Our 2018-2019 Global State of Digital Learning research study revealed some interesting insights about instructional approaches. It was taken by 9,279 education professionals from all across the country in various roles and districts.
When we look at instructional approaches most frequently used, the top ones are differentiated instruction (73.5%), blended learning (54.8%), and individualized learning (47.8%). And while flipped learning, personalized learning, and gamification command the most press, they aren’t being practiced as much as one might think. In many ways, this makes a lot of sense. These approaches require more time and resources than many of the others.
In fall 2007, Larry Berger, CEO of Wireless Generation (now Amplify) was invited to submit a paper to an “Entrepreneurship in Education”
As education entrepreneurs know, growth in K-12 comes hard. Sometimes very hard. We were living Marc Andreessen’s startup mantra: “You only ever experience two emotions: euphoria and terror.”
The edtech boom of the past two decades promised efficacy and new instructional models. Many teachers instead experience it as “clutter.” But poorly integrated standards, curriculum, assessment, and intervention materials have always been a problem.
When it comes to instruction, the work consists of four segments: core curriculum, supplemental (intervention, test prep, little books) curriculum, assessment, and technology (hardware, infrastructure and connectivity). Each of these workstreams are run by separate teams, using independent funding streams, only rarely coordinating. Schools rely—as they always have—on the hero in the classroom, who has to somehow synthesize everything for a roomful of children, every single day.
Twelve Years Later: How the K-12 Industry and Investment Landscape Has Shifted (Part 2)
Twelve years ago, Amplify CEO Larry Berger and I wrote about the “pareto distribution” of companies in the K-12 sector.
The “oligopoly” was the natural outcome of a highly decentralized system and fragmented demand. To serve 15,000-plus districts and more than 100,000 school buildings, a company needed huge sales and service teams; to afford them, the company needed a bookbag full of products across content areas, grade ranges, and use cases. The structure of demand created the “Big Three”—McGraw-Hill, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt and Pearson.
Meanwhile, the number of small players—further right on the pareto distribution—has grown dramatically. Online distribution and freemium business models have enabled companies like Flocabulary, Newsela, Nearpod, and others
few alternative models to consider:
companies like Remind, ClassDojo, and Edmodo, who all adopted a “West Coast” approach: collect active users now, with plans to monetize later.
The second includes the “platform” players—Schoology, itslearning, Canvas, and other LMS-like platforms. They have set out to do something differently, only possible by means of technology—to be the search, storage and distribution platform for instructional content. Google Classroom has instead emerged as the de facto standard platform, fueled by the runaway adoption of Chromebooks.
The third includes “policy responsive” players—companies like Panorama, Ellevation or Wireless Generation. hese companies help school systems meet a new policy requirement—social-emotional learning, English Language Learning, and reading assessment, respectively.
But we’re not “decluttering” our classrooms or in our schools. What would it take for the private and public sectors to work shoulder-to-shoulder?
a catch-22: so long as buying is fragmented, it’s hard to justify the integrated product investment; so long as products are fragmented, it’s hard for a district to create an integrated instructional model.
The Best Learning Management Systems based on Customer Experience
This Top 20 LMS list has been created using a holistic approach and is based on input from actual LMS users.
The order of appearance depends on Customer Satisfaction (CSAT Score), Customer Effort (CEF Score) & Customer Expectation (CEX Score).
Over the past 10 years, new learning management systems (LMSs) have sprung on the scene to rival the Blackboards and Moodles of old. On the EdSurge Product Index alone, 56 products self-identify and fall into the LMS category. And with certain established companies like Pearson pulling out of the LMS ranks, where do you start?
As University of Central Florida’s Associate Vice President of Distributed Learning, Tom Cavanagh, wrote in an article for EDUCAUSE, “every institute has a unique set of instructional and infrastructure circumstances to consider when deciding on an LMS,” but at the same time, “all institutions face certain common requirements”—whether a small charter school, a private university or a large public school district.
The LMS Checklist
#1: Is the platform straightforward and user-friendly?
#2: Who do we want to have access to this platform, and can we adjust what they can see?
#3: Can the instructor and student(s) talk to and communicate with each other easily?
“Students and faculty live a significant portion of their daily lives online in social media spaces,” writes University of Central Florida’s Tom Cavanagh in his article on the LMS selection process. “Are your students and faculty interested in these sorts of interplatform connections?”
