I have written versions of this reflection. So, to help me focus my reflection, it would be on two main areas: the rationale of the choices and decisions made for the assignment, and reflection on the assignment as a learner for me.
Reflection on the rationale of the choices and decisions made
I won’t repeat what’s already in our group assignment, a few highlights:
Using the Tony Bates’ SECTION model (2014) as the base framework to consider and select criteria for each category was an obvious choice. Che took the lead on that and it was quickly agreed as a group. Then it was the matter of going through different resources and literature, picking out items that meet our requirements. For me, the EDUCAUSE review article by Wright et al. (2014) was quite a useful resource for selecting the criteria.
Then I found myself being tempted to add more things into the rubric, so it is more comprehensive. At the same time, we don’t want it to be too long and complicated to work with, then that is impractical. I’m glad that our group agreed to keep things simple so that helped to guide the development of our final rubric.
On top of the requirements from the scenario, it was important to also anticipate the needs for normal use of an LMS, as well as for future use. After all, that is in the university’s best interest to ensure the LMS is future proof. Because, hosting multiple LMSs for different requirements is not a desirable position to be in.
Switching LMS is a costly business, in terms of time, money and resources! I reflect back to when the University of Auckland implemented Canvas, a huge amount of resources was provided. For 9 months, a full time equivalent position is placed in each of our eight major faculties, for training and support of the transition into Canvas. There was also the project team and the IT team supporting us through the process; plus 24/7 user support from the vendor!
Reflection on the assignment as a learner
I have learned a lot from working on this assignment, about the task itself, about working as a group and about myself.
I have more appreciation of those people who came up with the evaluation rubric for our own selection of LMS for the University of Auckland. It’s not a simple task and it is never “perfect”.
I really appreciate our group being super organized! We started the assignment very quickly and everyone works on their allocated tasks promptly. So, our group part was done days before the deadline! It is also one of the chattiest group I have been with so far in my 3 courses. So, I got to know a bit more about my group members, which is nice.
What I have learned about myself is that, throughout the process, I keep feeling like I might have missed something important. Thankfully, it is a group assignment, many pairs of eyes had gone through the list of criteria. I also had to remind myself, there is no “perfect” rubric, so we can only do the best we can. Then I remember Natasha’s feedback on my flight path about finding balance between trial and perfection, on my technology goals. Often, that is what we have to work with, what is good for our situation, is a good start. Likewise, for an LMS selection rubric, a good rubric is a good starting point. In our experience at the University of Auckland, aside from lots of scoring and sandpit testing, it came down to lots of conversations and negotiation.
Overall, it was an interesting experience doing this assignment. For better or worse, it had probably made me think way too much than I perhaps should have!
Reference:
Bates, T., (2014) Choosing and using media in education: The SECTIONS model. In Teaching in digital age. Retrieved from https://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/part/9-pedagogical-differences-between-media/
Wright, C., Lopes, V., Montgomerie, T. C., Reju, S., & Schmoller, S. (2014, April 21). Selecting a Learning Management System: Advice from an Academic Perspective. Retrieved January 21, 2018, from https://er.educause.edu/articles/2014/4/selecting-a-learning-management-system-advice-from-an-academic-perspective