Implementing Individualized Learning in a Legacy Learning Management System A Feasibility Prototype for an Online Statistics Course

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published: Jul 10, 2019
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14434/ijdl.v10i1.22500

Main Article Content

M. Earnest Morrow
Sam Houston State University
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4648-1909
Dabae Lee
Emporia State University

Abstract

Educators are being encouraged to shift their instructional paradigm from teacher-centered to learner-centered through the use of technology. For online courses, legacy learning management products originally designed to support and deliver teacher-centered instruction may represent a constraint to implementing the learner-centered paradigm. Yet, replacement of these systems presents a formidable hurdle to educators wishing to initiate learner-centered online courses. This hurdle could be lowered significantly by a transitional approach that allows learner-centered strategies to be delivered within the framework of existing learning management systems. This paper describes our efforts to prototype such a transitional approach for an online statistics course. Pedagogical and technological objectives were successfully achieved by combining the technologies of the Sharable Content Object Reference Model (SCORM), a legacy learning management system, and a standalone course authoring tool to deliver an example course demonstrating adaptive, competency-based student progress instruction that personalizes one’s learning path with topic-contingent assessment feedback.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Morrow, M. E., & Lee, D. (2019). Implementing Individualized Learning in a Legacy Learning Management System: A Feasibility Prototype for an Online Statistics Course. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 10(1), 131–144. https://doi.org/10.14434/ijdl.v10i1.22500
Issue
Vol. 10 No. 1 (2019)
Section
Articles

Copyright © 2023 by the International Journal of Designs for Learning, a publication of the Association of Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) and Indiana University. Permission to make digital or hard copies of portions of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that the copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page in print or the first screen in digital media. Except as otherwise noted, the content published by IJDL is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA. A simpler version of this statement is available here.

Author Biographies

M. Earnest Morrow, Sam Houston State University

M. Earnest Morrow is completing an educational doctorate (EdD) in Instructional Systems Design and Technology at Sam Houston State University after retiring from an extensive career in information technology management at a major multinational corporation. Mike’s objective is to redirect his experience in technology and corporate management practices to issues in the field of Computer Science Education. The subject of his dissertation concerns quantitative analysis of a cardsorting instrument for the assessment of computational thinking skills acquisition in a higher education setting.

 

Dabae Lee, Emporia State University

Dabae Lee is an assistant professor of Instructional Technology at Emporia State University. She teaches undergraduate and graduate courses in instructional technology, program evaluation, and research methods. Her research interests include personalized learning, student collaboration in learner-centered instructional methods, roles of technology in learner-centered paradigm, active learning spaces, and research methods in Instructional Technology.

References

Advanced Distributed Learning. (2015). Experience API. Retrieved from Advanced Distributed Learning: https://www.adlnet.gov/adl-research/performance-tracking-analysis/experience-api/

Advanced Distributed Learning. (2015). SCORM overview. Retrieved from Advanced Distributed Learning: http://adlnet.gov/adl-research/scorm/

Aslan, S., Huh, Y., Lee, D., & Reigeluth, C. M. (2011). The role of personalized integrated educational systems in the information-age paradigm of education. Contemporary Educational Technology, 2(2), 95-117. Retrieved from http://www.cedtech.net/articles/221.pdf

Articulate. (2012, September 24). Using javascript to tell the storyline flash player to go to slide. Retrieved from E-learning heroes discussion blog: https://community.articulate.com/discussions/articulate-storyline/using-javascript-to-tell-the-storyline-flash-player-to-go-to-slide

Articulate. (2015). StoryLine 2 - all features. Retrieved from Articulate: https://www.articulate.com/products/storyline-all-features.php

Bernardi, J. (2015, August 6). How to setup adaptive release for an assessment in Blackboard Learn. Retrieved from University of Houston Knowledge Base: http://innovate.uh.edu/edtech/knowledgebase/adaptive-release-for-an-assessment-on-blackboard-learn/

Blackboard. (2014, April). Add content packages. Retrieved from Blackboard Help: https://en-us.help.blackboard.com/Learn/9.1_2014_04/Instructor/090_Course_Content/010_Create_Content/025_Add_Content_Packages

Blackboard. (n.d.). Get started. Retrieved from CourseSites: https://www.coursesites.com/bbcswebdav/institution/coursesites-files/www/getstarted.html

Bloom, B. S. (1968). Learning for mastery. Instruction and Curriculum, 1(2), 1-10.

Bremer, D., & Bryant, R. (2005). A comparison of two learning management systems: Moodle vs Blackboard. Proceedings of the 18th Annual Conference of the National Advisory Committee on Computing Qualifications, pp. 135–140.

