Learning Management Systems (LMS) for the Information Age

Learning Management Systems (LMS) for the Information Age An overview of the systemic application of computers to education William Watson Indiana University - Indianapolis Purdue University at Sunnie Lee Watson Indiana University

Content 1. LMS: Definition and History 2. LMS vs CMS vs LCMS vs LO 3. The Need for LMS 4. LMS Features for the Information Age 5. Current, Major LMS Products 6. The Future of LMS

LMS: Definition and History Computers in education (aka Acronyms R Us ) Learning Management System (LMS) Course Management System (CMS) Reusable Learning Objects (RLO) Integrated Learning System (ILS) Computer-aided instruction (CAI) Computer-assisted learning (CAL) Computer-based instruction (CBI) Computer-mediated instruction (CMI)

LMS: Definition and History History of largely generic terms describing the application of computers to instruction: Computer-aided Instruction (CAI) drill & practice Computer-assisted learning (CAL) tutorials Computer-based instruction (CBI) individualized Integrated Learning System (ILS) and Computer-mediated instruction (CMI) management and tracking system on top of the instructional content integration across the system greater focus on personalized instruction

LMS: Definition and History LMS: also not precisely defined Differentiated by systemic nature to manage the entire instructional program and learning process of an organization (Szabo & Flesher, 2002) Instructional objectives are specified with individual lessons Lessons are integrated into the standardized curriculum Courseware extends several grade levels in a consistent manner A management system collects and records the results of student performance Lessons are provided based on individual students learning progress (Bailey, 1993)

LMS vs CMS vs LCMS vs LO Course Management System (CMS) Often confused with LMS Allows an instructor to manage one or more courses, online, face-to-face, or hybrid it provides an instructor with a set of tools and a framework that allows the relatively easy creation of online course content and the subsequent teaching and management of that course including various interactions with students taking the course (EDUCAUSE Evolving Technologies Committee, 2003)

LMS vs CMS vs LCMS vs LO Course Management System (CMS) Focuses on management of course, not entire learning Examples include: Blackboard WebCT Angel Oncourse

LMS vs CMS vs LCMS vs LO Learning Content Management System (LCMS) Often used synonymously with LMS or touted as a newer, more advanced format Content focused IDC defines as a system that is used to create, store, assemble and deliver personalized e- learning content in the form of learning objects (Oakes, 2002) LMS provides the rules and the LCMS provides the content. (Connolly, 2001)

LMS vs CMS vs LCMS vs LO Learning Objects (LO) touted for: reusability (ability for instruction to be reused in multiple contexts) generativity (the ability to generate instruction) adaptability (ability to be adapted to individual learners) scalability (ability to be extended to both larger and smaller audiences without a substantial increase in cost) (Wiley, 2002;Hodgins, 2002; Gibbons, Nelson, & Richards, 2002)

LMS vs CMS vs LCMS vs LO LO: Unclear definition and alternate terms: MERLOT s term: online learning materials (2005) MERRILL s term: knowledge objects (2002) Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE): any entity, digital or nondigital, that may be used for learning, education, or training (Parrish, 2004) Wiley: any digital resource that can be reused to support learning (2002)

LMS vs CMS vs LCMS vs LO Learning Objects relation to LMS and challenges Parrish: Does Wiley s definition include software tools (such as a calculator or Word processor)? (2004) Would any digitial media that can be reused to support learning be more precise? Lack of standards and adherence to standards (SCORM, LOM) for sharing Learning Objects Learning objects by definition exist as the smallest discrete components of all of these technologies; they make up the reusable instructional content that is managed by an LCMS and are plugged into the courses managed by a CMS, both of which are pieces of the larger, systemic LMS.

The Need for LMS Information age requires schools to focus on individual learners needs (Reigeluth, 1994; Reigeluth & Garfinkle, 1994; Senge et al., 2000) Customization rather than standardization (Joseph & Reigeluth, 2002) Teachers as facilitators (McCombs & Whisler, 1997) Technology will play an important role (Reigeluth & Garfinkle, 1994, Schlechty, 1991)

The Need for LMS Technology in the Information Age school should: track what each learner has mastered help student and teacher sequence instruction provide interactive instruction assess mastery and store evidence of attainments (portfolio) systemically integrate all features

LMS Features for the Information Age Standard Instructional Features (italicized are well-suited to information age) Content presentation Curriculum standards Direct instruction Bilingual Self-paced learning Project-based work Group work Authentic, real-world problems Individualized instruction

LMS Features for the Information Age Teacher customization of instruction Adaptive sequencing Adaptive lesson plans Customizable instructional content Prescription of lessons

LMS Features for the Information Age Instruction Outside of School Online message center Online discussion board Project-based work Activities/homework with parent involvement Community relations and support Online lesson plan management for teachers

LMS Features for the Information Age Data management Attendance Health information Parent/guardian information Enrollment Class schedule Record of attainments mastered Mastery progress

LMS Features for the Information Age Assessment Post test / Pre test Formative tests Practice tests Diagnostic tests Mastery-level tests

LMS Features for the Information Age Reporting Summative test report to teachers/parents Formative test report to teachers/ parents Student information report to teachers/parents Record of attainments report to teachers/parents Mastery progress report to teachers/parents Customizable reporting for teachers

Current, Major LMS Products Challenges: Muddled marketplace Marketing language How systemic are the products? Products reviewed: PLATO Pearson Digital Learning SkillsTutor (Achievement Technologies) Co-nect (now a part of Pearson Digital Learning)

