Serendipity35

"The gleaming devices that surround us are intrinsically different from designed objects of the past. They simply don't work all the time, nor do we expect them to. We're obsessed with the potential of our gadgets, yet we constantly bump into this kind of turbulence. Bottom line: Technology is outpacing our ability to use it. And it's the job of designers to restore balance to this equation.

Technological advances have always been driven more by a mind-set of "I can" than "I should," and never more so than today. Technologists love to cram maximum functionality into their products. That's "I can" thinking, which is driven by peer competition and market forces. (It's easier to sell a device with ten features than one.) But this approach ignores the far more important question of how the consumer will actually use the device"

John Maeda, President, Rhode Island School of Design, from Esquire

The past month I have seen more demos for products and upgrades to products that have added more and more features. Unfortunately, most of the time I don't find the features that useful. Still, there is a general "what the heck, they come with it anyway" feeling about a lot of this.

We selected a new e-portfolio product this fall semester to pilot because it was slim and clean and because we could turn off all the features and administration that we didn't want students to see, use, or be confused by in building their portfolios. Well, they are launching a new version that is all glassy with rounded corners and with Ajax-powered drag and drop customization - and a whole bunch of new features. We can hang onto our "old" version through the spring, but it's all new after that.

Sometimes I hear a vendor describe a new product or feature and think, "That's a solution to a problem we don't have."

It's like when your course management system has a major change - say version 7 to version 8. To the IT staff it means a few days of testing and then they flip the switch. But to the instructional technology staff and those who support the users (faculty & students), it means creating new training materials, and many hours of workshops and 1:1 tutoring on how to use the new version. The It staff (that's those of us who feel Instruction outweighs technology) also gets the brunt of the complaints from users who don't like the new version.

So what are you proposing, Ken? No more upgrades? No new features?

I'm not quite that conservative, but I go back to the Maeda quote above: It is easier to sell something "with ten features than one" but it is also more important to look at how the user will actually use that product. My bottom line: Educational technology is outpacing our ability to use it well, and it just might be the job of educators to restore some balance to this equation.