Glenda Morgan and Phil Hill respond to Alfred Essa's claim from yesterday that the LMS is dead. "Every dollar committed to LMS extensions," writes Essa, "is a dollar not spent on what actually advances learning: faculty innovation, curriculum design, program-level experimentation, and institutional capacity to shape its own tools." Morgan and Hill respond that the LMS was never intended to produce learning, but to handle important administrative functions. "Like Essa, we agree that higher education is facing structural change, not a temporary downturn. Institutions are under real pressure and will need to make difficult strategic choices and significant shifts. But abandoning the LMS is not one of the productive ones in our opinion."
Today: Total: [Direct link] [Share]
