The “open complementing closed – PLE and LMS – why, what for and how?” discussion made for interesting reading. I was surprised to hear they don’t use LMS’s much in Scotland. I think Brad Beach had the most credible, balanced opinions. But let’s see … Maybe I can put a few points into focus (out of focus?).
1) The comment about vocational students being more oriented to seeing and doing rather than reflecting and communicating is interesting. Of course, it depends on the vocational field. Social workers should be more interested in reflecting and communicating. On the other hand, machine building students, automotive engineering students … I know from experience that their approach to learning and the whole school thing is quite pragmatic (on the whole). There’s school and there’s real life. You take from school what you see as useful. The rest you exert the minimum effort on. This is a bit of a simplification. But it’s not far off. Ask them to reflect and you will get a look like your crazy.
2) First thing, you must know your audience. Is it a field of study which demands reflection? communication/discussion? Are the students in this field the kind of students predisposed to reflection and communication/discussion? Is it the kind of school which draws the kind of student predisposed to reflection and communication/discussion? Is it the kind of society which promotes a reflective/communicative approach to learning? Does this approach exist at lower levels of education?
3) You need to choose the tool according to your audience and the objectives of your course. It’s self-evident that a student will learn more the more deeply he or she takes a subject into his or her life. But there’s only so much you can do as a teacher to get a student to do so. Whether or not he or she does so has too much to do with factors outside of your control. What you can do is carefully select and organize your material and choose tools so the course material is interesting, clear, and well-organized in a way which expedites learning, and at least appears relevant (to the course of study, to the future ambitions of the students, to real life – particularly, in the case of vocational studies), thus inviting the student to delve more deeply into the material at hand.
4) In most cases, I think the goal is not to encourage students to stand on their individual differences and indiosyncrasies but to minimize these! The role of the teacher is best served when he or she can inspire students to see beyond themselves, opening the way to another way of thinking or another area of knowledge, getting them into the minds of the specialist, at least for a short time. And when all is over, they, the students can decide whether or not their interest has been truly caught and whether or not they want to delve further, joining this or that community of people with the same interests … This is where empowerment lies …
5) Learning is not as those riding the current bandwagon like to claim “communication and interaction and social aspects”. Do people really understand what they are saying when they spout this? It all sounds so nice and cozy and obvious. Who would want to deny it? But learning in itself is not social, learning does not demand a social component, and does not even demand social expression. You can exploit the social element, the communicative element, the reflective element that belongs to a particular subject or field. You can try to use it to pursue your agenda as a teacher. That’s it.
6) Are we in some interim period. Is it just the beginning? If PLEs don’t work in some particular educational setting, school, course, etc., does it simply mean we are still on the way? That students need to be made more aware of the possibilities? That the time will come with enough promotion? No, I don’t think so. It only means you’ve chosen the wrong tools, tools inappropriate for your subject and/or audience.
7) LMSs. There’s a lot you can say that isn’t quite right about LMSs. In the end, it all depends on the teacher, how he or she makes use of it. Again, it’s a matter of dealing appropriately with a given audience. Who is really failing if an LMS seems to fail, the LMS or the teacher? I think undoubtedly the teacher. When using an LMS, you still have a lot of tools at your disposal (including PLEs and tools resembling them). Again the question: have you made the best selection of tools, have you made the best use of the tools you have selected? Do you have realistic goals? Do you have appropriate goals? Do your students understand these goals? Have they bought in? Have you gotten them to accept your goals? Etc.
Last) You can’t beat an LMS for the ease with which you can track students and administer a course. Most students also like that reassurance of everything being in the same place with a certain amount of predictability, etc.
