Lane - The Diigo Meta page

• 31 Dec 09
  

  Geraldine Jones

  cms Moodle TfL VLE pedagogy

• 

  Ron Bramhall

  CMS Blackboard web2.0 elearning

• 09 Dec 09
  

  Peter Van Leeuwen

  cms Blackboard lms pedagogy

• 30 Nov 09
  

  Frederik Questier

  e-learning pedagogy

• 17 Nov 09
  

  LRC MHC

  Abstract
  Course management systems, like any other technology, have an inherent purpose implied in their design, and therefore a built–in pedagogy. Although these pedagogies are based on instructivist principles, today’s large CMSs have many features suitable for applying more constructivist pedagogies. Yet few faculty use these features, or even adapt their CMS very much, despite the several customization options. This is because most college instructors do not work or play much on the Web, and thus utilize Web–based systems primarily at their basic level. The defaults of the CMS therefore tend to determine the way Web–novice faculty teach online, encouraging methods based on posting of material and engendering usage that focuses on administrative tasks. A solution to this underutilization of the CMS is to focus on pedagogy for Web–novice faculty and allow a choice of CMS.

  LMS sakai pedagogy articles

• 03 Nov 09
  

  Deb Boisvert

  sakai pedagogy

• 

  Pat Sine

  cms

• 02 Nov 09
  

  Mathieu Plourde

  Course management systems, like any other technology, have an inherent purpose implied in their design, and therefore a built–in pedagogy. Although these pedagogies are based on instructivist principles, today’s large CMSs have many features suitable for applying more constructivist pedagogies.

  article paper research LMS Blackboard Moodle Sakai pedagogy teaching UX

• 31 Oct 09
  

  paul lowe

  Course management systems, like any other technology, have an inherent purpose implied in their design, and therefore a built–in pedagogy. Although these pedagogies are based on instructivist principles, today’s large CMSs have many features suitable for applying more constructivist pedagogies. Yet few faculty use these features, or even adapt their CMS very much, despite the several customization options. This is because most college instructors do not work or play much on the Web, and thus utilize Web–based systems primarily at their basic level. The defaults of the CMS therefore tend to determine the way Web–novice faculty teach online, encouraging methods based on posting of material and engendering usage that focuses on administrative tasks. A solution to this underutilization of the CMS is to focus on pedagogy for Web–novice faculty and allow a choice of CMS.

  blackboard collaboration pedagogy moodle education tools web2.0 evaluation CMS LMS VLE e_learning webtools sakai lane

• 26 Oct 09
  

  John McLeod

  cms elearning pedagogy design

  • 
    
    
    

    
    Course management systems, like any other technology, have an inherent purpose implied in their design, and therefore a built–in pedagogy. Although these pedagogies are based on instructivist principles, today’s large CMSs have many features suitable for applying more constructivist pedagogies. Yet few faculty use these features, or even adapt their CMS very much, despite the several customization options. This is because most college instructors do not work or play much on the Web, and thus utilize Web–based systems primarily at their basic level. The defaults of the CMS therefore tend to determine the way Web–novice faculty teach online, encouraging methods based on posting of material and engendering usage that focuses on administrative tasks. A solution to this underutilization of the CMS is to focus on pedagogy for Web–novice faculty and allow a choice of CMS.

• 25 Oct 09
  

  helen castanedo

  pedagogy cms Moodle

• 24 Oct 09
  

  dean groom

  pedagogy cms Moodle lms Blackboard

  • With Web novices, pedagogy must be emphasized before features and tools
• 17 Oct 09
  

  Carol Furchner

  "The defaults of the CMS therefore tend to determine the way Web–novice faculty teach online, encouraging methods based on posting of material and engendering usage that focuses on administrative tasks."

  webct pedagogy online_teaching

• 16 Oct 09
  

  Allison Rossett
  • 

    • 

      Allison Rossett on 2009-10-16

      I think that few faculty are mindful about pedagogical goals. Their focus is on teaching content, not reflecting on discovery learning or the implications of objectivism for assessment techniques. They want BB or Moodle to help them get their jobs done, teach their students, deliver grades. It is the rare professor who is mindful of the challenge and opportunity presented by CMS.
• 

  Kyle Murley

  A closer look at how course management systems work, combined with an understanding of how novices use technology, provides a clearer view of the manner in which a CMS may not only influence, but control, instructional approaches.

