LC Academic Technology

Larger Issues

• Unreliablity
• 9/24-26 Outage
• Audio Response item fails at more than minimal load
• Inference: CW5 was not properly load tested
• Result: Reluctance by instructors to use CW5
• Page design
  • Multiple screens
  • Save button at the bottom
  • Excessive white space
  • Inference: If user tests were carried out with instructors and students, the results were not effectively translated into interface design.
  • Result: More user error (unsaved or unsubmitted assignments or materials)
• Lack of training for students
  • Videos on the landing page have little to do with how students / teachers use it
  • No concerted effort to train students
  • Inference: There was a misundersanding of how the students would interact with the application. Again, if user tests were carried out with students, the results were not effectively translated into interface design.
  • Result: More user error
• No file control beyond instructor / student permissions
  • High security materials cannot be restricted beyond hiding them from students
  • Risk of accidental release of test / assessment material
  • Result: No choice but to remove high security files
  • Result: CW5 becomes ONLY a platform for delivering material to students, not for instructors to plan courses and lessons

Larger Results

It should be noted that for students, the above results not only lead to distrust of the system, but also a negative experience working with individual instructors, leading to poor evaluations that are not necessarily the fault of the instructors. It also leads to a negative experience learning a language, which, research repeatedly shows, has lifetime effects. For instructors, they lead to less effective teaching and a lower level of job satisfaction, and possibly higher turnover.

Importantly, while many of the above larger issues may only lead to user error, they essentially render the application useless to a large number of students and instructors. It is unreasonable to ask students to re-record audio responses simply because the instructions for the applet were not clear. It is unreasonable to ask instructors to make do with submissions from less than 100% of the students simply because instructions were not clear, or, worse yet, the application did not work properly. It is not reasonable to ask anyone to use the system unless a certain degree of reliability can be ensured.

Perhaps there is a misunderstanding of the critical nature of an application like CW in the languages. The quarter system means that there are often as few as 20 meetings in a course. There is very little room for either technical difficulties or user error in such an environment. Students expect that they will be able to figure out how to use CW without error immediately. Instructors expect this of their own interaction with CW as well, and they expect that the students will be able to achieve this goal. Further, they expect that if a new system is introduced, that it has been tested to these standards. There is no room for error, much less beta testing, in a system where time is constrained so severely and the results have such a large impact on students' futures.