4 Features to Look for in a 21st Century LMS: Two Districts Share Their Experiences of Choosing a Learning Management System That Does a Lot More Than Help Teachers Post Assignments

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] If sheer choice is any indicator, there has never been a better time for school systems adopt a learning management system. The traditional market leaders that have delivered LMSes into higher education for years--Blackboard, D2L, Moodle and Pearson--have expanded their reach support K-12. They join plenty of products that have been there all along: Aspen, its learning and Edmodo, among others. And there are plenty of relative newbies in the LMS ranks angling for their own slice of the education pie, such as Google Classroom and Instructure with Canvas. Many public school districts in the United States have never adopted an LMS, so there's a ripe market opportunity for vendors. What's driving schools into this category of software is the uptick in student computing, the pursuit of technology that can simplify the personalization of instruction, a desire broaden communication throughout the school community and a craving use data guide decision-making. 21st Century LMS Shopping List a sure bet that every program calling itself an LMS these days offers the course-management basics: providing a way for students submit assignments and for teachers run online discussions and deliver announcements. But those were the same features LMS users wanted a decade ago, and they pale in comparison what users are looking for now: * An intuitive interface that mimics consumer social networks; * collaboration that goes far beyond standard teacher-student communication; * assessments with analytics responsive enough drive instruction for that day, week or month; and * the capacity provide a structure for organizing digital learning resources and sharing them locally and broadly. Like districts all over the country, Roaring Fork School District in Colorado is in the midst of an LMS evaluation right now. According Technology Integration Facilitator Ben Bohmfalk, the teachers have never had an LMS, and they are trying two. About 20 percent of the teachers have picked up Google Classroom; and a handful of educators are piloting Schoology. The district arrived at this point after adopting Google Apps for Education several years ago, then beginning the steady trek 1-to-1. Because it seemed be a simple fit with Google Apps, the district picked up Google Classroom when it was officially introduced in August 2014. While the free program has added what teachers are doing in the classroom, he noted, it lacks some of the curriculum features teachers most want, whereas Schoology appears fill those gaps. Evergreen School Division in Manitoba, Canada, sought an LMS as a way consolidate the functionality being provided by a bunch of different software that its schools had adopted through the years. According Superintendent and CEO Paul Cuthbert, the district used one tool for attendance, another for a gradebook and various programs for classroom-based websites and blogs. A two-year assessment process whittled the choices down one: Edsby. After a year of piloting and a year of rolling the system out teachers in its high schools, the early and middle school teachers now have access the new LMS. A Social Interface Of all the LMSes that Roaring Fork checked out, Schoology turned out be the most intuitive, said Bohmfalk. It's set up the closest a social network style of interface. While some people might not love that if they're not social network users, it's an interface that's really familiar all teachers and students immediately. You can just click around and figure things out. not just the interface that gives that impression. Schoology also makes it easy for users to find people and connect with people, he added, just like Facebook. Cuthbert used the Facebook comparison too, but in regards Edsby. I would equate it a Facebook but in a protected area and that's focused exclusively around the teaching and learning process, he said. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.