  Moodle Blackboard elearning edtech edtec540 CMS LMS

  • these systems are closed silos, and that this fact alone could hamper pedagogy
  • why aren’t faculty tinkering with them in an effort to make their individual pedagogies work online?
  • 29 more annotations...
  • • Many instructors teaching online today are not “Web heads”
    • Their adoption of technology is based on top–down directives rather than interest or aptitude (Samarawickrema and Stacey, 2007).
    • They do not possess the “information literacy” skills now required of many undergraduates (Reid, 2006),
    • despite an assumption that professors are all computer–savvy (Dykman and Davis, 2008)
    • most are novices when it comes to the Web
    • most do not use the Web either extensively or intensively in their own work (Lane, 2007)
    • Few programs in the traditional disciplines at traditional universities offer anything in the way of Web–based methods
    • ,300 college instructors showed that while many use e–mail and some use discussion forums or plagiarism–check applications, none were communicating with students via current Web technologies such as video or audio chat, and only a few were experimenting with blogs for classes (Jones and Johnson–Yale, 2005)
    • Those experienced with the content involved in the search, but inexperienced at using the Web, did not tend to search far from the central “hub” where they began
    • Expert users contextualize their resources fluidly and organize materials effectively, while novices just upload and share files, hoping students will find them (Reanut, et al., 2006)
    • novices are inclined to utilize only the aspects they understand from a non–Web context
    • they require “restricted vocabularies, simple tasks, small numbers of possibilities, and very informative feedback.” (Chen, 2001)
    • buttons are based on type rather than purpose
    • exactly what most instructors do: upload word–processed files of their classroom materials
    • “plug in” their content under the appropriate category instead of envisioning a translation of their individual pedagogical style into an online environment.
    • Blackboard “tends to encourage a linear pathway through the content” [3], and its default is to support easy uploading and text entry to achieve that goal.
    • It would be natural and useful for novice instructors to see a blank schedule into which they could create each week’s or unit’s activities, rather than a selection of pre–set buttons or links.
    • Most professors think in terms of the semester, and how their pedagogical goals can be achieved within the context of time, rather than space.
    • It forces the instructor to think in terms of content types instead, breaking the natural structure of the semester, or of a list of topic
    • You could change all the course menu buttons into “Week 1”, “Week 2”, or organize by topic instead of content type.
    • Faculty are led by the interface of a CMS not only because they do not immediately see an alternative, but because the familiar signposts (the Syllabus button) imply a single way of completing the task (upload a document).
    • experience with the CMS over time does not necessarily lead to more creative pedagogy, or even to more expansive use of system features
    • faculty requests for help focus on what the technology can do, rather than how their pedagogical goals can be achieved.
    • Carmean and Haefner (2008) argue that any CMS can provide a deep learning experience and can be used for multimedia and in–depth communication with students
    • Novices happily use the high–tech CMS as a glorified copy machine (Dutton, 2004; Walker and Johnson, 2008).
    • With Web novices, pedagogy must be emphasized before features and tools
    • creating a course piecemeal means that the pedagogical goals are left behind in the interest of mastering a few tools
    • That replaces the instructor’s main strength (their expertise in their discipline and their teaching) with their main weakness (technological literacy).
    • A history instructor at MiraCosta College in California since 1989, Lisa M. Lane
• 15 Oct 09
  