Bunderson, C., Wiley, D., & McBride, R. (2009). Domain Theory for instruction: Mapping attainments to enable learner-centered education. In C. M. Reigeluth, & A. A. Carr-Chellman (Eds.), Instructional-design theories and models: Building a common knowledge base (pp. 327-347). New York, NY: Routledge.

Cohen, V. B. (1985, January). A reexamination of feedback in computer-based instruction: Implications for instructional design. Educational Technology, pp. 33-37.

Desire2Learn. (2015). D2L resource center - LeaP. Retrieved from D2L: https://documentation.desire2learn.com/en/LeaP

Dobre, I. (2015). Learning management systems for higher education - an overview of available options for higher education organizations. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 180, 313-320.

Holmesglen Institute of TAFE. (2013). Beyond SCORM - New interoperability standards. Retrieved from E-Standards for training: http://e-standards.flexiblelearning.net.au/research/funded_projects/emerging_technology_trials/2013/beyond_scorm_-_new_interoperability_standards.php

IMS Global Learning Consortium. (2016). Learning tools interoperability. Retrieved from IMS Global Learning Consortium: https://www.imsglobal.org/activity/learning-tools-interoperability

Johnson, D. T. (2000). Teaching mathematics to gifted students in a mixed-ability classroom. ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education, the Council for Exceptional Children.

Khan, B. H. (2006). Flexible learning in an information society. Hershey, PA: Information Science Publishing.

Kulik, C. -L., Kulik, J. A., & Bangert-Drowns, R. L. (1990). Effectiveness of mastery learning programs: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 60(2), 265-299. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543060002265

Lee, D. (2014). How to personalize learning in K-12 schools: Five essential design features. Educational Technologies, May-June, 12-17.

Manochehr, N. N. (2006). The influence of learning styles on learners in e-learning environments: An empirical study. Cheer Virtual Edition, 18, 10-14.

Mason, B. J., & Bruning, R. (2001, January). Providing feedback in computer-based instruction: What the research tells us. Retrieved from Center for Instructional Innovation: University of Nebraska-Lincoln: http://dwb4.unl.edu/dwb/Research/MB/MasonBruning.html

Mills, C. J., Ablard, K. E., & Gustin, W. C. (1994). Academically talented students’ achievement in a flexibly paced mathematics program. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 495-511. https://doi.org/10.2307/749487

Northeastern University. (2014, October). Choosing your publish settings in Storyline for use with Blackboard gradebook. Retrieved from Northeastern University Academic Technology Services: http:// www.ats.neu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Storyline_SCORM_ and_Blackboard_grading.pdf

Posner, M. A. (2011). The impact of a proficiency-based assessment and reassessment of learning outcomes system on student achievement and attitudes. Statistics Education Research Journal, 10(1), 3-14.

Reigeluth, C. M., & Karnopp, J. R. (2013). Reinventing schools: It’s time to break the mold. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Rustici Software. (n.d.). SCORM explained- business of SCORM. Retrieved from Rustici Software: http://scorm.com/scorm-explained/business-of-scorm/

Sodoke, K., Riopel, M., Raîche, G., Nkambou, .., & Lesage, M. (2007). Extending Moodle functionalities to adaptive testing framework. World Conf. on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare & Higher Education (E-Learn), 2007.

Software & Information Industry Association. (2010). Innovate to educate: System [Re]design for personalized learning; A report from the 2010 Symposium. In collaboration with ASCD and the Council of Chief State School Officers, Washington, DC

Stodolsky, S. S. (1988). The subject matters: Classroom activity in math and social studies. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Truong, H. M. (2015). Integrating learning styles and adaptive e-learning system: Current developments, problems and opportunities. Computers in Human Behavior, 2015, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.02.014

U.S. Department of Education. (2010). Transforming American education: Learning powered by technology. Washington DC: Office of Educational Technology.

University of Massachusetts. (2014). Blackboard Learn Building Blocks. Retrieved from UMassOnline: https://confluence.umassonline.net/display/UMOLTT/Blackboard+Learn+Building+Blocks

Watson, S. L., & Reigeluth, C. M. (2008, Sept.-Oct.). The learner-centered paradigm of education. Eductional Technology, 48(5), 39-48.

Yildirim, Z., Reigeluth, C. M., Kwon, S., Kageto, Y., & Shao, Z. (2014). A comparison of learning management systems in a school district: searching for the ideal personalized integrated educational system (PIES). Interactive Learning Environments, 22(6), 721-736. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2012.745423