The learning management system (LMS) is quite familiar to educators, but to new students it’s a large piece of often opaque technology. They have questions. And these questions tell us not only what they need to know, but also about who we are and how we present ourselves.
Q. What is the learning management system actually for?
Why this question matters:
It’s common for students to just be presented with an online tool they’re required to use without any real explanation of what it does or why it’s being used. For a student not used to your particular LMS, it can require a lot of extra work to get logged in and familiar with the interface. It’s important that they understand why they need to invest their time and sometimes their money.
What the question reflects about our system:
We tend not to engage with students about the decisions we make on how we teach and what tools we use, much less the pedagogical principles behind these decisions. The best students can typically expect is a set of learning objectives and maybe some indication of why these objectives are important.
What we can do:
The more complex the world becomes, the more agency students require. This means being informed not only about what they’re learning and why they’re learning it, but also about how they’re being taught and what they can do to improve their own chances of success. This doesn’t mean they should be steeped in the intricacies of constructivism, but they should have some sense that educators are acting with purpose.
In practical terms, this means it’s vital to:
- Ensure students understand what the LMS is for and why it’s being used.
- Explain how using the LMS supports learning and enhances students’ chances of success.
- Make clear that educators’ choices are purposeful and guided by teaching goals, not convention.
Q. Why do we have to use an LMS instead of our own tech tools?
Why this question matters:
Students don’t come to the classroom without tech experience. They have been using phones and computers since they were young and have grown used to their own set of tools. They’re not necessarily using email and YouTube, but they’re not using anything that looks like an LMS — so it’s reasonable to ask why they need special tools for education.
What the question reflects about our system:
When we talk about education at home and in the community, we are usually talking about content and curriculum. We rarely talk about how important things like discussions and hands-on activities are, for example. The focus seems to be on receiving content (especially if it can be seen on video), asking questions by email and submitting assignments as attachments. When we think of education that way, any other tool seems to pointlessly complicate things.
What we can do:
Spend less time on content and more time on process. Emphasize that learning isn’t so much about remembering things as it is about training the mind to recognize and react intelligently. This means educators must make clear the pedagogical intent of such things as group work, exercises, simulations, physical activities and hands-on learning.
In practical terms, this means:
- Spend more time emphasizing learning processes and less time emphasizing content.
- Explain that learning is about training the mind to recognize, interpret and respond intelligently, not just memorize.
- Make explicit to students the pedagogical purpose of group work, exercises, simulations, physical activities and hands-on learning.
Q. Why does the LMS feel so rigid compared to other apps we use?
Why this question matters:
Compared to the social networks and games students use on their phones and computers, learning management systems look like they were designed in a primitive age and not updated since.. This can have real consequences that impact what they feel about the instruction they are receiving or the curriculum they are covering. Perhaps it too is just as irrelevant and out of date.
What the question reflects about our system:
As educators know well, we need different tools to work with several dozen or several hundred students. The LMS must support not only the latest tools but the many different computers and operating systems available to them. Yet students are not encouraged to see learning as something that is done by a larger community. After all, they often work alone, are tested alone and receive individual grades. There’s no real reason for them to look beyond what they need as individuals to see what’s needed to ensure everybody has access to a proper learning system.
What we can do:
Emphasize the need to take into account the needs and interests of other people using the same system or network, whether they are driving on the roads, attending an event together, learning at an institution or simply living in a society.
In practical terms, this means:
- Make students aware of the importance of considering the needs and interests of all users in shared systems.
- Help students understand that learning is a collective activity, not just an individual endeavour.
- Explain why designing for scale, access and reliability requires balancing multiple trade-offs.
Q. Is the LMS just being used to keep track of us?
Why this question matters:
There is no doubt the LMS plays a role in monitoring and accountability. This is especially the case in today’s era of learning analytics. The LMS keeps track of every activity and interaction, and will send reminders to students when they’re falling behind or failing to fully engage. It checks their papers for plagiarism, might require the use of a locked-down browser and might even include an exam proctoring system. It’s not surprising if some students think surveillance is the LMS’s only function and that it creates an adversarial relationship between educators and students.
What the question reflects about our system:
A system that is used mostly for surveillance tells students very clearly that they are not trusted and that educators expect people who aren’t being watched to behave dishonestly. This type of system also tells students that educators think some things are more important than the students’ well-being and success. They are expected to view learning as a challenge and a competition, not something they can do naturally in concert with each other. It reflects the belief that if you can get away with it, cheating is a path to success and that there’s no inherent value to education other than the degree or certificate.
What we can do:
Avoid activities that require tracking and surveillance, and encourage students to depend on self-reflection and personal monitoring. The intent should be to clearly identify the reason for any monitoring and, specifically, the desire to ensure the success of the student as opposed to ensuring correct behaviour or obedience. The idea is to ensure monitoring is voluntary and that students manage it for themselves.
In practical terms, this means:
- Avoid activities that rely primarily on tracking and surveillance whenever possible.
- Clearly explain the purpose of any monitoring and emphasize that it is intended to support student success, not enforce obedience.
- Encourage self-reflection and personal monitoring rather than enforced compliance.
- Ensure that any monitoring is voluntary and managed by students themselves whenever feasible.
Q. Why can’t we just use the LMS and avoid in-person learning?
Why this question matters:
Some students who have experienced success with online learning are beginning to wonder why we even hold classes in person. Most students are now experiencing at least some online learning, which they may find a lot more convenient. They may feel they’re getting everything they need online. This may reflect a gradual social withdrawal on the part of the student or a lack of awareness that they will be expected to live and work in social environments, even those in which there is a lot of reliance on computers.
What the question reflects about our system:
This varies depending on why the student prefers to work online. It might reflect a general attitude that things that are easy and efficient are better, and that convenient learning is more effective learning. It might reflect a preference for order and structure, which is more a feature of online learning than a messy classroom environment. Or it might reflect the fact that a student is currently experiencing no value from whatever social interaction is being provided and therefore sees no need for it.
What we can do:
Agree with the student about the value and utility of the LMS so that their success with it is not undermined. Then invite reflection on how what is being learned can be applied in the broader community, and what is needed to enable that. For example, students could be presented with social, environmental or cultural challenges that could be addressed with the new skills they are learning, and in this way draw them into more challenging environments.
In practical terms, this means:
- Acknowledge the value and utility of the LMS so students’ success with it is not undermined.
- Guide students to reflect on how their learning applies beyond the LMS in broader social, environmental or cultural contexts.
- Create opportunities that challenge students to apply their skills in complex, real-world situations.
