An open letter to FAU

Imagine, if you will, that you've signed up to take a cooking class with world renowned chef Emeril Lagasse. The class is advertised to be a hands on introduction to cooking with the best of the best. The cooking class is quite expensive ($1000 per person), however you're learning with a pro and will complete the class being able to cook like a world class chef. 

The first day of class arrives and as you enter the classroom you find one of Emeril's recipes sitting on the counter next to a pile of ingredients and a list of instructions. Also on the counter is note from Emeril, letting you know that he'll be available twice a week, online, to discuss any questions you may have. 

You are shocked to find that Emeril isn't attending the class. He's not teaching you how to cook,  he's simply leaving detailed instructions and making himself available for questions. Beyond that, he's not even sampling your culinary attempts. He's sending former students in to do that and provide you with their feedback.

The money you paid to take the cooking class is non refundable. So you're left with a choice - quit the class and take the $1000 loss, or, continue in the class and teach yourself (as best you can) how to cook like Emeril (or like his student grader in any case).

This was my experience with Vermont Rutherfoord's Discrete Mathematics class.

This was, without a doubt, one of the most poorly conducted college level courses I have ever taken. I paid FAU over $1000 to ultimately teach myself discrete mathematics and it is for this reason that I am considering transferring colleges. 

I expect more from a university such as FAU and I will not pay premium prices for mediocre teaching. 

Students considering this course should have been informed that it would be mainly self study. There should have been clear information from either FAU or the instructor indicating that no lectures would be conducted, no discussion boards would be permitted and general contact with other students in the class would be discouraged (as the instructor provided no way to get in contact with any other students either by way of discussion board, email or other similar options on blackboard).

When I realized that the class would be conducted without any organized instruction or lessons it was too late to drop without losing the fee for the course. As a working mother I cannot afford to simply flush away that kind of money. I inquired with the professor whether there were any lectures I could attend in person in order to better understand the material, however he informed me there were none and he was available during virtual office hours to answer any questions. 

I didn't have "questions". I had chapters of extremely challenging math work that needed proper explaining, preferably by someone being paid to teach the material. 

A few weeks after this initial email, I respectfully challenged the grading of a particular homework assignment that included mathematical proofs. The proofs, which I had spent hours working on, received 0 (ZERO) credit and the explanation for that grade was that the instructor (or so I thought) "did not understand my thought process". This particular email I sent, I also copied to the head of the mathematical department in hopes of generating at the very least a discussion about how the course was being handled. The response I received from Mr. Rutherfoord was that his grader didn't understand my work. I was astounded that not only was this class conducted without any instruction on his part, but the task of grading was also passed along to someone else.

Pardon my exasperation, but how is it that I am paying for this class?! What, precisely, am I paying for? 

Overall, what I hope is abundantly clear is that neither I, nor many of my fellow classmates, will tolerate this lazy approach to teaching. We are paying FAU a very fine price and expect the quality of the teaching to be reflected in that price. If courses like this are what we can expect in return for such tuition, you will find that very few of us will remain. 

The Good, The Bad, The Poorly Designed (Part V)

Best In Show

Brown University

By far, the most improved site among each and every one I looked at on webpagesthatsuck. In 2006, this University site was lambasted (and again, for good reason) for several reasons, however the most appropriately concise were:

1. Jeez! That's a lot of s**t-brown color on a page!

2. Damn! This has to be one huge-a** page. (881,650 bytes, it turns out)

3. Where's the blankety-blank focus?

The page was covered in diarrhea brown and nearly impossible to navigate. 

Fast forward a decade and several face lifts and you have today's version which is AWESOME! It's clean, it's well organized and it flows. Not only that, it's appealing. Appealing! This site took the feedback and criticism and did something about it. For this, I have awarded Brown University the title of Best In Show. 

Well earned, Brown!   

