Using Reports in LMS
Name
Institution
Using Reports in LMS
Learning Management System (LMS) reports used by school instructors helps to access the progress of their programs, and access the students’ reactions throughout the course. The LMS system is customized in the desired criteria to yield the desired results (Zanjani, 2017). Through the generated reports, teachers can point out the areas that need improvement and come up with relevant measures to address them.
Different assessment criteria get chosen, for example, the amount of time spent on LMS, the subjects covered, and the duration. According to Rose (2016), the report also gives the amount of time covered on each topic and subject. Using such a description, therefore, the matter with the most time spent may depict the fact that a student probably took a considerable time to comprehend the components or that the topics were complex. With this information, an instructor can recommend several actions, such as addressing the issue one more time if the case spreads out among most students or personal directions to the affected students. Therefore LMS report provides the necessary information whenever required.
In the summary of the LMS reports provided, we shall analyze the findings and access the most engaging areas study and the least areas as provided. The reports are for three students, namely, student X, Y, and Z. Notably, the average time spent in the system varies from one student to another. Students engaged throughout the week, Student X is logged in almost daily but spends a considerable time of about 2 hours on Saturdays. On the other hand, student Y is logged off in 4 days of the week but dedicates 8 hours of the day in studies. Student Z shows to be active on weekends with spending 6 hours on Saturday.
In terms of engagement, the three students engage overall in Week 5 on assignments with Student Y spending the most hours. (3.04). Student Z takes the least time of about 1.16 hours. They are all less engaged in Week 4-Discussion 1, Week 4, Discussion 2. However, individual reports show that the most engaging task to student Z noted to be e-learning activity, which amongst all tasks done, took the most time of 1.89 hours and 1.78 hours during Week 6 and Week 4, respectively. The next engaging job to Student Z Includes Mobile run, 0.01, Week 1 Content Folder, among others. However, to Students X and Y, the E-learning course took the least time of about 0.01hrs and 0.06hrs in Week 6.
Although some areas were fully accessed, they had the least engagement of about an average of 0.01 hours across the three students. These least engaging areas were ‘Week 4 Discussion 1’ and ‘Week 4 Discussion 2’ across all the three students. However, some areas were not accessed at all, thus recording 0 hours of engagement. Overall, in terms of the total course time, Student Y took the least (5hrs) while Student Z took the longest at 16 hours on average.
These reports help in the understanding of students’ reaction towards the course subjects. The number of times a particular topic is accessed can serve as an indicator to the tutor on the level of content comprehension by a student. Students will tend to spend considerable time on a challenging topic in seeking their understanding. We can conclude that the most challenging issues to Students X, Y, and Z were Student Center in the Content folder, Week 5- Assignment 2, and E-activity, respectively. Therefore, from this, a teacher can decide to revise or allocate more time to the delivery content.
If given a chance to improve the LMS reporting tool to improve functionality and course, I would introduce an interactive model that would allow social dialogue and discussions across the students taking similar courses. The logged-in students could engage in task deliberations and elaboration of the complex field tasks. Interactive sessions will act as motivators and something compelling to the learners to log in. It would necessitate the students to take active roles in different areas of study.
Secondly, I would initiate the gamification role of the system. Here, learners get awards, badges cumulative points, and leaderboards whenever they achieve the set milestones. I would create say a Diamond, Silver, and Platinum badges for the prize in order of the set guidelines. For one to earn the Gold badge would require submitting an assignment as the first person for say a week or the one with the highest engaging average time for a given subject. The gold holders would earn exclusive benefits outlined by the system. Silver and Platinum holders would have lesser terms than those of Gold holders, making it an exquisite title. It would compel the learners to submit their assignments on time and engage fully with the learning system. On the other hand, leaderboards will bring on healthy competition as nobody wants to be at the bottom line of the board. The Second position also strives to be a leader, and thus the game is not only at the bottom of the list but cuts across as everyone strives to keep on doing better.
To enhance the students’ learning process, I would recommend redesigning the LMS to make it appealing and beautiful. According to Beech & Kowalik (2018), anyone and everybody get attracted at first sight of an item, and beautifying the LMS design will go a long way in engaging the learners. Therefore, a well-organized site attracts constant use in the pursuit of knowledge in LMS, unlike the sophisticated one.
The system should allow self-assessment of individuals (Rose, 2016). It would involve downloadable podcasts and presentation of learning content in a bid to understand the subject in totality. This method would come in handy for slow learners who would have an additional source of the question after logging off. A good LMS should provide the right interface user to align with the training materials for online learning.
Once the system is redesigned, and allow for students-teacher collaboration, then it is the students who perform the most role in keeping the system running both consciously and unconsciously. It is because the culture of active learning is maintained.
A targeted report I’d wish presented is that showing students progress, satisfaction, and performance level in the course in development. The student satisfaction report will describe the management of the factors that contribute to low achievement and the necessary measures to mitigate them. Students’ progress and performance report, on the other hand, will show both the student on the position they hold in the subject and the specific areas to improve and work. A good performance report will indicate to the teachers on the impact of their lessons and content delivery.
An LMS should produce reports on online assessments. The ability to identify knowledge and skills gaps can help develop and initiate personalized training on the learning topics with low scores. Moreover, it could involve allocating more time to the E-learning activities of the poorly performed areas (Zanjani, 2017).
A course module report is as vital as any other report of the LMS. The amount of time a course took to complete, the number of logins by learners, and the average amount of engagement with the course can help the faculty managers assess the module’s viability.
A Learning Management System should provide learners with suggestions and recommendations report that will help the faculty address the learners’ concerns and provide amicable solutions. Anonymity should be maintained at some point to give students confidence in the airing of their grievances.
References
Beech, V., & Kowalik, E. A. (2018). Problems and Promises of Using LMS Learner Analytics for Assessment: Case Study of a First-Year English Program.
Rose, A. (2016). Using LMS reports as a strategic planning tool. Training & Development, 43(6), 18.
Zanjani, N. (2017). The essential elements of LMS design that affect user engagement with e-learning tools within LMSs in the higher education sector. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(1).