I agree with its detractors that Blackboard is in the money making business. Like the publishers of educational journals, access is restricted through prohibitively expensive licences. But I also don’t agree that Blackboard is dead so to paraphase Julian’s comment here’s a scratch. While the Web 2.0 revolutionaries are plotting on one corner of the square then those getting on with daily life have to make the best of it. Educational opportunities shouldn’t be denied on the grounds of cost but the reality for many educators is they are caught in the middle. If Blackboard is the tool of choice of your institution then knocking it vociferously doesn’t help. If the future of higher education is digital then we should be encouraging engagement and there are worse places than Blackboard for the cutting of technical teeth. It’s easy to be critical about Blackboard; it may well be closed rather than open, be clunky and not visually appealing but it’s a tool and if it’s the only one you have then it’s what you do with it that counts. Better to have active engagement with Blackboard than no engagement with digital learning at all.
Scratching Blackboard
//
On the subject of cutting technical teeth, here’s an interesting perspective you might have missed while on your travels – http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=408779
Interesting that Hanson finds the reluctance to embrace e-learning is partly about a desire to protect the tutor/student relationship.
Well. Yes. Developing That kind of teaching presence on line pretty much what Laurillard, Garrison & Anderson and other interested parties have being saying what is needed to make e-learning work for several years isn’t it?