Since writing my Flight Path at the beginning of this course, I am reflecting on what I’ve learned, as well as my experience thus far. I would define myself as a life-long learner, someone who voluntary pursues knowledge and is extremely self-motivated. As I finish this course I consider where I am headed and how the course projects will impact my pedagogy. I strongly believe that technology can improve education and provide meaningful learning opportunities that are engaging and motivating, while preparing students for a technology-driven world. I believe technology supports critical, creative, and computational thinking. The goals I set for myself when I first wrote my Flight Path included developing computational thinking skills, design thinking skills, discovering new ways to integrate digital technology and platforms for instruction, and reflect weekly on the research and ideas. I feel that I have gained knowledge in course development, however I feel I still have much to learn and experience when working with a LMS, specifically Moodle. My Flight Path goals took a new direction once I began designing the course shell. My focus changed to how I could successfully design the course shell with students at the centre of my decisions, how I could implement HTML, and make the online learning community meaningful to its users.

In my experience with working through the course projects I learned how to successfully develop and run an online course through Moodle. The skills I gained through this course include stronger online communication skills as I worked at communicating ideas through weekly text outlines, incorporated multimedia resources, and learned how to use online assessment tools. What I found challenging was learning an entire new platform. I have never worked with a learning management system until my graduate degree. At the beginning of the semester I felt overwhelmed, unprepared, and lost. I found that working with colleagues on the assignments supported me and helped me view the course design from different perspectives. Another instructional design skill I gained was incorporating HTML. I had visions for my course that I wasn’t able to implement due to the limitations of Moodle. It took a lot of additional time to learn why and how I could incorporate code to match my vision. I feel that ETEC 565A challenged me in my thinking and in my abilities. There was a lot to cover in 12 short weeks, and I feel that with more time, I could have created a stronger LMS. I worked on this project with a partner, and I consistently wondered how students doing this project individually managed. I felt that it was integral to my learning that I worked with a partner. I felt that we supported each other in our learning, and challenged each other to find alternative ways to meet our designs and push through any roadblocks. This course challenged my thinking from a pedagogical viewpoint, as well as from a student viewpoint. I needed to consider the needs of both the instructor and the students, and if both were being met through our LMS design. I feel that if I was able to properly test this course with students, I would be able to get feedback on what was successful, what was challenging, and what didn’t work.

While revisiting my notes about working with different LMS, platforms, and digital communication and assessment tools in this course, I am reminded why I decided to work with Moodle. I have had many colleagues interact with Moodle both as students and instructors. I am working with WordPress for my eFolio, using FreshGrade as an ePortfolio with my students, and I have worked with Edge edX in the past. I decided to choose Moodle because I wanted to learn something new and see if this would be something I could transfer into my practice. There are many reasons why Moodle was chosen as our final platform, as you can read in our Platform Evaluation. We followed the principles of Bates and Poole’s SECTIONS (2003) model which puts our students at the center of decision making. I am unsure if I agree with the “Ease of use” (Bates, 2003) as I found Moodle to be challenging to navigate as an instructor.

Throughout the instructional design projects, I found the communication and discussions between my colleagues to be the most informative and helpful. The forum for posing questions and sharing resources was beneficial as I navigated through the design of the course shell. Many students had insightful tips to share. Throughout the activities, we worked solely with one LMS. I wish I had the opportunity to try different platforms prior to officially choosing Moodle, as I hadn’t registered for the others. I found it difficult to evaluate different platforms with little to no experience with them. We were relying on what the websites stated and on user reviews. I found the instructional design projects helpful, once I had a better understanding of the platform itself. We chose to design a blended course because our activities were hands-on, occurring in the classroom. Our Moodle did not house any specific activities, but rather provided the resources, multimedia, and outlines for each week. In the future, I would like the opportunity to design activities that are only accessible online, such as the WISE projects, where students take ownership over their learning through online inquiry (Linn, Clark, and Slotta, 2003). Overall, I found this course to be a journey with many stops and turns along the way. I learned a lot, I challenged myself, and I leave with many new tools and resources to implement into my practice.

Resources:

Bates, T., Poole, G. (2003). Effective teaching with technology in higher education: Foundations for success (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Linn, M. C., Clark, D., & Slotta, J. D. (2003). WISE design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87(4), 517-538. Doi:10.1002/sce.10086