somewhat kooky, but at least didn’t crash my web browser? Even the plain web form that the Computer Science department used for its introductory classes years ago worked flawlessly without a flashy interface. I’m not suggesting that blander is necessarily better, but the system could use standard, stable elements to build the functionality for WebCT and apply style elements where supported to make a pleasing user experience rather than a crashing, frustrating one.
I would rather have an application that “just works” for its designed task. Right now I have to copy my homework to another computer, reboot into a supported operating system, copy the homework back over, and upload it to WebCT. Does anybody else think that I’m performing an unnecessary duplication of work that the information age is supposed to make obsolete? Perhaps I am just a boring, dull engineer, but I would consider this software more appropriately used as a tool than art.
