Another week, another post diving into the world of online learning. This week's adventure takes us into the heart of online learning, specifically looking at learning management systems (LMSs) and the impact they have on people's lives. To really get to the heart of this topic, it's important to understand two basic truths about LMSs. Firstly, not all LMSs are created equal (and don't let anyone tell you otherwise). Secondly, the LMS does not make the teacher. I will repeat it again: the LMS does not make the teacher. Any LMS an educator chooses to use in their classroom is only as good as the teacher who utilizes it. This doesn't mean that teachers who cannot "utilize" an LMS with any amount of success are bad teachers. It simply means that a good LMS will do nothing for a teacher, good or bad, if it is not a best-fit.
This thought deserves a look at the ISTE Standards for Educators since these standards can often be the driving force in online education decisions. When looking at the intention behind LMSs, there is a lot of support for the use of them to be found in the ISTE Standards. From the Learner Standards, rigorous LMS research to determine which LMS is the best fit for each individual educator ties in nicely with ISTE Standard 1c. This standard asks that educators stay current with research to determine what will improve student outcomes. As there has been extensive research on LMSs and student outcomes, it is important for educators to understand just how impactful LMSs are to their learning outcomes (spoiler- teachers themselves have the most impact, and LMSs are simply extensions of good teaching).
Another area of support for LMSs in terms of the ISTE Standards comes from the Leader Standard. In ISTE Standard 2c, ISTE pushes for teachers to model new technologies for their colleagues with the goal of implementation at a grade, school, or district level. One topic of conversation that we have continually circled back around to this week is the idea that just because a district is currently using an LMS does not mean it is the LMS that all district teachers should be using. Dr. Deschryver made note several times this week via Zoom, email, and his introductory video that after our LMS analysis, we need to be the advocates for change in our district if we find a better fit LMS. It is no longer enough to sit by and allow others to make these decisions for us as teachers. Through research, analysis, and modeling (Standard 2c), informed educators can present a sound argument to administrators as to why change needs to occur.
Additionally, it is imperative that educators view LMSs through the lens of the Designer and Facilitator Standards. Standard 5C focuses on digital learning environments that engage learners in their learnings. A good LMS will engage students in their learning while supporting areas such as ease of use and functionality. If an LMS is too confusing for students to use or is poorly designed, it does not support student learning in the way it should in order to reach successful outcomes for both student and educator. Alongside this is Standard 6a, which places emphasis on student ownership of goals both individually and in groups. Again, this ties into the idea that if an LMS is not a good fit for the grade or content level it is being used at, students will not have the opportunity to take ownership of their learning. This is especially true of certain LMSs (such as Google Classroom) that do not even provide students with the opportunity to engage in group work.
Although ISTE Standards for Educators seem to support the use of a best-fit LMS in your online learning, two key areas where disconnect occurs are ISTE Citizen Standards 3C and 3D, which are tied to the idea of modeling student privacy and ethical use of personal data. In the research I did this week, I was shocked to see how unaligned many LMSs are with this idea. Many LMSs require some personal data to be dumped into their database for learning purposes, but that data does not always stay private.
Furthermore, with adding students to an LMS (without their consent most of the time), teachers are not modeling practices in student privacy as they should be according to the ISTE Standards. When I thought about this in terms of my middle school classes, I realized that many of students are under the age of 13, which means that they couldn't even sign up for their own Disney profile without their parent's consent (and yet here we are, as teachers, signing students up for all sorts of things). Very few LMSs make the teachers sign a consent form and verify their account before allowing teachers to add students (Schoology is one of them), and this just doesn't add up when we are teaching our students about safety online in terms of data, rights, and digital identity.
It really boils down to this- based on the evidence and research I have done on LMSs this week, and their ties with the ISTE Standards, I believe that an LMS can be the right tool for most classrooms as we move forward in the fall if educators take into consideration what the ISTE Standards ask of educators and how the wrong LMS can backfire if not properly vetted for their individual circumstances. Since the ISTE Standards leave a lot of wiggle room in terms of design, facilitation, learning, and leadership, a good LMS could easily fit into the goals and standards set forth by ISTE for Educators. The best thing educators can do as they move forward in setting up an online community or LMS is to keep in mind the goals ISTE is trying to achieve for educators. Then, educators need to take those goals and align them with their own unique circumstances (grade level, content, demographics,) and ask, "Does this online learning help me achieve that goal?" If the answer is no, move on.
Commentaires