One other factor is that in a 1:1 computers are used differently than in an online or blended class. Bjorn Behrendt http://www.EdLiaten.com/ http://www.AskBj.net/ http://www.VTed.org/ On Dec 8, 2012 8:42 PM, "Eric Hall" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > This is definitely not a "choose your own adventure" situation. In terms > of support and consistency it certainly makes sense for those using LMS to > use the same one! What I question is whether it is necessary for everyone > within a learning community to do so. "Systems" do not fit everyone's needs > and style, and I see many people who prefer more flexibility (and less > clutter) and are thus using the Google suite instead. My hope is that we > can set an expectation for "online classrooms" that gives teachers some > choice and flexibility without limiting options or widening them so far > that support is difficult. > > Ultimately I think the tension we are experiencing is not the LMS that was > chosen, but rather the growing pains of folks who are new to "working > digitally" with their students. Making the jump from no online presence to > an LMS is a substantial shift, and the expectation that assignments will be > delivered and (in most cases) collected electronically can take some time > to adjust to. I suspect we would be hearing the same feedback regardless of > which LMS was chosen, and I believe Edu 2.0 was chosen by early-adopters as > an "easier system" than the existing Moodle environment. One reason the > decision is now being revisited is that the context is now an entire 1:1 > community and not just a handful of folks who may be using it. > > > *Eric Hall* > *Technology Integration Specialist* > *Mount Mansfield Union High School* > *Chittenden East SU* > > > > On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Charlie MacFadyen <[log in to unmask]>wrote: > >> Hi Eric, >> I understand what you're saying about using a variety of tools generally, >> but the very point of a learning management system is that it's a...well, >> system. Isn't that why you were asking the question to begin with? Or are >> you thinking that each teacher and class would work with whichever LMS >> suits them best? I don't mean that sarcastically-- I'm really curious >> whether people feel that this works. >> Thanks. >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Dec 7, 2012, at 3:56 PM, Eric Hall <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >> Charlie - >> >> In terms of different level of use, using the same tool in different ways >> or using multiple tools I would argue that it may be a challenge and even >> (initially) inconvenient for students but perhaps ultimately a more >> valuable learning experience. I think of the challenge that many adults >> have moving from Microsoft Office to LibreOffice or Google Docs: If kids >> only experience "one way" and/or a limited number of tools, will they be >> developing the sort of technological fluidity we want them to have in a >> fast-changing landscape? Tools WILL change, so we should be teaching them >> how to adapt and learn new tools efficiently vs. tailoring to the negative >> feedback. I believe this is even reflected in the NETS somewhere... >> >> Until recently I always thought that it was the adults who had more >> difficulty with change for a variety of reasons, and that kids were pretty >> flexible. It has been interesting to encounter a similar resistance to >> change and inflexibility on the part of many older students! I have told >> some that they are much to young to sound like stick-in-the-mud adults... >> >> >> *Eric Hall* >> *Technology Integration Specialist* >> *Mount Mansfield Union High School* >> *Chittenden East SU* >> >> >> >> On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Charles MacFadyen <[log in to unmask]>wrote: >> >>> The tension that I see arising within LMS use is between the convenience >>> of the "one-stop shop" and the flexibility of using the best tool for each >>> particular function. We use Moodle at CVU (I'll fill out the form soon), >>> and one complaint students have is that some teachers use it regularly and >>> others don't. It seems sometimes that they would prefer either * >>> everyone* or *no one* to use the LMS, but not something in between! >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Eric Hall <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >>> >>>> Matt - >>>> >>>> I looked, but couldn't find info on SCHOOL-IT from previous >>>> conversations or LMS comparisons. Could you share again? Thanks! >>>> >>>> *Eric Hall* >>>> *Technology Integration Specialist* >>>> *Mount Mansfield Union High School* >>>> *Chittenden East SU* >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 9:18 AM, Matt Henchen <[log in to unmask]>wrote: >>>> >>>>> A few quick points: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 1. The LMS smackdown *was* focused purely on functionality and not >>>>> on any particular tool. In fact, anybody who was involved in the process >>>>> could tell you that we began by brainstorming and prioritizing a list of >>>>> functions first... >>>>> 2. I have never heard anybody advocate for a "one size fits all" >>>>> tool, which will meet all of our digital needs - that idea is completely >>>>> ridiculous. However, I have personally advocated for a 'one size fits all' >>>>> system for managing classroom resources, grading, assessment, and data >>>>> management. Of course, we could