  Kimya Mahzad

  pedagogy cms lms Moodle Blackboard digitalliteracy

• 14 Oct 09
  

  Jared Stein

  e-learning blackboard moodle edtech

  • in–network blogging, portfolios, branched lessons, instant messaging, and research “scholar” elements, including RSS feeds
  • Novice users rely heavily on the first tier of accessible features, and depend on elements that assist their memory and prompt them to enter information. To operate the system, they require “restricted vocabularies, simple tasks, small numbers of possibilities, and very informative feedback.” (Chen, 2001)
  • 5 more annotations...
  • • They want speed and ease of use rather than more features (Ioannou and Hannifin 2008)
    • faculty see an inflexible system that cannot be customized
    • Morgan, 2003
    • The vast majority of complaints about CMSs come from innovative, heavy users of Web technologies, those accustomed to customizing applications to make their work more effective
    • support novice online instructors differently than advanced instructors
• 

  Ammar Elhassan ElMerhbi

  pedagogy CMS

• 13 Oct 09
  

  Florence Dujardin

  social media pedagogy CMS e-learning blog LTA education

• 

  Ron Scott

  Insidious CMS FTW!

  technoculture technology empathy

• 

  Joan Vinall-Cox

  Brings clarity to the impact of CMSs on pedagogy

  pedagogy cms elearning

  • 

    • 

      Joan Vinall-Cox on 2009-10-13

      and show an aptitude for & development of web skills
  • It’s important to make a distinction between a teacher experienced in instruction, and one experienced in using the Web to instruct.
  • 6 more annotations...
  • • most graduate schools utilize the same methods of research and scholarship as were used decades ago
    • Most professors think in terms of the semester, and how their pedagogical goals can be achieved within the context of time, rather than space.
    • those willing to play around with the features tend to discover new directions for their teaching.
    • Few instructors are consciously aware that CMS design is influencing their pedagogy.
    • The vast majority of complaints about CMSs come from innovative, heavy users of Web technologies, those accustomed to customizing applications to make their work more effective. They also come from behaviorists and constructivists who face significant limitations in many systems. Novices happily use the high–tech CMS as a glorified copy machine
    • Teaching faculty to consider their teaching approaches first, before they enter the CMS, could help prevent tool availability from limiting their pedagogy.
• 12 Oct 09
  

  Jeff Steely

  How a course management system is designed influences how it is used. Rather than starting with the tool, faculty should start with their pedagogy, and think about how it can be enhanced with the tool.

  pedagogy teaching learning

  • not pedagogically neutral shells for course content. They influence pedagogy by presenting default formats designed to guide the instructor toward creating a course in a certain way
  • 

    • 

      Jeff Steely on 2009-10-12

      Would it make sense for the CMS to present a 'wizard' to walk one through structuring the course? So many other systems offer this choice for the novice. Not everyone would need/want to use it, but the wizard could be structured to help the user think about pedagogy first and the technology second.
    • 

      LRC MHC on 2009-11-17

      I used to customize all of the tools/buttons on my courses to create categories that made sense within my pedagogical framework. However, after a few years, I realized that this had started to confuse students--because students got used to the default categories in the LMS, they expected to see them in my course, too. Eventually, I gave up on doing so much customization, letting the defaults remain because it made it easier for my students to jump in and start navigating my course.
• 

