1. I have indeed noted pedagogical restrictiveness in my personal practice.  Starting approximately 4 years ago, Schoology had gained popularity among members of my PLN and I began to explore it.  I found it to have a similar feature set to Moodle, with plans for feature growth and development.  However, my school division mandated that all online teachers use Moodle as the only LMS to be used.  To that point I had accepted the limitations of Moodle as I had no other access to LMS and was not willing to pay a subscription fee for a system that I may not be allowed to use.  At this time, I decided to leave my division’s online school and focus my LMS use on my in-house students.
2. Learners’ experiences are affected by all of the features of the LMS.  From the layout of the site, to the ease of use, to the technical support pieces; everything experienced by the learner will have an impact on his or her learning.  In my use of Moodle, I would always have an “at-a-glance” calendar at the top of the site.  Students were easily able to see their due dates and schedule without having to drive deep into the site.  Since using Schoology, I have used the interactive assignment dropbox to both accept and give feedback on assignments.  Schoology allows me to use my iPad to annotate images and return them to the student instantaneously.  Research has shown that this speed of feedback is crucial to increasing student learning and engagement.
3. By standardization, there increases the capacity to solve problems and create solutions as every user will be familiar with the same system.  Problems that crop up with one user can be described to others without the learning curve of learning a new LMS.  Tech support personnel can become experts in a LMS rather than a jack-of-all-trades.  However, by using a standard LMS, instructor professionalism s jeopardized as many aspects of their online course will be prescriptive.  Keeping good teachers teaching online requires that they be comfortable with their LMS and also that the choice of LMS aligns closely with their personal and professional practices and beliefs about learning.
4. Spiro states that LMS “are about managing and control.” To an extent I agree with this statement.  In the current educational landscape, curriculum must be prescribed by some entity and managing that knowledge falls well within the parameters of a LMS.  However, I must disagree with his prediction that “the LMS as we know it will be dead in five years.”  There will always be a need to manage content and package it in manageable portions.  Even when considering MOOCs, there are a plethora of delivery platforms, but there will always be a need to manage and organizing the content.

I chose to analyze my school division’s gradebook software selection, eventually resulting in the selection of StudentAchive, through the ADDIE model.  My division employs approximately 350 teachers in 24 schools across an area of approximately 25000 square kilometres.  As such, we are a relatively small organization in terms of people but large in the area we must cover.

I believe that ADDIE fits our situation as a gradebook program is something that should not be changed on a regular basis, rather it should remain constant for a decade or more.  The perceived inflexibility of the ADDIE model (Bates, 2014) could actually be an advantage in this situation.

While I was not an active member of the committee that selected StudentAchieve, the committee kept all teachers informed about their progress.  The committee actively researched gradebook programs, with three receiving significant attention:  MapleWood, PowerSchool, and StudentAchieve.  The committee selected pilot teachers across the division to use one of the programs for a semester and report back.  I was on the MapleWood group.  After analysis, the committee originally found that none of the programs met our needs.  However, after contacting StudentAchieve the committee felt that they were willing to adapt their program to our needs.  StudentAchieve was, at the time, a relative unknown and my division was the first in the province to use them on a division-wide level.  Our tech team spent hours with the programmers changing design elements, interfaces, and numerous other aspects that I’m sure they felt were unnecessary to share with the rest of the teachers.

Our committee also had to develop new algorithms for calculating grades.  My division had committed to “outcomes-based reporting” and as such needed a gradebook that would not simply calculate the average.  Again, the programmers were able to design a system that gave us teachers choice over how we presented the final marks:  average (as usual), most recent mark, or most consistent mark.

Implementation occurred at the beginning of the 2011-2012 school year, with significant inservicing from division-level personnel and teachers on the piloting committee.  However, the evaluate phase of the ADDIE model never actually happened.  In my opinion, as the school division had spent a large sum of money on a program they intended to keep using it for the forseeable future.

Reflecting on this process really highlighted some of the weaknesses of the ADDIE model.  It is indeed a very slow model to act upon and make changes.  However, I do believe that we all use some aspects of ADDIE in our daily practice, but much less formally than in a situation such as I described.

