Modified SNOW method results

Fall 2001
Spring 2001

Fall 2001

Spring 2001

Overall, LMSs have improved accessibility in the last two years based on scores from the modified SNOW method. Total accessibility scores for WebCT increased over eight-fold while Blackboard increased more than five-fold. Unfortunately, the most recent version of Blackboard slipped slightly, as indicated by the lower score for Blackboard 5 than for Blackboard 4. The Access Support Functionality Ratios also significantly increased across the board, indicating that the programs allow for additional accessibility.

Table I: Modified SNOW Method results

Statistic	Blackboard 4	Prometheus	Blackboard 5	WebCT	Max value
Total Accessibility	576	537	526	561	1976
Total Access Support	488	476	456	468	1284
Total Functionality	452	444	432	464	608
Access Support Functionality Ratio	1.097	1.061	1.060	1.022	2.144
Access Support Functionality Ratio unmodified	1.120	1.042	1.061	1.035	2.183 [23]

Blackboard 4 is clearly on top of these ratings; it has both the highest Total Accessibility as well as the highest Access Support Functionality Ratio. Blackboard 5 has the lowest Total Accessibility, while WebCT has the lowest Ratio. WebCT would have also had the lowest Total Accessibility, except for the 45 points it received for the inclusion of accessibility information in the help site. No other program included such information. However, while the information provided was relevant to accessibility, WebCT violated some of the listed guidelines.

One of the features touted of WebCT is its wide base of tools and user control. This open programmability allows WebCT users to build stand-alone pages with common LMS functionality. That is, most of the instructor-entered information must be contained in web pages created outside of the program. The other LMSs evaluated give instructors a strict structure, forcing them to accept many settings common to all courses within the program. In these programs, most instructors enter their content through fill-in forms. The added flexibility of WebCT works to decrease the accessibility of the package. For example, points were lost because the program allows users to set low contrast colors for text and background. Other LMSs do not allow users to set these colors.

WebCT also lost points for its creation interface. Because it does not run its users through a set path, it misses opportunities to prompt those creating pages to add accessible elements. In other LMS packages, for example, when a user attempts to add an image to a page, the package prompts users to add an alt tag in the following screen. WebCT does not step users through this series, and so does not "know" to prompt the user to add an alt tag.