  Mary Ann Harlan

  edtech education ICT online learning

• 

  Natalie Lafferty

  pedagogy cms Moodle lms Blackboard elearning vle

• 10 Oct 09
  

  dnewton

  Blackboard Moodle cms

  • Carmean
• 09 Oct 09
  

  Jerry Johnson

  pedagogy cms Moodle elearning

• 

  Rafael Parente

  ipactheory

• 

  Leo Schmitt

  Moodle Blackboard cms elearning

• 

  gobibijou
  • The vast majority of complaints about CMSs come from innovative, heavy users of Web technologies, those accustomed to customizing applications to make their work more effective. They also come from behaviorists and constructivists who face significant limitations in many systems.
  • With Web novices, pedagogy must be emphasized before features and tools.
  • 7 more annotations...
  • • But creating a course piecemeal means that the pedagogical goals are left behind in the interest of mastering a few tools.
    • hat replaces the instructor’s main strength (their expertise in their discipline and their teaching) with their main weakness (technological literacy).
    • Teaching faculty to consider their teaching approaches first, before they enter the CMS, could help prevent tool availability from limiting their pedagogy.
    • Opt–Out system (such as Blackboard) all the features are available by default and must be excluded to avoid confusing students. Opt–Out systems are most likely to overwhelm Web novices, because they present an array of tools, and the tendency is to reduce cognitive load by using the default
    • Opt–In and Opt–Out
    • Opt–In system (such as Moodle), the instructor selects each activity and presentation factor from a menu list, effectively designing much of the interface for students.
    • forcing the instructor to think holistically about the class structure. Features such as chat, polls, and interactive lessons as options presented with the same weight as more traditional text–based resources. Thus there is less of an implication that presentation is key, and more of an implication that interactivity is important
• 08 Oct 09
  

  Miguel guhlin
  • But lo! men have become the tools of their tools.
    — Henry David Thoreau
  • We would like to believe that technologies are neutral, that they can be used well or used poorly, but contain no inherent direction or intent.
  • 23 more annotations...
  • • These new technologies, we say, had both good and bad applications, which depended entirely on the humans using them. Instinctively, however, we know that such an approach is faulty.
    • The fact that each technology had a specific purpose implies a goal in its design, an objective that limited or even determined its use. Today’s online technologies are no different, and create serious impacts on our teaching.
    • Few discuss the ways in which they influence and guide pedagogy, and those that do only note their predisposition for supporting more instructivist methods. Current research also ignores the fact that many of the new wave of online teachers are Web novices entering the field without a deep understanding of online technology.
    • Course managment systems each contain their own inherent pedagogy, and for most systems these pedagogies are traditional in nature. As with all technologies, the design of the product is a result of its perceived use. Today’s enterprise–scale systems were created to manage traditional teaching tasks as if they were business processes. They were originally designed to focus on instructor efficiency for administrative functions such as grade posting, test creation, and enrollment management. Pedagogical considerations were thus either not considered, or were considered to be embodied in such managerial tasks.
    • The built–in pedagogy of the big systems is based on traditional approaches to instruction dating from the nineteenth century: presentation and assessment.
    • “the downside of the CMS is that it canalizes our collective creativity by forcing e–learning technologies into the familiar classroom categories of lectures, discussions, and exams", reinforcing "uncritical acceptance of the traditional features of the classroom model.”
    • oday’s CMSs can be customized, changed and adapted, so why aren’t faculty tinkering with them in an effort to make their individual pedagogies work online?
    • Today’s online faculty don’t teach online because they spend their lives blogging, reading feeds, and Twittering, and one day think, “hey, I could also teach online!” Most were drafted, either because they felt their market value would slip if they didn’t teach online, or because their department or dean told them they must. Their adoption of technology is based on top–down directives rather than interest or aptitude (Samarawickrema and Stacey, 2007).
    • They do not possess the “information literacy” skills now required of many undergraduates (Reid, 2006), despite an assumption that professors are all computer–savvy (Dykman and Davis, 2008). Some of these faculty have been teaching in the classroom for many years, and have developed successful instructional formats for themselves, be they traditional or more collaborative. Then they are assigned to teach online. When they ask where to start in creating an online course, they are usually pointed to the college’s preferred CMS. And that’s where the pedagogical guidance begins.
    • make a distinction between a teacher experienced in instruction, and one experienced in using the Web to instruct.
    • “While seeking information, the Web novice groups were overwhelmed by simply trying to keep track of their location, and they repeatedly got lost.” [2] These users were trying to reduce their cognitive load by limiting their use of the software, while Web experts were able to keep their goal in mind easily while searching more deeply. Expert users contextualize their resources fluidly and organize materials effectively, while novices just upload and share files, hoping students will find them (Reanut, et al., 2006)
    • Novice users rely heavily on the first tier of accessible features, and depend on elements that assist their memory and prompt them to enter information. To operate the system, they require “restricted vocabularies, simple tasks, small numbers of possibilities, and very informative feedback.”
    • Blackboard “tends to encourage a linear pathway through the content” [3], and its default is to support easy uploading and text entry to achieve that goal.
    • Blackboard/WebCT’s default organization accepts neither of these approaches in its initial interface. It forces the instructor to think in terms of content types instead, breaking the natural structure of the semester, or of a list of topics. Again, we know that the setup can be customized with relative ease, by going to the Control Panel and selecting Manage Course Menu, then using Modify buttons. You could change all the course menu buttons into “Week 1”, “Week 2”, or organize by topic instead of content type. But few professors try that, or they assume that they can’t do it. Blackboard can be highly intimidating to learn, and may “seriously hinder” choices the faculty member makes while using the tool
    • Even after several years of working with the CMS, faculty requests for help focus on what the technology can do, rather than how their pedagogical goals can be achieved
    • They want speed and ease of use rather than more features
    • Carmean and Haefner (2008) argue that any CMS can provide a deep learning experience and can be used for multimedia and in–depth communication with students. Educational technologists look at a CMS and see its many features, but faculty see an inflexible system that cannot be customized
    • Few instructors are consciously aware that CMS design is influencing their pedagogy.
    • hose taxing the system more, and using the most complex features, show lower levels of satisfaction. The vast majority of complaints about CMSs come from innovative, heavy users of Web technologies, those accustomed to customizing applications to make their work more effective. They also come from behaviorists and constructivists who face significant limitations in many systems. Novices happily use the high–tech CMS as a glorified copy machine (Dutton, 2004; Walker and Johnson, 2008
    • With Web novices, pedagogy must be emphasized before features and tools.
    • Teaching faculty to consider their teaching approaches first, before they enter the CMS, could help prevent tool availability from limiting their pedagogy.
    • Opt–Out systems are most likely to overwhelm Web novices, because they present an array of tools, and the tendency is to reduce cognitive load by using the defaults.
    • In an Opt–In system (such as Moodle), the instructor selects each activity and presentation factor from a menu list, effectively designing much of the interface for students. Fewer defaults are pre–set, forcing the instructor to think holistically about the class structure. Features such as chat, polls, and interactive lessons as options presented with the same weight as more traditional text–based resources.
• 07 Oct 09
  