PLATO FEATURES

Plato features - continued

Pearson features

Pearson features - continued

Achievement Technology Features

Achievement Technology Features - continued

Co-nect Features

Co-nect Features - continued

LMS Features Comparison

LMS Features Comparison - continued

Current Trends in LMS Currently studies show that LMS assist learning more than traditional instruction alone More design-based and formative research on LMS is needed LMS has a history in industrial age, sortingbased, drill and practice instruction LMS needs to continue to develop towards truly systemic platforms that better support information age learning needs

The Future of LMS Discussion LMS Goals for the Future: Provide more constructivist-based instruction that focuses on personalized and flexible approaches to meet learner-defined goals (Reigeluth & Garfinkle, 1994). Support collaborative and cooperative learning inside and outside of the classroom and providing students with a seamless learning environment between school and home, allowing parents to be more engaged in their child's learning (Taylor, 2004). Address personalized assessment, progress tracking, reporting, and responsiveness to learner needs in the future (Reigeluth & Garfinkle, 1994).

The Future of LMS Discussion LMS Goals for the Future: (continued) Truly integrating systems that allow for improved collaboration across systems and among stakeholders (Sherry, 1993). Improve support for professional diagnosis and development for teachers and other stakeholders. Improve cost effectiveness and maximizing efficiency in leveraging existing resources that are already available in schools and LMSs (Szabo & Flesher, 2002).

For further detail Watson, W. R., Lee, S., & Reigeluth, C. M. (2006). Learning Management Systems: An overview and roadmap of the systemic application of computers to education. In F. M. M. Neto & F. V. Brasileiro (Eds.), Advances in Computer-supported Learning (pp. 66-96). London: Information Science Publishing.

Future studies planned Evaluation of features for each software component and how they collaborate for each LMS company Student perceptions of LMS Further analysis of information age LMS features Comparison of systemic vs. piecemeal use of LMS features

References Bailey, G. D. (1993). Wanted: A road map for understanding integrated learning systems. In G. D. Bailey (Ed.), Computer-based integrated learning systems (pp. 3-9). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. Connolly, P. J. (2001). A standard for success. InfoWorld, 23(42), 57-58. EDUCAUSE Evolving Technologies Committee. (2003). Course Management Systems (CMS). Retrieved April 25, 2005 from the World Wide Web: http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/dec0302.pdf. Gibbons, A.S., Nelson, J.M & Richards, R. (2002). The nature and origin of instructional objects. In D.A. Wiley (Ed.), The instructional use of learning objects : Online version. Retrieved March 13, 2005 from the World Wide Web: http://reusability.org/read/chapters/gibbons.doc. Gilhooly, K. (2001). Making e-learning effective. Computerworld, 35(29), 52-53. Hodgins, H.W. (2002). The future of learning objects. In D.A. Wiley (Ed.), The instructional use of learning objects: Online version. Retrieved March 13, 2005 from the World Wide Web: http://reusability.org/read/chapters/hodgins.doc. Joseph, R., & Reigeluth, C. M. (2002). Beyond technology integration: the case for technology transformation. Educational Technology(July-August), 9-12. McCombs, B., & Whisler, J. (1997). The learner-centered classroom and school. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. MERLOT. (2005). Multimedia educational resource for learning and on-line teaching website. Retrieved March 13, 2005 from the World Wide Web: http://www.merlot.org/ Merrill, M.D. (2002). Knowledge objects to support inquiry-based, online learning. In D.A. Wiley (Ed.), The instructional use of learning objects: Online version. Retrieved March 13, 2005 from the World Wide Web: http://reusability.org/read/chapters/merrill.doc.

References - continued Oakes, K. (2002). E-learning: LCMS, LMS-they're not just acronyms but powerful systems for learning. T+D, 56(3). Parrish, P.E. (2004). The trouble with learning objects. Educational Technology Research & Development, 52(1). Reigeluth, C. M., & Garfinkle, R. J. (1994). Envisioning a new system of education. In C. M. Reigeluth & R. J. Garfinkle (Eds.), Systemic change in education. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. Schlechty, P.C. (1991). Schools for the 21st century: leadership imperatives for educational reform. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers. Senge, P., Cambron-McCabe, N., Lucas, T., Smith, B., Dutton, J., & Kleiner, A. (2000). Schools that learn: a fifth discipline fieldbook for educators, parents, and everyone who cares about education. Toronto, Canada: Currency. Sherry, M. (1993). Integrated Learning Systems: what may we expect in the future? In G. D. Bailey (Ed.), Computer-based Integrated Learning Systems. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. Szabo, M., & Flesher, K. (2002). CMI theory and practice: historical roots of learning management systems. Paper presented at the E-Learn 2002 World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, & Higher Education, Montreal, Canada. Taylor, F. P. (2004). Education technology helps unite school communities, improve academic achievement. T.H.E. Journal, 31(10), 46-48. Toffler, A. (1984). The third wave. New York, New York: Bantam. Wiley, D.A. (2002). Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory: a definition, a metaphor, and a taxonomy. In D.A. Wiley (Ed.), The instructional use of learning objects: Online version. Retrieved March 13, 2005 from the World Wide Web: http://reusability.org/read/chapters/wiley.doc.

Comments or Questions? Please contact Bill wwatson@iupui.edu and Sunnie suklee@indiana.edu if you have any comments or questions. Thank you very much.