I’m just about to start the second half of day three of my training and it’s been a very interesting experience thus far in which I’ve had several epiphanies.
First and foremost I’ve realised that my initial attempts at objective attendance were doomed to failure. As I’ve discussed previously, the fundamental philosophical objections I have for this mode of education have proven too severe to overcome. Frighteningly, I’m now more appalled by use of an LMS than I was before.
To be honest I’m quite concerned about this ephiphany. I’ve always sought to find the middle ground in conversations where disagreements exist; and traditionally I’ve always found at least a small foothold. In this case my only conclusion is I want no part of LMS’s; I feel they are not beneficial to learning, and I will instead actively seek to increase awareness of the alternatives.
Modeling alternatives has always been a focal point for me, but in the wake of this week’s ephiphanies it’s taking on an even greater sense of urgency.
The Backchannel’s on Fire
One unexpected, yet very positive outcome of all this has been the opportunity to engage in vibrant backchannel conversation spanning a number of different mediums. I already have a vibrant network of insightful international colleagues, and this enabled me to explore concepts that were not being covered by the formal portion of the session. Importantly, this included aspects of the tool and subject matter that I found profoundly concerning or frustrating.
The ability to discuss these concerns with trusted colleagues – regardless of their relative location – was incredibly value, especially considering I could externalise my thoughts as they emerged and were in the front of my mind.
The fact many of these conversations occurred during periods where the facilitator was covering Blackboard’s ability to restrict access to student conversations is perhaps the ultimate irony.
Gotta go, class is starting.
Its been great watching your tweets and joining in the discussions today-great fun!
I got a bit unpleasant for a while I admit, and I apologise for that and thank you for your friendly ear. It was very therapeutic!
Pingback: LMSs get the gas face at bavatuesdays
Wow. Your comments about the epiphany concerning you really resonate with me. I’ve been thinking a lot lately about how (and when, and why) to temper my strong opinions about these issues. Too often, I find myself in institutional conversations where I can’t speak really freely about my distaste for the LMS and most vendor-provided “solutions.” The problem is, distaste isn’t really a strong enough word. I don’t just *dislike* these tools. I worry that they are doing real, irreparable harm. But when I talk like that, I fear I start to sound so extreme that a lot of folks just tune me out.
Hi Martha, I can relate to your sentiments here. It’s one of the reasons I largely hold my tongue about things I really don’t like and instead try to refocus my attention on what I do.
For example, I try very hard to avoid bad-mouthing things. I think that people have a natural thresh hold for negativity and they will only listen to it for so long before they just discount you as a witch-burner. In that sense I feel bad about my abuse of BB on Twitter yesterday, it was fairly out of character (besides, it’s not just about them but LMS’ in general).
Yet it was also an honest account of the frustrations I was feeling at the time, and I think there is value in that – to a degree. I believe people appreciate the freshness of honesty and openness. In the case of criticism, I think the key is just to let it have it’s moment when needed and then move on to an emphasis on the solutions – e.g. I don’t like A, I prefer B instead.
Ultimately you can’t live in the criticism anyway, solutions are what drive us forward (and together).
Hi Mike – surely it’s not the system per se – but the people behind the system that is the problem. Control etc. does not some from the system itself. It comes from the people who use the system? Or have I missed the point?
Jenny
Hi Jenny, I think that’s true to a point. Ultimately though I think Learning Management Systems – and WebCT/BB in particular – have been designed with a particular pedagogy and social hierarchy in mind – one that largely perpetuates traditional classroom structures and dynamics, flow of information, and the relationships that are encouraged to develop. So I don’t necessarily consider LMSs to be neutral technologies.
Then again, blogs, wikis and other new media tools aren’t neutral technologies either. The medium is the message as they say.
Yet like most technologies, the manner in which they’re used and implemented will have a large impact on the opportunities they offer to instructors and students, and the environment and interactivity they help facilitate – only insomuch as the tech supports though. I think you would run into distinct technological constraints in running a fully open course in Blackboard.
I take your point to be that the underlying (or overarching) educational culture surrounding the technology is the primary influence – and I would definitely agree with that.
For good or for bad we continue to find ourselves in a landscape obsessed with outcomes and process – formalised curriculum, achievement of nominated attributes, aims and objectives, etc – rather than a more holistic ontology as explored by the individual.
It perhaps isn’t surprising, then, that the emphasis would be translated to a habit of trying to force students through content as chosen and interpreted by an instructor, rather than affording them opportunities for self-discovery and self-empowerment.
In this case the choice of an LMS as an online environment would result from an existing belief system – because it’s affordances are in line with standing objectives.
I suppose if all this is true then my gripe should be with the educational culture rather than the software that caters to it. This might suggest that a paradigm shift in the nature of the culture would be visible in the tools that are used to facilitate its interactivity.
That’s an interesting thought. I’ll ponder that a bit further
Thanks for the comment.