  Susan Nugent

  article by Lisa M. Lane from First Monday

  pedagogy cms Moodle lms Blackboard

• 

  Reuven Werber

  pedagogy cms lms Moodle elearning constructivism

• 

  Mark Woolley

  Course management systems, like any other technology, have an inherent purpose implied in their design, and therefore a built–in pedagogy. A paper on Content/course management systems

  e-learning moodle

• 

  Bill Harshbarger

  Insightful paper on using CMS like Moodle and Blackboard

  elpprodev

• 

  Greg Walker

  pedagogy

  • Course management systems, like any other technology, have an inherent purpose implied in their design, and therefore a built–in pedagogy. Although these pedagogies are based on instructivist principles, today’s large CMSs have many features suitable for applying more constructivist pedagogies. Yet few faculty use these features, or even adapt their CMS very much, despite the several customization options. This is because most college instructors do not work or play much on the Web, and thus utilize Web–based systems primarily at their basic level. The defaults of the CMS therefore tend to determine the way Web–novice faculty teach online, encouraging methods based on posting of material and engendering usage that focuses on administrative tasks. A solution to this underutilization of the CMS is to focus on pedagogy for Web–novice faculty and allow a choice of CMS.
  • Even after several years of working with the CMS, faculty requests for help focus on what the technology can do, rather than how their pedagogical goals can be achieved.
  • 7 more annotations...
  • • 

