Human-Computer Interaction through WebCT
From the Perspective of SIRLS Faculty
 
 
Pam Baxter, Buffy McDonald and John Stanton
IRLS 588-791 (Information Technology)
April 21, 2004
 
 
 
Abstract
 
The interaction of the faculty members at the University of Arizona with WebCT was examined in this paper.  Surveys were conducted on faculty members in the School of Information Resources and Library Science program to see what challenges were faced in using WebCT.  It was determined that the majority of faculty members surveyed in this project had experienced significant technical difficulties in using the information system.  However, through refresher classes or training sessions on WebCT, a GAT dedicated to helping only the faculty with WebCT, a cleaner display of the pages in WebCT, and the users’ needs being addressed in the design and implementation of technical support it was believed that the challenges of using WebCT were not insurmountable.
 
Introduction
The information system we have chosen to work on for our group project is WebCT.  Our focus will be to determine the pros and cons of SIRLS faculties’ interactions with WebCT. WebCT is provided for students to allow them to take classes online through a university.  The University of Arizona is currently using WebCT Campus Version 3.8 which is a versatile course management tool for web delivered courses. It has a variety of features including:  
 
The Problem
The goal of our project is to determine through surveys what some of the challenges are for faculty members using WebCT and to see if any improvements can be made. The faculty has a distinct challenge in offering their courses online versus in a classroom.  They must pay attention to how the teacher-student interaction will take place and how the student-student interaction will occur. They handle this concern through discussion groups, email and online chat rooms. We wanted to determine how the professors view their own success at meeting this challenge and whether WebCT provides them with a proper teaching-learning environment.
 
Importance
We chose to look at WebCT because of the important role it plays in allowing students from different geographical locations the opportunity to receive a graduate degree in Information Resources and Library Science from the University of Arizona.  Without the use of WebCT or some similar product, students would not have the ability to take virtual courses.  This would limit the number of students who could enroll in, and graduate from, this program.  There has to be some way to meet this need of students who want to obtain a library science degree, but do not live in a state that offers this program. WebCT meets this need.
 
Who it Impacts
The students, faculty, and the university are the major stakeholders in using WebCT.  The students learn through online courses that allow them to attend the university from any geographical location, as long as they can attend six credits on campus.  For example, we have met students from Ohio, Taiwan, Alaska, California and Idaho in this program.  Students interact with each other and their professors through WebCT by posting discussion topics on the board, e-mailing one another, and entering chat rooms.  The professors must interact with WebCT and their students. They post articles, class readings, lecture notes, assignments, and feedback on graded assignments. They set up a syllabus, class notes, class readings, and a class list among other things.  The university is the institution that allows the students and faculty to interact within an accredited library science program.  WebCT allows the university to offer their program to a wider population of available students. Without WebCT, many students would not be allowed to get their degree.  Only a handful of schools in the western U.S. offer the library science program.
 
Our Approach
Our information has been gathered by surveying six members of the SIRLS faculty of the University of Arizona that are using WebCT. We sent out the survey to 12 SIRLS professors. Seven completed survey responses were returned to us. One professor responded saying she had no experience with WebCT.   Here are the 11 questions we posted to the 12 SIRLS faculty members:
 
1. What kind of technical background do you have?
2. What kinds of tools and technical support are made available for WebCT?  Is this information helpful to you? 
3. What could be done to make these tools and technical support better?
4. What is your experience in working with the WebCT support staff?
5. When you first set up your course, did you find it easy to maneuver through WebCT? 
6. What in WebCT works best for you?  What is the biggest challenge?  What features would you like to see added?  What problems do you have with using WebCT?
7. Do your students report having trouble with WebCT?  If so list most reported problems?
8. Do you find it useful for SIRLS to have a WebCT GAT?
9. Have you ever used competing products of WebCT?  If so what products?  Rate in comparison to WebCT.
10. Do you find WebCT helps you to be as effective a teacher online as you are in the classroom?
11. Do you know how WebCT was chosen?
 
What We Found
Based on our team’s experience, we expected to find that the majority of faculty had experienced significant technical difficulties in using WebCT.  What we found supported this assumption.
 
1. What kind of technical background do you have?
All but one of the faculty members who responded had a strong technical background with computers and software.
 
2. What kinds of tools and technical support are made available for WebCT? Is this information helpful to you?
One professor said she was not aware of help and that she relies on other SIRLS professors for help. Most of the respondents reported
Help screens were available in WebCT. Some mentioned that there are a number of FAQs and a tutorial for faculty available on the WebCT and UA WebCT web sites.  One professor reported it is easier to just play with the program to figure things out. The UA WebCT technical support team is available via phone or email and is usually helpful.
 
3. What could be done to make these tools and technical support better? This comment from a faculty member was of particular interest:
"Like Blackboard, WebCT released a fully re-designed system from the version we own about two years ago. There are differences in system architecture, functionality and a huge difference in the cost. Unfortunately for WebCT and Blackboard, they released this right at the time of our cyclical budget crises and 9.11.  Tech support for WebCT has been accomplished by hitting a moving target. That is to say that the providing the hardware to manage this huge user base has often been a step behind and the fact that it has held together pretty well under those circumstances is a tribute to our staff. The technical support for WebCT goes on behind the scenes and is quite good.  The user support (direct support to faculty) is extremely good.  Whenever I needed support, these folks would drop what they were doing and help. Also, I have seen these two or three staff members who support faculty teaching with WebCT spends hours with faculty helping them through questions. IMO, what is needed is more responsibility on the part of some U of A faculty members to look at how they are teaching [instructional design], and a willingness to revise their courses to better meet learner-centered instruction and appropriate use of the electronic tools at their disposal. WebCT is one tool, among many, that faculty might use."
 
