The topic of ‘LMS of the future’ is an intriguing one, particularly because of the rapid changes that are now occurring in both Internet and communication technologies. First, I would like to concur with Dr. Saba that we really would need to call this an EMS, or education management system, because we are not only changing learning, but also instruction, and furthermore, the foundation of higher education as we know it.
That said, my EMS would focus on the reality of transitioning from industrial-era education to post-industrial education. Such a venture would only truly be successful with a smooth, well-organized transition. The first thing I would abolish is the Standardized Testing and attendance-based funding system.
I would include the role of enrolling institutions, but with a clearly defined national structure that manages interactions between these institutions, much like an air traffic controller on an airfield. This would ensure the optimal allocation of knowledge resources across the country, and would create a structure for dialog between institutions.
I’d also focus on the early training in metacognition. This skill must be taught at a very young age, in order for it to carry over into such an educational system. If the very cornerstone of such a system is to provide a structure that supports unique individual needs of each student, then the student will have to be fully prepared to become a self-directed learner. By the time they hit early adolescence, they will have been exposed to many practice routines, and have proven their metacognition skills for advancement.
I would follow Dr. Saba’s concept of interdisciplinary instructional teams, as opposed to traditional subject-area departments. This would allow the teams to better assist students in the timely completion of tasks and the appropriate fulfillment of their learning contract. I would also follow closely the cycles of ongoing counseling and assessment to assist the students’ efforts in completing their program of study. I also agree that states would reimburse these enrolling institutions based on students successfully completing their learning contracts. This provides both a fair and productive way for government to support quality education.
Due to the cost, time, and maintenance savings that such an EMS would provide, there is no doubt that such a system is worthwhile. But is it viable? My contention is that it IS viable, so long as the appropriate mechanisms are in place to provide for a transition to this type of learning. As stated before, our current educational system is firmly rooted in traditional, industrial-era, classroom-based instruction. The transition to such a system would require a specific, research-oriented pilot program that was free from all such restraints. This system could be employed in different locations throughout the country, subject to various critiques and trial runs. Then, a methodical step-by-step introduction of the system could be introduced into existing schools (by choice). Gradually, more and more schools could bring the system online.
At first, the current school system and the newly designed EMS would work side-by-side. Eventually, some schools may opt to go completely under the EMS umbrella, with support from other schools and also from the government.
In order for any of this to happen, we really do need talented leadership and vision paving the way for this new paradigm shift. There is no doubt that today’s learners are accustomed to new ways of learning that the current system is having trouble providing. A properly designed EMS, along with a detailed transition plan, would be the key to unlocking this powerful technology.
- Login to post comments