Files
kfitz.info/content/blog/2006-10-22-is-managing-really-what-we-want.md
Kathleen Fitzpatrick 655ad0ded8 upgrade to 3.0
2024-10-14 19:27:15 -04:00

17 lines
2.3 KiB
Markdown
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters

This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

---
title: "Is 'Managing' Really What We Want?"
date: '2006-10-22T09:13:01-04:00'
permalink: /is-managing-really-what-we-want/
tags:
- conferences
---
Yesterdays presentations were overall quite provocative, and have been wonderfully blogged by [Bryan](http://b2e.nitle.org/), [James](http://webpub.allegheny.edu/employee/j/jfadden/wordpress/), and [Laura](http://www.brynmawr.edu/etc/etcblog/). Theres been a tension throughout, however, between the forces of standardization and the forces of innovation, and somebody (and Im sorry I cant remember who) finally hit the issue dead center by asking whether weve gotten in trouble because of our uses of terms like “learning management.” Is learning something we really want to succumb to management? Or is that desire for control over the environment in which learning takes place finally stifling?
Anybody who heard my presentation yesterday (which Ill post shortly) or whos seen any of my classes knows perfectly well which side of this issue I come down on. Without the ability to innovate, to test new possibilities, to try something risky that simply may not work, I dont know that I could teach, or that any real learning could take place in my classes. For me, the values that Bryan identified yesterday as embodied in the amalgamation of stuff described as “web 2.0” are far more exciting and conducive to the open exchange that teaching and learning require, than are the values of organization, systematization, and enclosure that are promoted by current implementations of the LMS.
Im walking away from this symposium hoping that the LMS will develop in a more open fashion. Its eminently possible, after all; the Segue project at Middlebury, which Alex Chapin discussed yesterday, presents a wide range of tools for faculty and student use, with a finely granular permissions system that defaults toward openness but allows for protection of the kinds of materials that ought to be protected. I get nervous about the idea of having one overarching system that serves all network purposes, but if we had a system that were sufficiently complex and robust, it would go a long way toward making my uses of the LMS feel less managed, and more experimental.
(tags: [LMSLAC2006](http://technorati.com/tag/LMSLAC2006))