Advantages and Dangers?

What are some of the advantages and dangers of the process of standardization of knowledge and instructional practices?

A very interesting and engaging topic this week as today I was at a workshop to discuss the implementation of the new my education BC moodle platform for teacher, administrators, and clerical staff which will come into effect in our district in September.  Some of the workshop goals were to:

1. introduce the moodle platform of LMS to teachers from all schools in the district
2. develop a ‘working sense’ of how this will look in the classroom
3. take us through in a matter of an hour and a half the logistics behind what teachers are now going to become responsible for within the classroom and describe the affordances that this moodle will bring to teachers.

As such, this is what I learned today, some of which appears on the surface to be positive and advantageous, and some of which appears on the surface to dangerous and more streamlined into the standardization of instructional practices.

First to the advantageous:

1. educators will now have access to student reports (both formative and summative assessments) that date back to the student entering the public school system.
2. educators will have access to student information including Individualized Education Plans (IEPs), and any notes that former teachers leave that are advantageous to developing differentiated learning plans for students to best meet their engagement and learning needs.
3. the process is streamlined in that reporting periods are becoming more concise and to the point in elementary schools (which is great in that reports, at least in our district consume on average 30 – 40 hours per reporting period), time in which we can be planning and developing authentic learning opportunities.

Now to the challenge that not only did I see, but heard repeatedly from the coordinators who were administering the workshop:

1. all of your ideas are great (as they spoke to the teachers), but we take our orders in terms of what is displayed within the moodle, along with the abilities to access information which is restricted from the top down.

I formulate this as a challenge as I read Hamish, Coates, et al (2005) as they describe the LMS and the complex creation of collaborative opportunities from administrators and teachers.  They further press this point as they suggest that ¨such collaborations are more open to various forms of monitoring, inspection, and control¨ (p.30).  What I find interesting within this regard is that this appears on the surface to be a very real challenge to the autonomy that teachers relish from a managerial standpoint.  I am curious to see if this will be a starting point for further challenges to teacher autonomy with regards to knowledge and instructional practice.  As suggested by Hamish, Coates, et al (2005), ¨through making the internet a more seductive and accessible tool for teaching, LMS may also be homogenising the creation, style, and ownership of pedagogical knowledge¨ (p. 32).  Are educators really going to be accepting of their individual ownership to pedagogical knowledge being shared in an open, online manner?

Would your conclusion be different from what Spiro gets from his observations? Give examples to support your judgment.

Spiro’s argument is that the LMS systems that encompass corporate Learning Management Systems will be dead in five years if there is no adaptation and modification.  In the world of corporate America this may be true, however, in the world of academia, one might argue that the five suggested changes to classroom pedagogy with the implementations of technology are creating Inquiry based learners.  For instance, my classroom is an environment which promotes self directed learning through the IBL model.  Student engagement is at an all time high as we are seeing learners take control of their learning and working in collaboration with myself to generate opportunities to learn around what interests them (they in many ways become their own guide).  Our timelines for learning are very open and flexible, and collaborative and constructivist communities of practice are appearing throughout the room on a regular basis.  Finally, one of the comments directed my way most often by my students is the fact that they can now take their learning with them anywhere and anytime, which enables them to work at a pace conducive with their learning style.