week 2. addie vs. agile: evaluations of the d2L LMS.
Choose an organization, which you are familiar with, and evaluate educational technology using the ADDIE model and the “Agile Design” model outlined by Bates’ (2014):
How informative these models are for determining whether your organization implements educational technologies in the most effective way?
I chose my organization’s long-standing adoption of the Desire2Learn (Brightspace) platform, as “mandated” by Ontario’s Ministry of Education, in that the Ministry had signed a multiyear contract with Desire2Learn (based in Kitchener, Ontario) to provide an LMS to school boards as part of the provincial e-learning strategy. Based on the ADDIE evaluation model, here is where Desire2Learn stands:
Analyse: Beneath the “Preparation” umbrella lies “strategy and leadership”. Desire2Learn has effectively secured a huge contract with Ontario’s Ministry of Education, and therefore all schools in Ontario have access to this LMS. Their rollout strategy has been effective, although of course there are some design “issues” with the actual LMS that affects the number of teachers that actually use it on a regular basis. I go into this in a bit more detail later in the paragraph. IT and people support: In my school board, since it is “Ministry-run”, and each school board employs an “e-learning contact” (this moniker has recently changed, I believe), IT support is minimal, and typically falls under the eLC’s duties. While the LMS is customizable, often many of the “plug-ins” are difficult for a teacher who doesn’t have much experience, and so one of a few things happen: the teacher doesn’t have time and puts it on hold, he/she could ask the eLC for assistance but depending on how busy the eLC is, it may be a while before assistance is given, etc.
Design: Desire2Learn has a software repository consisting of OSAPAC software the Ministry has procured and offers licenses to all school boards in Ontario. There are also ready-made course packages that eLC’s share between school boards and distribute amongst themselves for teachers to use. The platform is customizable with basic themes, fonts and layouts, and is fairly linear in nature (courses are separated into modules). There is a Learning Repository where teachers can curate and publish learning materials, and then have them conveniently in one place.
Develop: I wrote about licensing and accessibility in the previous two categories, in that course modules are freely shared between e-learning contacts at various school boards. There is a well-established and open community where sharing is valued.
Implement: Desire2Learn provides a great deal of learning tools for students and organizational tools for teachers. Some may argue that it is actually “over-engineered”, since most teachers may not even touch the majority of the features. The d2L has quiz, survey and other assessment tools built in, and is integrated with a “dropbox” where students virtually turn in their work. Since it supports both synchronous and asynchronous communication, students can work at their pace and the LMS and teacher/facilitator is there at the individual student’s point of learning to lend support where they are. There are also blogging tools and Discussion forums, as well as a News Feed, that lends well to the idea of students learning from each other in a cooperative, constructivist environment.
Evaluate: d2L provides teachers with a Grader app where they can evaluate student work, and export it from the app into our reporting software. This helps to show student progress over time (along with students’ interactions with others as well as the teacher on Discussion forums and other communication platforms within the LMS).
In Bates’ AGILE model article, he talks about teachers and students needing to be able to respond to an ever-evolving world. There will always be new information, new methodologies, new philosophies – so we must therefore prepare students, not in the mastering of content, but rather the mastery of transferrable skills that are vital in the real world (such as: flexibility, networking, information retrieval and analysis). So, VLE’s need to mimic and reflect this need.
One of the key ideas in the Agile model is that “although there may be a short preparation time before the course starts, most of the decisions about what will go into the course, what tools will be used, what activities learners will do, and sometimes even how students will be assessed, are decided as the course progresses.” LMS’ like Moodle and Google Classroom (although I know that Classroom is not actually an LMS….yet) are open-source environments, and both have online communities that are invested in providing feedback to the organizations, whereby the organizations actually take the feedback and apply changes to the LMS – making it about the learners. The developers are often users themselves, so they have a vested interest. d2L also has an Updates page where feedback is taken into consideration (through meetings, both formal and informal, of eLC’s who take teachers’ concerns into account, and Ministry representatives). For example, in May, d2L provided an update where it can now be integrated with Google Drive, so school boards that have adopted Google Apps for Education (GAFE) can now use both to turn in assignments. This, to me, provides evidence of another key idea in the Agile model: Content, Learner Activities, Tools used and assessment vary, according to the changing environment. If d2L provides a possibility of a deep integration with GAFE (single sign-on), this will open up new possibilities beyond the confines of the LMS. GAFE is used by over 40 million people in education, so this would be a desirable move, especially considering GAFE’s inherent collaborative platform.
In terms of Open and Experiential Learning, it is of my opinion that d2L is not there – or at least the way it’s being used in the majority of classrooms is not there – it is rather closed, possibly due to student privacy concerns as it is a Ministry-funded endeavour. Depending on Admin permissions, you can do things like embed a Twitter feed inside your LMS.
- Which of these two instructional design models better fit your instructional preferences?
Agile models: Adamson (2012) states: The linear process of cause and effect becomes increasingly irrelevant, and it is necessary for knowledge workers to begin thinking in new ways and exploring new solutions.
Linear learning is not a natural way of learning, and the Agile model desires to address this concern. Non-linear learning is learning through exploration and exposure to new and relevant learning experiences, and I believe this tends to inform my instructional practises much more than a linear approach. I believe in inquiry-based learning, and connecting students to the world around them (for example, by virtual field trips), and this type of rich learning blossoms in a more agile environment, rather than a formulaic, structured platform. If an LMS is too linear in nature, or if a teacher does not put as much thought and/or effort into the delivery of the content, then the LMS is simply an organizational tool for the teacher, and really does little for the student. LMS’ are built on the social constructivist pedagogy, which means that it *should* be learner-oriented.