      • 

        Greg Walker on 2009-10-07

        Then the first questions should be what is your pedagocial goal?
      • 

        Allison Rossett on 2009-10-16

        That question will not MOVE most faculty. More likely profs are moved by questions of how do I get my stuff to students dependably, tell them what is expected, remind them what to read, encourage them to read and think and show that they did. Questions of pedagogy? Not so much top of mind.
    • those willing to play around with the features tend to discover new directions for their teaching.
    • Few instructors are consciously aware that CMS design is influencing their pedagogy. M
    • With Web novices, pedagogy must be emphasized before features and tools.
    • Starting with the CMS features creates a backward process.
    • Teaching faculty to consider their teaching approaches first, before they enter the CMS, could help prevent tool availability from limiting their pedagogy.
    • 

      • 

        Greg Walker on 2009-10-07

        Yes and does there need to be an emphasis on the disticntion between how to apply pedagogy to an online environment from the classroom?
      • 

        dean groom on 2009-10-24

        yes, in the case of higher ed, it is highly likey they will not understand ether as novices, let alon be able to align them construcitvely
• 

  Dean Shareski

  Course management systems, like any other technology, have an inherent purpose implied in their design, and therefore a built–in pedagogy. Although these pedagogies are based on instructivist principles, today’s large CMSs have many features suitable for

  cms pedagogy design

• 

  J.R. Radney

  pedagogy cms Moodle Blackboard elearning online design

  • Course management systems (CMSs), used throughout colleges and universities for presenting online or technology–enhanced classes, are not pedagogically neutral shells for course content. They influence pedagogy by presenting default formats designed to guide the instructor toward creating a course in a certain way. This is particularly true of integrated systems (such as Blackboard/WebCT), but is also a factor in some of the newer, more constructivist systems (Moodle).
  • A closer look at how course management systems work, combined with an understanding of how novices use technology, provides a clearer view of the manner in which a CMS may not only influence, but control, instructional approaches.

    • 

      J.R. Radney on 2009-10-07

      Thesis of the article
  • 4 more annotations...
  • • one survey of over 2,300 college instructors showed that while many use e–mail and some use discussion forums or plagiarism–check applications, none were communicating with students via current Web technologies such as video or audio chat, and only a few were experimenting with blogs for classes (Jones and Johnson–Yale, 2005).
    • Expert users contextualize their resources fluidly and organize materials effectively, while novices just upload and share files, hoping students will find them (Reanut, et al., 2006).
    • When faced with a CMS for the first time, faculty begin by experimenting with one or two tools that they already understand, then adapting the tools gradually as they gain more experience using them (West, et al., 2007).
    • But creating a course piecemeal means that the pedagogical goals are left behind in the interest of mastering a few tools. That replaces the instructor’s main strength (their expertise in their discipline and their teaching) with their main weakness (technological literacy).
• 06 Oct 09
  

  Peg Maddocks

  Pedagogy cms

• 

  Stephan Ridgway

  Lisa M Lane
  First Monday, Volume 14, Number 10 - 5 October 2009

  pedagogy elearning lms Moodle sielearningstrategy siwd

• 

  Robyn Jay

  pedagogy cms lms Moodle Blackboard digitalliteracy

  • The buttons link to pages that simply provide a place to upload a document, which is exactly what most instructors do: upload word–processed files of their classroom materials. They are encouraged to “plug in” their content under the appropriate category instead of envisioning a translation of their individual pedagogical style into an online environment. Blackboard “tends to encourage a linear pathway through the content” [3], and its default is to support easy uploading and text entry to achieve that goal.
  • Even after several years of working with the CMS, faculty requests for help focus on what the technology can do, rather than how their pedagogical goals can be achieved.
  • 1 more annotations...
  • • Morgan notes such improvement as a “side effect of the use of the software rather than a direct result of its use” [5] — those willing to play around with the features tend to discover new directions for their teaching.
• 

