BlogU

  • Great Article on Insidious Pedagogy

    By Joshua Kim October 9, 2009 12:29 am EDT

    I spend more time in Blackboard then any other application / site. For the past 7 years Blackboard has been the place where I taught my online/hybrid courses, partnered with subject matter experts to build courses, and trained faculty. In many ways Blackboard enabled my transition from full-time teaching to learning technology. Blackboard has put bread on my table.

    Perhaps it is because I'm so entangled with Blackboard that found Lisa M. Lane's article "Insidious Pedagogy: How Course Management Systems Affect Teaching" to be so compelling. (Thanks to Stephen Downes for the link.)

    Mostly I believe that Blackboard and other CMS's have opened up a space for conversations around learning. We use Blackboard has an opportunity to engage faculty colleagues on re-thinking their course design and teaching practices in order to focus on collaboration and the student production of knowledge. In every workshop or one-on-one training we talk first about learning goals and pedagogy, and only then show how the CMS can support and enable these goals.

    Lane is considerably more critical of the course management system. She builds a very strong argument that the default design of Blackboard/WebCT, what she calls an "Opt-Out design", privileges a non-interactivist and anti-constructivist method of teaching. She writes that:

    "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.......[Blackboard/WebCT] forces the instructor to think in terms of content types instead, breaking the natural structure of the semester, or of a list of topics."

    Lane also builds a compelling case for the pedagogical advantages of Moodle:

    "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. Thus there is less of an implication that presentation is key, and more of an implication that interactivity is important."

    In reading Lane's article I came to realize that much of the work that I do with faculty members is to help move them off the default settings and towards a more narrative and interactive approach to course design. I wonder if learning technologists/designers working on Moodle campuses have higher rates of success in this effort?

    I wonder if Blackboard plans to move its defaults towards an "Opt-In" system that behaves closer to the Moodle model. The strength of Blackboard is in its robust Grade Center, testing engine, assignment management, discussion tools, and integration with student information systems. It seems like these strengths of Blackboard could easily be integrated with a more progressive default design.

    Lane's article is one example where I'd very much value a discussion that includes the people from Blackboard, as well as the Blackboard and Moodle user community.

Advertisement

Comments on Great Article on Insidious Pedagogy

  • Shifting the default
  • Posted by Rich , Program Coordinator for Faculty Development at Columbus State on October 9, 2009 at 9:30am EDT
  • I have not read Lane's article but what I read here matches my own sentiments after working with faculty in Blackboard for seven years. Every institutions "default" is bit different and it is possible to prompt different uses of the system (I'll say more on this below). But on the whole, Bb acts as glorified file cabinet where you attach stuff. And that is how most courses look -- a bunch of attachments -- when the teacher has little design support from instructional technology staff. (Note: My experience includes Bb7 but no later version.)

    I've had limited experience with Moodle and D2L when taking professional development courses but I did notice with each of those systems that I felt I was interacting with a web site instead of downloading files and I was interacting more with class participants. I know this is not entirely due to the LMS but to the design work that went into the course. Still, it seemed far easier to achieve that end in these other systems than in Bb.

    The fact that people accept the default is an important one. It is explored in books like "Nudge" and is behind initiatives to create opt-out savings and charitable giving options that "nudge" people to do what is best. To the extent that we can modify our default LMS set-up to encourage effective practice we should do so. We have a "model course" that has content placeholders and prompts that match Quality Matters standards and other best practices. When this is loaded first, the resulting course usually retains many of these design features. The tool can determine what it is created with it. We need our tools to encourage better design.

  • From a student's perspective
  • Posted by Rick Martin on October 9, 2009 at 11:15am EDT
  • FWIW - I've taken grad-level courses on both Blackboard and Moodle. My n is perilously low and I can't speak to the elements of the instructor interface which might contribute to this, but I definitely experienced the Moodle course as more interactive and, as a result, more instructive than the half-dozen Blackboard ones. And it's not my impression that the instructor on the Moodle course was particularly exceptional.

  • Other factors that might interfere in course design
  • Posted by KT , Prof of MIS at small, public, teaching university on October 10, 2009 at 2:30pm EDT
  • At my institution, we just installed a newer version of BB (9). While it seems to encourage a more website like interface, the creation and modification of content takes much longer. It's taking me two or three times longer to do anything and it seems much easier to make mistakes. Each edit takes more time (even when on campus and connecting via a fast LAN). The text editor is horrendous.

    So ... I haven't really had time to move beyond the defaults into a better re-design of my course (I use it heavily in support of my face-to-face classes). I'm mired in trying to get basic materials into the 'filing cabinets'. The dropbox is gone, the email to students doesn't work (but emailing announcements does). The blogs are hard to find and put upfront. I can't do much to edit the 'home page' area.

    I realize these problems may be due to how BB9 was installed here and to a learning curve, but none of the folks involved here are novices (our institution has been using BB for years and years; I've been a BB admin at one point, and I do have a PhD and 30 years experience in IT using networks and creating software and databases of all sorts).

    And don't get me started on security. BB seems to refuse to include a secure browser for exams and actually blocked my java code that improved security (to limit copy/edit/screen-capture/print capabilities during quizzes/exams) in the version update before this one. BB security is really poor.

    We have experimented with Moodle. I did love being able to import student id pictures and add them automatically to my roster. (Are there any secure browser add-ins for Moodle?) But we were going to have to make a lot of additions to the basic Moodle software to get it up to the capabilities that BB already had.

    I suggest that ease of use and ease of installation is an important factor in how much of the instructor's effort can go towards changing the basic pedagogical approach of the CMS. I hope to improve my BB course sites toward more interactivity next semester, but I expect it will still be in slow, incremental steps.

  • Sharing of model course?
  • Posted by Elaine Garofoli , Academic Learning Technologist at Suffolk University on October 12, 2009 at 9:00am EDT
  • Hi Rich,
    I am less than a year into my position as Academic Learning Technoligst in a Business School, and am working with faculty in Blackboard 7.xx, to help them realize that teaching online means more than holding a live chat session once/week in LiveClassroom. Consequently, I am very intrigued with the model course you have created and wonder if you are able to share more about that, or better yet, the template itself.
    Many thanks.
    ~Elaine

  • Bad teaching is bad teaching
  • Posted by Jared Stein on October 14, 2009 at 5:30pm EDT
  • We use both Bb/WebCT and Moodle. While I believe that a LMS's interface can affect the course design decisions of novices, I maintain that most LMSs provide essentially the same core features, a poorly designed course is a poorly designed course, but that poor "design" of course content and navigation can be thwarted by exceptional interactivity.

    I will say that Moodle's basic UI does present the "online course" in a particular paradigm that some find helpful, defaulting towards a semesterly or topics based interface with less "steps" for students to lose their scent along the way. Unfortunately, it still has spotty support for current web technology and little chance of creating links between the classroom and the real world. In essence, it is still behind the curve in terms of features and possibilities exhibited by the open web--nearly as far behind as Bb.

    The key advantage, of course, is Moodle is both free and open source.

  • @ Elaine
  • Posted by Rich , Program Coordinator for Faculty Development at Columbus State on October 17, 2009 at 9:15pm EDT
  • You can see an annotated tour of this model at http://teaching.cscc.edu/LDC/CDK.asp.

  • Posted by Elaine on January 2, 2010 at 7:30pm EST
  • @Rich - molto grazie