Brown University circa 2006

Brown University circa now

The Good, The Bad, The Poorly Designed (Part IV)

Then and Now

Superior Court of California - County of San Francisco (SCSF)

In 2005, webpagesthatsuck listed SCSF as one of the top 10 worst sites of the year and for good reason. Upon log in, you're nearly confidant that you'd accidentally clicked on a pop up ad and the site you're looking for must be in the window behind the ad. 

No. This pop up ad is indeed the site you're looking for. 

Nearly as disorganized as a preteen's Myspace page, you're immediately assaulted with a barrage of primary colors, mismatched fonts and a solid black background. The experience was almost like being screamed at in a foreign language - all you can do is stare at the person yelling and attempt to decipher the meaning of the words by their body language and gestures. 

Fast forward  a decade and ladies and gents, we've dropped that Myspace page and moved on to Facebook! As you log on to the page it's blissfully serene with respect to colors, fonts and outline. The content (while still slightly cluttered) is much more organized and there's a general flow to the page. 

SCSF circa 2005 

SCSF circa now

While not the cleanest site you'll find today, it certainly is leaps and bounds beyond what it had been. Well done, SCSF!

The Good, The Bad, The Poorly Designed (Part III)

Sit Down, You're Rocking The Boat

Yale School of Art

I wanted to move on to positive. I'd had it in my rough outline of tasks that part three of this series would be a website that had really turned it around.

and then I saw this.

In 2010, webpagesthatsuck listed Yale School of Art as a contender to the top 10 worst sites of the year. I thought, surely they cannot possibly mean Yale, the collegiate holy grounds for such well known (respective to their fields) alumni as Eli Whitney, Paul Newman and Meryl Streep (to name a few). There must be another site operating under the name Yale Art with no relation to the school and simply hoping for misguided searchers to stumble upon their site as they searched for Yale University.

I am horrified to share that this site, Yale School of Art, does in fact belong to Yale University. Upon further investigation I also found that five years on, they still just don't get it.

Why I Hate It:

The page does not stop moving. It is, in fact, nauseating. The background image jerks and jolts as the background letters are jostled about - intentionally, it would appear - while the foreground image trickles like oil over the top of those jolting letters. It's almost as though you're attempting to read a sign while sitting in a row boat, in the middle of the ocean during a hurricane. Now, imagine the letters on that sign are flashing on and off, but not all the letters flash on when they should. All you can think is "please, make it stop".

Next we move on to the layout of the content. On the left side we see a (nearly) alphabetized list of options ranging from about the site, admissions, gallery, everything else and home.  They are listed in a simple, generic format with zero pizazz. I mean honestly, with the ridiculous background they chose to go with, you'd think they could have spent two minutes organizing the layout for the remainder of the site and at the very least attempting to color coordinate the various text boxes. On top of that, everything is on the left side of the page. On inspection, I expect this was deliberate so that the user could enjoy the background image (after the seizures died down).

All in all, it's unacceptable to me that a university (YALE UNIVERSITY!) would allow this type of poorly designed mess to be representing them as a school. Hopefully the notice that appears at the top of the page indicating they are currently seeking a new Dean means that change is coming.

Get it together, Yale.

The Good, The Bad, The Poorly Designed (Part II)

Clean Up, Aisle 3

5safepoints


In a close second behind The Visual Arts League is a site that, after having made the list of top 10 worst sites of 2008 (presented by webpagesthatsuck), made a few (literally a few) changes in an effort to spruce up their appearance.

Sadly, it was not time well spent.

Why I Hate It:

So.Much.Clutter.
My eyes water as I try to focus on everything happening on this page while simultaneously attempting to ignore the floating banner. There's no organization and no (apparent) logic behind the layout - just complete and utter chaos. Imagine walking in to the grocery store and instead of clearly labeled aisles and an organized layout of products, the merchandise is lying in a heap in the middle of the floor while some yahoo runs up and down the store with a banner yelling "We're Number 1!". Which brings me to my next point -

I hate that floating banner.
Announcing 10 years of excellence in service, over and over. Clearly unable to boast about excellence in organization or overall ability as web developers, this slogan seems to be the best they could run with. And run it does. Looping across the screen to the point of becoming nearly the most irritating thing on the page. Nearly - but not quite.