  Cris Harshman

  pedagogy cms lms Moodle Blackboard paper

• 

  Will Stewart

  Course management systems, like any other technology, have an inherent purpose implied in their design, and therefore a built–in pedagogy. Although these pedagogies are based on instructivist principles, today’s large CMSs have many features suitable for applying more constructivist pedagogies. Yet few faculty use these features, or even adapt their CMS very much, despite the several customization options. This is because most college instructors do not work or play much on the Web, and thus utilize Web–based systems primarily at their basic level. The defaults of the CMS therefore tend to determine the way Web–novice faculty teach online, encouraging methods based on posting of material and engendering usage that focuses on administrative tasks. A solution to this underutilization of the CMS is to focus on pedagogy for Web–novice faculty and allow a choice of CMS.

  pedagogy cms lane lms Blackboard Moodle

• 

  Burks Oakley

  Good paper about the role of the course management system (CMS) in determining online pedagogy.

  CMS LMS online pedagogy course management system

• 

  Wayne Eglinton

  pedagogy cms lane lms

• 

  Kristina Hoeppner

  "Course management systems, like any other technology, have an inherent purpose implied in their design, and therefore a built–in pedagogy. Although these pedagogies are based on instructivist principles, today’s large CMSs have many features suitable for applying more constructivist pedagogies. Yet few faculty use these features, or even adapt their CMS very much, despite the several customization options. This is because most college instructors do not work or play much on the Web, and thus utilize Web–based systems primarily at their basic level. The defaults of the CMS therefore tend to determine the way Web–novice faculty teach online, encouraging methods based on posting of material and engendering usage that focuses on administrative tasks. A solution to this underutilization of the CMS is to focus on pedagogy for Web–novice faculty and allow a choice of CMS."

  pedagogy edtech cms teaching vle lms training

  • When faced with a different interface or online environment, novices are inclined to utilize only the aspects they understand from a non–Web context. Posting a Word document online makes sense, but not creating an HTML page, because a word–processed document is a familiar unit of presentation but a Web page is not.
  • Faculty are led by the interface of a CMS not only because they do not immediately see an alternative, but because the familiar signposts (the Syllabus button) imply a single way of completing the task (upload a document).
  • 5 more annotations...
  • • There is more satisfaction in mastering a few elements than in experimenting.
    • Even after several years of working with the CMS, faculty requests for help focus on what the technology can do, rather than how their pedagogical goals can be achieved.
    • But novice users do not have a framework for expectations.
    • One solution to the CMS pedagogy trap is to support novice online instructors differently than advanced instructors. With Web novices, pedagogy must be emphasized before features and tools.
    • Teaching faculty to consider their teaching approaches first, before they enter the CMS, could help prevent tool availability from limiting their pedagogy.
• 

  Valentina Dodge

  Lisa Lane -Course management systems, like any other technology, have an inherent purpose implied in their design, and therefore a built–in pedagogy.

