The problem proposed to my group was a tricky one for a single rubric to encompass and really needs to be look at via a very pointed lens to be effective. Since the district wants all grade levels to conform the LMS needs to have many different modalities and “faces”, for example you would not want a grade 3 student to navigate a canvas like LMS. So the LMS requires a stripped down version of itself so it can be applied at all grade levels.
This problem was made more difficult due to teachers currently using a hodgepodge of learning technologies to support blended instruction, so the new standardized LMS required all these functions and must complete similar tasks in a better way.
So I proposed we use the SAMR method to evaluate the new LMS (added bonus is it is not as extensive as the other theoretical frameworks provided in the module readings this week). By using SAMR as the columns we are able to compare the new LMS to the current technologies being used by teachers (and compare to general in-class/blended instruction). It isn’t absolutely comprehensive or applicable to all aspects of the rubric, but it can be used as a guide in giving point values to potential technologies.
To make the rubric more comprehensive we organized the rows or evaluation items using the SECTIONS framework. This was due to the comprehensive nature of SECTIONS, but as teachers we were not overly aware of some of the more administrators / infrastructure based aspects of the framework (like costs). In the end I believe the combination of the two frameworks was an effective way of finding a potential LMS but obviously there would need to be a significant amount of research prior to even using a rubric of this nature.
