Week 10 Reflection – LTEC 6010: Reflecting on Learning Management Systems: How Digital Training Shapes Workforce Skill Transfer

Image Credit:: Arlington Research Workplace. (2025) http://www.arlingtonresearch.global/

Building learning and teaching environments in which technology is valued and used are the key roles of schools. This is primarily true in workplaces in which big companies implement Learning Management Systems (LMS) and other digital tools. You can learn faster with these computer-based learning tools, which are easily accessible and flexible. Do they assist people in reaching their goals in the workplace?

The solution is not that easy. You may have witnessed numerous T.V. shows and the advertisement of ITIs and the future opportunities you will get, but the truth behind them is different. The manner in which businesses use these tools to deliver training is a key factor. A tool is often implemented by many organizations without a training plan, goals, or follow-up. Consequently, the emphasis shifts towards the technology (for instance, clicking through a module, watching a video, or taking a quiz) rather than the learning itself. Many users simply click through a module or modules, take a quiz, don’t practice, and don’t get feedback. There is a speedy “forgetting” of learning. Salas et al. (2012) and Sitzmann (2011) reveal this issue clearly.

When an employee completes an online safety course but never practices those safety steps or gets feedback, they are likely never going to use those steps correctly when the occasion arises. The system is not a skill awareness. Another challenge is that not all employees are equally adept with technology. While some workers are confident and knowledgeable digital tool users, others struggle with them. According to van Laar et al. (2017) and Ng (2012), digital skills differ across populations. When it is assumed that everyone is ready, the training can leave workers behind.

Just because a system is simple to use does not mean it will remove deeper aspects, such as the fear of failure or resistance to change of staff. Most employees may not access the portal correctly or use it to its potential because it will be overwhelming and confusing. Any system which is easy does not eliminate barriers related to technology. Probably few people would argue that whatever the job, all workers need access to job skills. Workers should be equipped with hands-on job skills, as this is a completely different story altogether. It will be necessary to acquire action-oriented job skills, especially those that involve people. Skills such as communication, teamwork, and quick decision making are all hard to learn from a tool.

According to the study of Bell et al. (2017), learning can be improved by simulation, but only if practice and feedback follow the simulation experience. Simulations are useful if and only if they are realistic. Some people think studying through digital tools is more engaging and flexible. To some degree, this is the case. Interactive modules and videos are interesting to interact with. You gain access to training classes anytime and anywhere and learn at your own pace (Means et al., 2010). Additionally, employees can access content at any time they wish.

Simply put, technology can sustain deployment but cannot ensure learning or performance by itself. Management systems are not good or bad; nonetheless, when applied in the right way, they are beneficial. Learning management systems, when deployed correctly, for example, can help improve access to training, allow for personalization, and reach many learners simultaneously (Zawacki-Richter et al., 2019). However, they can become limiting when an organization is entirely dependent on them.

Only people can train other people. A comprehensive and effective plan is important if you want to provide effective training. The strategy will have to address competencies, behavior, performance, and adaptation to change. You must establish the proper goals. The businesses that understand this will be the winners, not always on training completion rates, but on impact on jobs. Educational enhancement occurs when digital tools merge with authentic practice, individuals, and design. Ultimately, technology is a means to an end.

Week 9 Reflection – LTEC 6010: Reflecting on Identity: How My Learning Self Shapes Teaching, Theory, and Research

Identity sharing has been a strong mirror for me. Telling my story as a learner, teacher, and new researcher made clear how much I rely on dialogue, real problems, and attention to whose voices are heard in class. It also showed me that these are not just preferences but core parts of my professional identity.

How Identity Sharing Went

Sharing my identity felt both affirming and a bit risky. Naming that I learn best through conversation and problem solving helped me see a clear pattern in how I study, teach, and design tasks. At the same time, talking about whose stories count in classrooms made me ask when I may have failed to notice silence or exclusion in my own practice. I also saw that my use of problem based, open tasks is not only a method but an expression of who I am as an educator.

