Navigating An LMS Review Process: Harnessing Next-Generation Digital Learning Through Evidence-Based Decision-Making

IF 2 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice Pub Date : 2024-05-22 DOI:10.53761/ynndrw32
Bill Wade, Seb Dianati, Bill Searle, Michael Sankey
{"title":"Navigating An LMS Review Process: Harnessing Next-Generation Digital Learning Through Evidence-Based Decision-Making","authors":"Bill Wade, Seb Dianati, Bill Searle, Michael Sankey","doi":"10.53761/ynndrw32","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Universities across Australasia regularly evaluate their Learning Management Systems (LMS) to meet the increasing digital teaching and learning demands. LMS reviews conducted approximately every five years or so are driven by factors such as pandemics, contract renewals, fiscal considerations, and the pursuit of optimal student online learning experiences. Recent trends show that Australian universities are conducting LMS reviews more frequently and transitioning to new LMSs at an accelerated pace (Phil, 2022; Sankey, 2023a). This is to ensure the LMS of choice meets the Next Generation Digital Learning Environment (NGDLE) functionality (Educause, 2018), is affordable, reliable and is still fit for purpose. While ongoing LMS reviews are common, there is a lack of published information on how higher education institutions undertake them. There was little available to unpack how best to engage in open, transparent, and aspirational conversation with staff and students about their experience with the LMS. As part of the review, even less was published about the dialogue on the future teaching and learning needs and the future of the LMS. To help address this gap in the literature, this practice-based paper reports on our approach and the steps taken to propose a unique two-phase / multi-stage model for reviewing an LMS and offers a useful checklist for those who may want some help getting started.\n \n ","PeriodicalId":45764,"journal":{"name":"Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53761/ynndrw32","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Universities across Australasia regularly evaluate their Learning Management Systems (LMS) to meet the increasing digital teaching and learning demands. LMS reviews conducted approximately every five years or so are driven by factors such as pandemics, contract renewals, fiscal considerations, and the pursuit of optimal student online learning experiences. Recent trends show that Australian universities are conducting LMS reviews more frequently and transitioning to new LMSs at an accelerated pace (Phil, 2022; Sankey, 2023a). This is to ensure the LMS of choice meets the Next Generation Digital Learning Environment (NGDLE) functionality (Educause, 2018), is affordable, reliable and is still fit for purpose. While ongoing LMS reviews are common, there is a lack of published information on how higher education institutions undertake them. There was little available to unpack how best to engage in open, transparent, and aspirational conversation with staff and students about their experience with the LMS. As part of the review, even less was published about the dialogue on the future teaching and learning needs and the future of the LMS. To help address this gap in the literature, this practice-based paper reports on our approach and the steps taken to propose a unique two-phase / multi-stage model for reviewing an LMS and offers a useful checklist for those who may want some help getting started.    
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
驾驭 LMS 审查流程:通过循证决策驾驭下一代数字化学习
大洋洲的各所大学都会定期对其学习管理系统(LMS)进行评估,以满足日益增长的数字化教学和学习需求。大约每五年左右对 LMS 进行一次评估,其驱动因素包括流行病、合同续签、财政考虑以及追求最佳的学生在线学习体验。最近的趋势表明,澳大利亚的大学正在更频繁地进行 LMS 评估,并加速向新的 LMS 过渡(Phil, 2022; Sankey, 2023a)。这是为了确保所选择的 LMS 符合下一代数字化学习环境(NGDLE)的功能要求(Educause,2018 年),价格合理,性能可靠,并且仍然适用。虽然持续的 LMS 审查很常见,但缺乏关于高等教育机构如何进行审查的公开信息。对于如何最好地与教职员工和学生就他们使用 LMS 的体验进行公开、透明和有抱负的对话,几乎没有可用的资料。作为审查的一部分,关于未来教学需求和 LMS 未来的对话发表的资料就更少了。为了帮助解决文献中的这一空白,这篇以实践为基础的论文报告了我们的方法和步骤,提出了一种独特的两阶段/多阶段的 LMS 审查模式,并为那些可能需要一些帮助才能开始工作的人提供了一份有用的清单。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice
Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
18.80%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: The Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice aims to add significantly to the body of knowledge describing effective and innovative teaching and learning practice in higher education.The Journal is a forum for educational practitioners across a wide range of disciplines. Its purpose is to facilitate the communication of teaching and learning outcomes in a scholarly way, bridging the gap between journals covering purely academic research and articles and opinions published without peer review.
期刊最新文献
Editorial: Intensive modes of teaching, past, present, and future Editorial: More Practical Gender Research is Needed in Higher Education Leadership and Management What Exactly is Peer Learning? An Exploratory Analysis of Student Class Interaction Reframing Professional Identity: Professional Development Framework for Learning/Educational Designers Perceptions and Experiences of Academic Advisers and Minoritised Students at a UK University
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1