The award for most irritating thing on the page is overuse of bold font. Everywhere you look, it's bold and in some cases all caps (you know, in case the bold font isn't sufficiently irritating). Bold font should be used sparingly, a "check out our weekly special" type of use. Not on every label of every product.

In the same way that I choose to pay more by visiting Publix instead of Walmart, I would choose a competitors site in order to avoid using this site. While I will, without a doubt, pay more at Publix, I walk in knowing that I can find exactly what I'm looking for without hunting or requiring the assistance of an employee to help me, and walk out with my sanity still intact.

The Good, The Bad, The Poorly Designed (Part I)

The Best of The Worst

The Visual Arts League

Ten years ago - yes, a decade - The Visual Arts League was listed as one of the worst websites on webpagesthatsuck. Interestingly, and as the moderator notes, The Visual Arts League site is dedicated to VISUAL ART. One would understandably expect that such a site would be, well, visually artistic. So far removed from anything artistic, this site sets the bar for best worst art sites.

Why I Hate It:

Let's begin with the (slightly creepy) photos of two women submerged in a body of water, with only their heads above water and staring coquettishly at you as though you've dropped in on them unexpectedly. Not the first thing I expect to see when logging on to a Visual Art site. Personally, I'd prefer they save the vacation photos for family and friends who are obligated either by relationship or moral niceties to smile through the vacation slideshow as they regale you with tales of skinny dipping in Mexico.

Next, the feeling of claustrophobia. As soon as you're able to concretely focus on something (besides the bathing beauties)  you notice that, while not necessarily hoarder worthy, the content of the site is poorly organized and leaves the distinct impression that you're standing in the cluttered living room of a grandmother who spends her weekends at the local yard sales and proudly displays each and every purchase throughout her home. Time for a POD and a storage unit, let's clean this place up!

Finally, the dated information. Some items cited on the main page are nearly a decade old leaving one to wonder whether the site is truly active. In fact, after several dead links, I thought perhaps the site creator/designer had given up years ago and the domain name was simply still active. This, unfortunately, is not the case. With a last update date of June 6 2015, I am grieved to say this site is still actively maintained.

After some research I found that the site owner, Mrs. Judy Wray, is nearing her 70th birthday which signals to me that perhaps she is not the mastermind behind this cringe worthy site (though she certainly could be). For my fellow "seeing is believing" skeptics, I have listed the screen shot from the 2005 site along with today's version to prove that yes, it really is that bad. 

2005 Site: Visual Arts League circa 2005

2015 Site:  Visual Arts League circa 2015

This Isn't Starbucks

Once upon a time, this blog likely would have evolved at a Starbucks. On the left side of my laptop would sit six shots over ice in a venti cup with a splash of cream. In my ears would rest headphones, quietly streaming whatever background noise I was in the mood for. In front of me a cast of strangers, some aware of my glance, others oblivious to the world around them, would become the catalysts for whatever musings I decided to articulate. 

Today, my kitchen is Starbucks. Spotify is streaming the mood music and I am distracted by my five month old who, unlike the Starbucks strangers, is all too aware of my gaze. Attempting by way of smiles, laughs and gabbles to express how very amazed she is by the world around her, she is alight with energy.  My husband, who has dressed said baby in what I can only describe as a "Picassoesque" outfit for the day, is attempting to wrangle her attention and redirect mine so that I may complete this blog. 

Speaking with my husband about how very quickly she has grown and evolved (deflecting his insistence that I put my headphones in and get back to work on my homework), I find myself wondering - have the sites listed on webpagesthatsuck evolved? Have they grown past their (hideous) adolescent stages? Did they take the feedback (assuming they were aware they'd been listed on the site and taken the time to read the critiques) and use it to grow and improve? I decided to investigate and humbly present the following five part blog series: The Good, The Bad, The Poorly Designed.