always use a 'suite' of tools to get the >>>>> job done, but then we are adding complexity to the system. The reality is >>>>> that classroom teachers do not have the time to use multiple tools to get >>>>> the job done. Every teacher I have talked to appreciates the idea of one >>>>> system that can be used to post assignments and resources, grade and >>>>> assess, and transmit assessment data automatically to whatever agency needs >>>>> it. However, with that said, the use of an LMS was never meant to be an >>>>> end unto itself, but rather a beginning. The LMS was meant to be a >>>>> springboard for teachers, students, and parents - they have ALWAYS been >>>>> meant to be used with other digital tools. >>>>> >>>>> The one thing I can agree with Eric on here is that there is not, >>>>> currently, a system that will meet all of our needs. However, rather than >>>>> quilting together another 'suite' of tools that we can stumble along with >>>>> for a few more years, why don't all the schools interested in using a truly >>>>> comprehensive LMS get together and put some pressure on the developers of >>>>> some of the leading LMS? As many of you know, the developer of Edu20 has >>>>> offered many times to develop *functions to our specs* and I am sure >>>>> the developers of the other leading LMS systems would do the same. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 9:13 PM, Eric Hall <[log in to unmask]>wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I know we've batted this around a few times, but... the selection of >>>>>> an LMS (currently Edu 2.0) has come into question at our school, and we are >>>>>> now revisiting the choice of a digital classroom environment (eg. stick or >>>>>> switch). Concurrently, we are also exploring how to balance the functions >>>>>> on an LMS with the use of Google Apps as a productivity suite. >>>>>> >>>>>> I am working hard to make this a conversation about "digital >>>>>> functionality" vs. an LMS smackdown: backing away from the tools and >>>>>> focusing on the goals first. To that end I have begun to list the >>>>>> functions of digital classrooms<https://docs.google.com/a/cesuvt.org/document/d/1XenVusOw4k3vBWBbqm_7vg6HqTzUPTPzTJ-OCuoTaPw/edit> that >>>>>> meet the goals of teachers, students, parents and Administration (the four >>>>>> "stakeholders" in this process.) This is an open document, so feel free to >>>>>> add your thoughts! >>>>>> >>>>>> Personally, I am not convinced that there IS a system that meets ALL >>>>>> needs well, and I advocate for a hybrid approach: using multiple tools >>>>>> (limited in number for support and consistency) each for their strengths. >>>>>> That said, we also need to consider the LMS's that are available as part of >>>>>> the solution. >>>>>> >>>>>> If you have a moment to complete this brief survey<https://docs.google.com/a/cesuvt.org/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dDZiXzNMY0gtbHlId19OUzAydURNUEE6MQ>, >>>>>> it would be appreciated. The full results are here<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmH4x6D8GsFedDZiXzNMY0gtbHlId19OUzAydURNUEE>for others involved in similar discussions. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Eric Hall* >>>>>> *Technology Integration Specialist* >>>>>> *Mount Mansfield Union High School* >>>>>> *Chittenden East SU* >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> This e-mail may contain information protected under the Family >>>>>> Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). If this e-mail contains student >>>>>> information and you are not entitled to access such information under >>>>>> FERPA, please notify the sender. Federal regulations require that you >>>>>> destroy this e-mail without reviewing it and you may not forward it to >>>>>> anyone. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Matt Henchen >>>>> History/Civics Teacher >>>>> Harwood Union Middle/High School >>>>> (802) 324-4521 >>>>> www.vermonteducator.com >>>>> www.newschoolhistory.com >>>>> >>>>> Scan here for my contact information... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> This e-mail may contain information protected under the Family >>>> Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). If this e-mail contains student >>>> information and you are not entitled to access such information under >>>> FERPA, please notify the sender. Federal regulations require that you >>>> destroy this e-mail without reviewing it and you may not forward it to >>>> anyone. >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Charlie MacFadyen >>> Technology Integration Specialist >>> Champlain Valley Union HS >>> Hinesburg, VT >>> (802) 482-7117 >>> >> >> >> This e-mail may contain information protected under the Family >> Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). If this e-mail contains student >> information and you are not entitled to access such information under >> FERPA, please notify the sender. Federal regulations require that you >> destroy this e-mail without reviewing it and you may not forward it to >> anyone. >> >> > > This e-mail may contain information protected under the Family Educational > Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). If this e-mail contains student information > and you are not entitled to access such information under FERPA, please > notify the sender. Federal regulations require that you destroy this e-mail > without reviewing it and you may not forward it to anyone. >