One of the major issues I’ve faced in my current job, is trying to get faculty to understand that employing technology in a course of instruction should only be done to provide an improved learning experience and never as a means of improving productivity or reducing an instructor’s workload.  Since late June, when we began migrating from one Learning Management System (LMS) to another, and especially during this past week of Final Exams, I can’t help but wonder if this is a battle that simply cannot be won.

Since the migration to the new LMS began, virtually all instructor “issues” have focused on testing.  Not a single question has been raised about content.  The ANGEL LMS provides vastly improved capabilities for interactivity and social interaction over the old system, yet not a single instructor has expressed any interest in them.  Instructors now have access to built-in Blogs, Wikis, and course syndication through RSS.  They now have the capability to map individual activities and assessment items to a specific learning outcome for later analysis in the improvement of their course.  Sadly, however, all questions and issues have focused exclusively on tests and quizzes.

This past week the various divisions that continue the archiac practice of proctored final exams provided yet another example of the aforementioned losing battle.  Without exception, every division that continues the practice of proctored final exams did nothing more than use the LMS; the same LMS the student could have accessed from home.  So let me see if I got this right - you want me to come to campus to take the exact same exam I could take at home only so you can prove I’m not cheating?  I think during finals week it’s a little late!

Though research has shown time and time again that the only thing a multiple-choice exam evaluates is a student’s ability to memorize, such a suggestion to faculty is normally meet with condemnation and antipathy.  Arguing that the only way learning can be assessed is if it produces a cognitive change that can be “seen” through essay questions, case-studies, practical application, performance, etc., is to suggest that the instructor actually read “X-number” of individual submissions.  One of my favorite stories is of the instructor who responded to my suggestion of using case-studies for assessment with “That would mean I would have to read 25 individual papers.”

Instructors using the new LMS are now focusing the vast majority of their attention of “automating” as much as they possibly can.  The new LMS provides rubric and automatic scoring capabilities for discussion forum assignments.  As a result, a great deal of effort is being expended “automating” the process of discussion grading.  However, this automatic scoring can only provide a quantitative and not a qualitative measure.  As a result, all a student need do, for example, is make an original post that says “My name is Joe,” then respond to two other postings with the words “I agree” and they earn maximum points for this particular assignment.

So where does the learning part come in?  Well, maybe it doesn’t.  Remember it’s all about “the numbers” and not about the learning.  When inquiring as to the quality of a technology-enabled course, the answer from those in a supervisory position is almost always “They have a very high pass rate.”  When you propose changes to improve the quality of learning the response most often heard is “That program has had a 100% pass rate for three years.  We don’t want to change something that isn’t broken.”  In further evidence of the argument that “it’s all about the numbers” and not the learning is clearly evidenced by the following message broadcast to all students upon completion of their final exam”

“I’ve added 8 points to everyones final exam due to low scores”

So what’s the answer?  Perhaps there isn’t one as I know Dewey, Knowles and many other educational innovators expressed much the same concerns as I a long time ago.  Perhaps if it truly is “all about the numbers” we should do everyone, faculty and students, a favor and just have them pay tuition then give them a passing score.  No tests to administer, no email exchanges with students to fill up your inbox, no questions to answer and no papers to grade.  Everyone passes, every course has a 100% pass rate, and the school itself can produce some great looking PowerPoint charts to prove their effectiveness.