References

Bates, T. (2014). Chapter 4: The ADDIE model; Chapter 8: Models for media selection. Teaching in a Digital Age. (onlinebook)

Hi group. My name is Jason Harbor and I hail from the thriving metropolis of Porcupine Plain, Saskatchewan. This is my 9th course in the MET program. For me, the end is in sight!

I teach math/science in grades 9-12 in a small (250 student) K-12 school in northeast Saskatchewan. Also, in the fall I will be taking on a new challenge, serving as guidance counselor for the school.

My professional interests include assessment (my principal and I have started a feedback-only grading method that we are pretty proud of!) and personally I have a passion for music. While in my undergraduate days I played bass professionally in the University of Regina Big Band but sadly haven’t played much since then.

The picture I’ve attached below is an actual stop sign in my town. Any Ukrainians in the crowd may understand the reference at the bottom, but it Ukrainian for stop.

I’m looking forward to learning with and from you this semester.

I chose to base my analysis based on the principles set out in Chickering & Ehrmann (1996).

I believe that these principles are not only good practice when using technology, but they are good practice in any context; educational or not.

1. Good Practice Encourages Contacts Between Students and Faculty

I could not agree more. Without solid lines of communication between myself and my students, we all would be lost. I am lucky to teach in a small school (250 students K-12) so it is not difficult to find time both in class and out of class to talk to my students. Complementary to this point is communication with parents/guardians.

To further these goals I use a tool called Remind (formerly called Remind101) to communicate with students and parents outside of class time.

2. Good Practice Develops Reciprocity and Cooperation Among Students

This practice is enhanced by my situation in a small school. My students all know each other and most have gone to school together since kindergarten. I encourage my students to talk about and exchange their work on formative assessments, leveraging the knowledge of the group instead of trying to learn individually. My students text and picture message each other, as well as sending out group Snapchats on a regular basis. (Personally, I have some large issues with Snapchat itself, but I am glad that some students have found a way to make it a positive tool.

3. Good Practice Uses Active Learning Techniques

This is one practice where I find my practice lacking. Teaching senior level math, I rarely give up the control to my students to direct their own learning. Most other math teachers would understand this reluctance. My role is shifting to now teaching some science courses, and I find myself able to “let go” and have my students construct their own knowledge.

4. Good Practice Gives Prompt Feedback

My principal and I have initiated a policy in which we will not place a number or letter grade on any summative assessment handed back to students. We will only provide detailed feedback, and post the number grade in our online gradebook only after the student has reviewed the feedback. We have found that our students are now more involved in the learning and are seeking out the feedback as validation rather than a mark. Anecdotally, I have found that my students are much more in the moment and less are willing to “cram” at the end of a unit.

5. Good Practice Emphasizes Time on Task

Again, I find my practice lacking in this area. While I have played with tools to flip my classroom and engage technology as a learning aid, I haven’t been able to get past those few students who will routinely misuse the technology.

6. Good Practice Communicates High Expectations

As I have begun shifting into teaching more science courses I am able to apply this practice more easily. Science lends itself to the “real-life problems, conflicting perspectives, and paradoxical data sets” referenced my Chickering & Ehrmann. I find it easier to motivate these students with the expectation that their work will be published in an online format and have found their work to be of better quality than if it were to be just handed in to me.

7. Good Practice Respects Diverse Talents and Ways of Learning

In my math classes, I routinely offer options of how to solve some problems, particularly those conducive to using a graphing calculator. Most graphing problems and many finance problems can be solved using a graphing calculator. Many of my students choose this option as they see it to be “easier”, because of their ways of knowing. Other students will prefer to use an algebraic method or to graph by hand, if necessary.

To be honest, I have never thought about formally assessing my technological proficiency so these criteria seem quite complete. As I think about this more my views on the criteria may change. As I have already stated, using technology to enhance active learning techniques and emphasizing time on task are deficient in my practice, so these are the digital-age skills that I would want to develop more fully.