Evaluation Rubric and Report

Self-Reflection

For this assignment my group was tasked with comparing two or more learning management systems (LMS) using a rubric we created. For our context we chose a fictional high school in an urban area of British Columbia (BC), as high school teachers we felt comfortable in identifying the needs of an individual high school. After establishing our context, we collaborated on a list of 6 categories, 14 subcategories, and 25 criteria for our rubric.

When brainstorming our criteria, we began with the elements of the MIT CITE, IIM framework, but also added elements from the SECTIONS framework as BC has strict rules surround the privacy and security of student data (FIPPA), a consideration not included in the MIT CIT, IIM framework and by using them together, they complemented each other well (Bates, 2014; Osterweil, et al., 2015). We also borrowed the categories from the MIT CIT, IIM framework, with added numeric values to aid in ranking the LMSs under consideration.

We chose to compare 3 LMS platforms that members of the group were already familiar with Edsby, Google Classroom and Microsoft Teams.

I was surprized that Microsoft Teams, a designed for collaboration designed for a broad spectrum of industries, scored as closely as it did to Edsby, a LMS developed in concert with educators, on our rubric. Though many of the advantages that Teams had over Edsby, voice and video calling, chat features with other teachers at different sites, technical support, monitoring, etc., are to be expected of a platform with a corporation the size of Microsoft behind it. It wasn’t surprizing however that Edsby, a platform focused on education, scored higher in three categories we deemed vital components in an LMS: Interface, Integration and Educational Features. Even with no previous experience with Edsby, the user-friendly interface of Edsby was evident. The platform offers intuitive features, and the design was detailed yet easy to navigate, similar in nature to social media platforms that users are likely to be familiar with.

The integration potential of Edsby with other school systems is also impressive. Allowing for the taking and reporting of attendance, syncing marks and due dates with other student information systems. The integration can streamline daily administrative tasks reducing the number of programs that teachers need to operate. Though, the need to use other communications platforms to collaborate and communicate with other teachers, bot at the school and beyond is a significant shortcoming.

From a practical standpoint the selection of programs like an LMS will not be made at the teacher, or likely even the school, level in public K-12 education. Selections and acquisitions of this nature would need the approval, support and buying power of a school district to make them practical and realistic. Despite this, the process used in this evaluation can, and should, be transferred to the evaluation and selection of technologies and programs that teachers choose to use with their students.

References:

Bates, T. (2014). Choosing and using media in education: The SECTIONS model. In Teaching in digital age. https://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/part/9-pedagogical-differences-between-media/

Osterweil, S., Shah, P., Allen, S., Groff, J., & Sai Kodidala, P., & Schoenfeld, I. (2015). Summary report: A framework for evaluating appropriateness of educational technology use in global development programs. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts & The Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, India. https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/115340/Summary%20Report_A%20Framework%20for%20Evaluating%20Appropriateness%20of%20Educational%20Technology%20Use%20in%20Global%20Development%20Programs.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y