4. What is your experience in working with the WebCT support staff?
The UA WebCT support staff (Barry and Gretchen) was reported to be very good and helpful.
 
5. When you first set up your course, did you find it easy to maneuver through WebCT?
Of the seven replies we received 4 gave a definite NO answer to this question.  The comments given ranged from clunky, not intuitive, very difficult and bad page layouts. Of the three remaining replies one was a simple, YES, another an okay and the final person stated that after "playing around a bit" it was pretty "easy". 
 
6. What in WebCT works best for you?  What is the biggest challenge?
What features would you like to see added?  What problems do you have with using WebCT?
For this set of questions we received six replies.  Four respondents found one positive aspect of WebCT and no two mentioned the same aspect. What works best: Chat, tools are all in one place, threaded discussions, homework and grading really are good.  Challenges: no "blackboard," no support for synchronous teaching methods, hidden functions, too difficult to learn, not user friendly, and inordinate amounts of clicks needed. The final respondent was general in their remarks stating, "Nothing works best or worst- I just cope with it."
 
7. Do your students report having trouble with WebCT?  If so list the most reported problem.
"Getting access" and uploading to the "presentation" space were the two main problems faculty said students reported having. Reading documents was the next problem reported and two of the faculty recorded that students seem to manage well but that some "grumbling" does occur.
 
8. Do you find it useful for SIRLS to have a WebCT GAT?
Five of the faculty questioned responded with positive feedback on this question.  They believe that a GAT is essential to online courses. One faculty member was not sure what a GAT is, but believing GAT to stand for Graduate Assistant for Technology also responded positively. The final faculty member had forgotten that there was a GAT and would like to be able to put a "face" to the position.
 
9. Have you ever used competing products of WebCT? If so what products? Rate in comparison to WebCT.
Blackboard and Desire2Learn are competing products that have been used by the faculty members we surveyed.  One professor explained, “I use Blackboard all of the time.  WebCT is more sophisticated and therefore more complicated.  Blackboard is more user friendly and it is easy to load files, the screen display is great, the whiteboad/chat is excellent for live online sessions and an archive is easily created.  The features of Blackboard are so much better and the clarity of each screen is superior to WebCT.” Desire2Learn was also seen as slightly better than WebCT.
 
10. Do you find WebCT helps you to be as effective a teacher online as you are in the classroom?
The overall response to this question is that online classes should not be the only classes the students take. One professor explains, “I do not find any substitute for having some in-person time with the instructor.  Both students and instructor benefit from sessions together.  That said, I have been teaching online for five years and have had some really super students in online classes.  I do know, however, that although online sounds so flexible and convenient, it takes as much if not more time than in-person classes.  From the instructor side, online is labor intensive, hard on the eyes, and more challenging to get to know students.  I enjoy the online sessions, but I do feel that students need to mix online classes with some in-person classes where they meet peers and instructors in a live interactive but not virtual session.”  However, some of the professors were quick to point out that technology should not be completely blamed for the challenges faced with online courses.  One professor says, “No, the tool does not make an effective teacher. What makes an effective teacher involves instructional design, communication, learning styles, and knowledge of the discipline. I like to look at the tools to see how they can further these elements. If the tool puts one in a structure that prohibits good design then it's not a good tool.”
 
11. Do you know how WebCT was chosen?
“I believe it was piloted right from the beta and was in use in the University before any other systems were designed and available. Subsequently the CCIT Faculty Instructional Computing group periodically evaluated all the systems on offer, and while most had strengths and weaknesses, they stuck with status quo. (What was important in the early days was the ability to integrate into the University student record system.) I think also several of the other packages (e.g. Blackboard) have been (and may even still be) used in the University. No one insists that everyone use WebCT.”
 
What Can Be Learned
The problems faculty experiences with using WebCT are significant, but are not insurmountable.  With these improvements WebCT could be made better: Also, currently U of A is not using the latest version of WebCT due to cost.  Upgrades could be added in the future.  With a combination of virtual courses and face-to-face courses the students enrolled in the University of Arizona’s Information Resources and Library Science degree program do get a good education.  WebCT allows many students to attend this program that otherwise would not be able to.  Each member in our group falls into this category.  We agree with many of the faculty that we surveyed that the virtual courses are effective as long as there is some face-to-face contact in the teaching environment, and that there needs to be caution in only blaming technology when a professor faces a challenge in presenting his/her class online.
 
What Would Come Next
If we were to continue with this research project we would extend our emailed surveys by asking the faculty members what, if anything, they did to determine their students’ needs in designing their course online.  We would also go deeper in trying to determine whether the design of their WebCT website difficulties was due to technology problems or if it was something else.  Finally, we would ask the professors to comment on how they dealt with the lack of subtle cues they could gain as feedback from students in a face-to-face classroom environment, but could not be perceived in their online courses.