What I Learned About Myself

Through this process, I learned that I am someone who learns least effectively in lecture and test environments and is most engaged in dialogic, problem centered spaces. I am a person who quickly notices power and voice, who sees which students speak and which stay quiet, and whose knowledge is treated as normal or as other. I am also a researcher who wants to see learning in action, through classroom observation, talk, and participation, because I see knowledge as built in context, not just stored in individual minds. I realized that I hold a strong belief that learning should feel meaningful and connected to real life, which drives my work but can also limit my openness to other approaches.

Overcoming Personal Values to Learn New Things

My values support deep learning but can also narrow what I am willing to try. Because I value open and authentic problems, I can lose patience with very structured, stepwise teaching, even when it might support beginners. Because I dislike lecture heavy settings, I can dismiss content focused sessions too quickly. To keep learning, I need to hold my constructivist commitments with some humility, be willing to sit in environments that do not match my ideal and treat my discomfort as data rather than as a sign that the space is wrong. Overcoming my values does not mean dropping them but letting them be questioned and refined as I encounter new methods and new evidence.

How My Identity Pushes Theory and Research

This same identity shapes the questions I want to ask as a researcher. Since I see knowledge as socially constructed and tied to participation and power, I am drawn to questions such as who speaks in problem-based classrooms, how different students experience open tasks, and how teachers work within tight constraints while still trying to teach in a constructivist way. My identity pushes me to extend constructivist theory by placing power, emotion, and constraint closer to the center. I want to know not only that learning is socially built, but whose social worlds shape that building and who is left out of it.

Where Identity Comes From

I see identity as coming from the mix of personal history, relationships, culture, and institutions. My own identity was shaped by years of finding lectures less effective, thriving in project and discussion based courses, teaching students from different nationalities, and working within specific school systems. It is also shaped by the stories my culture tells about good students and good teachers and by how others have responded to me in those roles. Identity is not fixed. It is built and rebuilt through interaction and reflection across time.

Impact on Teaching and Learning

Identity has a strong impact on teaching and learning because it shapes what feels natural, what we notice, and what we value. For me, group work, discussion, and open problems feel natural, which leads me to design such environments for my students. My focus on voice and participation means I notice who is silent and who is centered. For learners, identity shapes whether they feel safe to speak, whether they see themselves as capable knowers, and how they read a task that is open or ambiguous. For teachers, identity guides method choice, expectations of students, and interpretations of behavior.

One example is my own learning. In lecture heavy classes, I often did little more than memorize for tests, while in project based courses I was energized by working on real questions with peers and having some say in my focus. As a teacher / trainer, having taught students from different nationalities made me more aware that what counts as normal is culturally situated and led me to design tasks that invite students to draw on their own experiences. As a researcher, my belief that learning is visible in interaction directs me toward qualitative methods and toward questions about process rather than only outcomes.

For me, identity sharing has become more than a reflective exercise. It is now a way to make sure that the person I am, the theory I read, and the research I plan are in honest conversation with each other.

Week 7 Reflection – LTEC 6010: Reflection on My Learning Activity, Design Process, and Reasoning

When I first started designing this learning activity, my aim was for students to think reflexively on how knowledge is created, instead of merely consumed.  I also wanted to self-reflect and think more critically. It makes sense to ground the activity in constructivist learning theory and interpretivist philosophy. They both highlight meaning making. According to the constructivists, understanding is “constructed” by each one of us. This idea was the basis of the learning activity design. To illustrate how philosophies differ, which shapes what becomes ‘evidence’, I chose these two case studies, one quantitative, the other qualitative. Study A looked at clicks, logins and time spent. It felt solid, organized, and backed by data. Study B included student reflections and journals. They capture experiences that numbers can’t. When I consider both things, it strikes me how technology “filters” our views of learning What measured often drives what we deem as the most important. On working through it, I saw how far I had to interpret to conclude. Through discussion I could see that evidence does not just appear, it is produced by assumptions about “good learning.”

Learning this filled me with smiles and made me enjoy constructivist approaches even more. The knowledge wasn’t going to be given to me; it was something that we all co create. That activity was more than theories; it was turning back. The habit of asking questions of the data, the tools, and even of me was part of it. It was clear to me by this time that educational technology is not neutral. We need to question the values and choices that are coded into it.