Great discussion going on over at the Chronicle of Higher Education over the LMS vs. Web 2.0 debate. The comments are what makes it interesting. A few highlights:
“Why should we, #4, “adapt to the learning styles of all the students”? Some “learning styles” are not very conducive nor adaptive to learning some kinds of things, concepts, skills, and ideas. Medical and Law Schools do not “adapt to the learning styles” of all the students. And the Courts those law students will have to practice in will certainly not so adapt.
Of course, if the job of most undergraduate colleges, especially Liberal Arts, and the like, is to warehouse late teens and young adults for four to six years, then we have to make them happy so as to promote “retention”. But some how, I dont think Wal-Mart or MacDonalds are going to “adapt to their learning styles” any more than the Courts are.”
———–
“Students will abandon monolithic LMSs? Yes, in spirit they will, but as long as institutions are granting the credits and degrees, students [as always] will have to go with the flow.”
———–
“I agree with John Thompson — it is not LMS vs Web2.0 that is the central issue. Unlike Matt (#4) who apparently sees the value of an LMS as something that “puts it all together”, I think the days of the cookie-cutter, monolithic LMS are limited. Why should we rely on, or wait for, a company like Blackboard to decide what functionality or tools to build in to their “product”.”
———–
Comparing traditional higher education and web 2.0 is like comparing apples and red.