#5: Does this platform plug in with all of the other platforms we have?
“Given the pace of change and the plethora of options with educational technology, it’s very difficult for any LMS vendor to keep up with stand-alone tools that will always outperform built-in tools,” explains Michael Truong, executive director of innovative teaching and technology at Azusa Pacific University. According to Truong, “no LMS will be able to compete directly with tools like Piazza (discussion forum), Socrative (quizzing), EdPuzzle (video annotation), etc.”
As a result, Truong says, “The best way to ‘prepare’ for future technological changes is to go with an LMS that plays well with external tools.”
How One District Created a Culture of Innovation Through Interoperability
Join the Executive Director of Technology for the School District of Pickens County in South Carolina, Barbara Nesbitt, on Thursday, February 22 at 1pm EST to hear how they used Schoology to:
Centralize their technologies and resources
Save teachers time to focus on student achievement
Ensure a consistent student experience from grade-to-grade
Excellent discussion on the blend-online listserv on :
Can anyone recommend a good social network platform, preferably Cloud-based, that could be used to facilitate substantive organic communication and collaboration among past, present and future students on a handful of online and blended learning programs?
From: The EDUCAUSE Blended and Online Learning Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Robert Tousignant Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 11:50 AM To:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [BLEND-ONLINE] Social network platforms for HigherEd
Also, as mentioned in my previous post, Schoology (http://www.schoology.com) offers an LMS with a modern social media interface and integrations with Facebook, Microsoft OneDrive, etc… you might want to add it to the list as well.
I added both thanks for the update and clarification.
Facebook Group
“Groups for Schools” feature today which will allow American colleges to create Group pages accessible only within the school community.
LinkedIn
LinkedIn is a business-oriented social networking service. Founded in December 2002 and launched on May 5, 2003, it is mainly used for professional networking.
K-12 Edmodo
Edmodo is a social networking site for teachers and students where over 46 million teachers, students, and parents are connecting to collaborate on assignments, discover new resources. Edmodo is a web 2.0 social networking tool for educators to use to communicate with students and parents.
Microsoft OneDrive
A file hosting service that allows users to upload and sync files to a cloud storage and then access them from a Web browser or their local device.
12manage.com
A free management education and business education platform for management and organization of business or education.
Yammer
Yammer a private social network collaboration software and business applications that allows the user to connect to the right people, share information across teams and organize around projects.
Celly
Celly is a platform for ad-hoc social networks that is accessible via iPhone, Android, Web, SMS text and even email. Networks connect individuals and communities for instant and easy communication.
Jive
Jive is a communication and collaboration platform solution for business. Jive enables employees, partners and customers to work together.
Twitter
Twitter is a powerhouse for marketing, communication, business, and even education, letting people from around the world work together, share ideas, and gain exposure to concepts.
Google+ Communities
Google+ is a place to connect with friends and family, and explore interests. Google+ allows the user to share photos, send messages, and stay in touch with the people globally.
Hive Social
Hive Social is a specialist Social Media consultancy, that helps businesses and brands find, connect, build and engage with their online audience through Social Media and Digital Marketing.
Enterprise Hive
HiveSocial for higher education is an enterprise social software, communication and collaboration platform with embedded game mechanics
Socialtext
Socialtext applies Web 2.0 technologies such as enterprise microblogging, enterprise social networking and wikis to the critical challenges facing businesses. Socialtext’s platform allows employees to share expertise, speed workflows, and get their jobs done faster.
Elgg
Elgg an open source social networking software that provides individuals and organizations with the components needed to create an online social environment. It offers blogging, microblogging, file sharing, networking, and groups
“Learning is finding out what you already know, Doing is demonstrating that you know it, Teaching is reminding others that they know it as well as you do. We are all learners, doers, and teachers.”
A Facebook group is probably the quickest, easiest, and will give you the best engagement. Data shows that in the under 25 age group, Facebook groups is still popular.
If you were trying to reach mainly current and future, I would shift to LinkedIn.
All of those other social networks and white label networks require people to remember another log in, site, and place to check and update. You might get good engagement up front, but it will deteriorate.
David Kampmann, M.S. in Ed, CFD | Southeast Technical Institute
Can anyone recommend a good social network platform, preferably Cloud-based, that could be used to facilitate substantive organic communication and collaboration among past, present and future students on a handful of online and blended learning programs?