  pedagogy online CMS journal WebCT Blackboard Moodle instructional_design

• 

  Stephen Rahn

  pedagogy elearning cms education learning online lms teaching

• 

  Lois Lindell

  elearning pedagogy

• 

  Gabriela Sellart

  cms pedagogy e-learning

  • The defaults of the CMS therefore tend to determine the way Web–novice faculty teach online, encouraging methods based on posting of material and engendering usage that focuses on administrative tasks.
  • But lo! men have become the tools of their tools.
  • 12 more annotations...
  • • we know that such an approach is faulty. The fact that each technology had a specific purpose implies a goal in its design, an objective that limited or even determined its use. Today’s online technologies are no different, and create serious impacts on our teaching.
    • Few discuss the ways in which they influence and guide pedagogy, and those that do only note their predisposition for supporting more instructivist methods.
    • The built–in pedagogy of the big systems is based on traditional approaches to instruction dating from the nineteenth century: presentation and assessment.
    • forcing e–learning technologies into the familiar classroom categories of lectures, discussions, and exams
    • interface of any software reflects its intent
    • Today’s online faculty don’t teach online because they spend their lives blogging, reading feeds, and Twittering, and one day think, “hey, I could also teach online!” Most were drafted, either because they felt their market value would slip if they didn’t teach online, or because their department or dean told them they must. Their adoption of technology is based on top–down directives rather than interest or aptitude
    • It’s important to make a distinction between a teacher experienced in instruction, and one experienced in using the Web to instruct.
    • When faced with a different interface or online environment, novices are inclined to utilize only the aspects they understand from a non–Web context.
    • There is more satisfaction in mastering a few elements than in experimenting.
    • One solution to the CMS pedagogy trap is to support novice online instructors differently than advanced instructors.
    • With Web novices, pedagogy must be emphasized before features and tools.
    • That replaces the instructor’s main strength (their expertise in their discipline and their teaching) with their main weakness (technological literacy).
• 05 Oct 09
  

  Sharon Elin

  "Most college instructors do not work or play much on the Web, and thus utilize Web–based systems primarily at their basic level. The defaults of the CMS therefore tend to determine the way Web–novice faculty teach online, encouraging methods based on posting of material and engendering usage that focuses on administrative tasks."

  pedagogy article2read elearning

  • most college instructors do not work or play much on the Web, and thus utilize Web–based systems primarily at their basic level. The defaults of the CMS therefore tend to determine the way Web–novice faculty teach online, encouraging methods based on posting of material and engendering usage that focuses on administrative tasks.

Public Stiky Notes

• 
  Joan Vinall-Cox on 2009-10-13
  and show an aptitude for & development of web skills
• 
  Allison Rossett on 2009-10-16
  I think that few faculty are mindful about pedagogical goals. Their focus is on teaching content, not reflecting on discovery learning or the implications of objectivism for assessment techniques. They want BB or Moodle to help them get their jobs done, teach their students, deliver grades. It is the rare professor who is mindful of the challenge and opportunity presented by CMS.
• 
  J.R. Radney on 2009-10-07
  Thesis of the article
• 
  LRC MHC on 2009-11-17
  I used to customize all of the tools/buttons on my courses to create categories that made sense within my pedagogical framework. However, after a few years, I realized that this had started to confuse students--because students got used to the default categories in the LMS, they expected to see them in my course, too. Eventually, I gave up on doing so much customization, letting the defaults remain because it made it easier for my students to jump in and start navigating my course.
• 
  Jeff Steely on 2009-10-12
  Would it make sense for the CMS to present a 'wizard' to walk one through structuring the course? So many other systems offer this choice for the novice. Not everyone would need/want to use it, but the wizard could be structured to help the user think about pedagogy first and the technology second.
• 
  Allison Rossett on 2009-10-16
  That question will not MOVE most faculty. More likely profs are moved by questions of how do I get my stuff to students dependably, tell them what is expected, remind them what to read, encourage them to read and think and show that they did. Questions of pedagogy? Not so much top of mind.
• 
  Greg Walker on 2009-10-07
  Then the first questions should be what is your pedagocial goal?
• 
  dean groom on 2009-10-24
  yes, in the case of higher ed, it is highly likey they will not understand ether as novices, let alon be able to align them construcitvely
• 
  Greg Walker on 2009-10-07
  Yes and does there need to be an emphasis on the disticntion between how to apply pedagogy to an online environment from the classroom?

Page Comments

• 
  Bernadette Harris on 2009-10-07
  Robyn, I can't tell you how often I get pulled up by people when I use the term "play" about my work. It's nice to see it used here.
  BH

Would you like to comment?

Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.