I am familiar with Google+ Communities, Yammer, Jive and Socialtext, but I am wondering if there are other solutions worth investigating. Facebook at Work might be a possibility, but it is too early to tell. Elgg is also a viable option, especially, a hosted Elgg instance, but identifying a fully functional, customizable and super easy to use and administrate Cloud-first solution is most desirable.
From: The EDUCAUSE Blended and Online Learning Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Robert Tousignant Sent: Thursday, April 9, 2015 1:41 PM To:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [BLEND-ONLINE] Faculty Involvement in LMS Selection
I’ve been reviewing this thread and thought I’d introduce a new player… Schoology is getting the attention of the analyst community and gobbling up the SIIA Codie awards for best learning platform the last couple of years. (Please note, I am not an impartial observer and I do a horse in the race)
The attached document includes information that will explain a new paradigm for evaluating an LMS that we see being adopted more and more – a move from a focus on utility (features and functions) to one focused standards, interoperability and the user experience (UI/UX).
Feel free to reach out directly if I can be of assistance.
These days, I tend to favor LMS Review/Selection initiatives that take one to two years to complete, but as always, it depends on the institution, its readiness to spec the needs of their faculty/students and evaluate viable options, as well as the campus resources available to nurture a possible smooth LMS platform transition. I like pointing out to the well-executed recent LMS selection initiatives carried out by UCF, Northwestern, Indiana, Harvard and Dartmouth, although there are many others.
*** Attend the FACULTY SUMMER INSTITUTE :: Wed-Fri May 27-29 at Urbana-Champaign
#pedagogy #BlendedLearning #classroom #teaching #OnlineLearning #EdTech http://go.illinois.edu/facultysummerinstitute
_____________________________
From: Hap Aziz <hapaziz@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 9, 2015 12:30 PM
Subject: Re: [BLEND-ONLINE] Faculty Involvement in LMS Selection
To: <blend-online@listserv.educause.edu>
That’s sounds like a similar timeframe to what we had at UB when we moved from Blackboard to Canvas. While LTI didn’t not play a large role in the decision-making process as we changed our LMS, it is now a central consideration as we look to acquire any new app functionality for our learning environment.
I’m setting up an area in the IMS forum area for LTI policy discussion. I’ll share that location with the group shortly so we can take some of the in-the-weeds discussion offline here.
The selection process started in January of 2013 and the task force voted at the end of May of 2013 unanimously for Canvas so about 5 months. By October we started training faculty in preparation for the Spring 2014 semester what was amazing about our transition to Canvas was that we had everyone moved out of ANGEL by start of Summer 14 so we only had 1 semester where we were supporting both ANGEL and Canvas. The use of LTI integrations and Canvas makes our jobs a lot easier to support the various tools that faculty are adopting for their classes – it also makes it a lot easier for faculty to integrate other technologies and keep them in the LMS or have single sign on so it is more seamless for students.
CONFIDENTIALITY: This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential, proprietary and privileged information, and unauthorized disclosure or use is prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email from your system. Thank you.
From: The EDUCAUSE Blended and Online Learning Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Hap Aziz Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 7:09 PM To:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [BLEND-ONLINE] Faculty Involvement in LMS Selection
Hey, Sam, long time no see! Do you know about how long your whole selection process took? Also, does LTI conformance make your job with academic technology more straightforward to deal with?
I am at San Juan College and we also recently went through the selection process for a new LMS and like others who have commented switched to Canvas (from ANGEL). We ended up with a selection team that was primarily faculty, a couple students, and a handful of technology staff that reviewed the various LMSs and then made our final decision. If you would like I can get you the contact information for the faculty who assisted on the selection team.
CONFIDENTIALITY: This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential, proprietary and privileged information, and unauthorized disclosure or use is prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email from your system. Thank you.
From: The EDUCAUSE Blended and Online Learning Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Noval, JeJe (LLU) Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2015 9:25 PM To:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: [BLEND-ONLINE] Faculty Involvement in LMS Selection
Hello Colleagues,
Were any of you, faculty members, involved in the learning management selection process of your educational institution? If so, would it be possible to interview you in the future for a research study?
Best,
JeJe Noval, MS, RD
Assistant Professor
Loma Linda University
