The fire service has enthusiastically adopted twenty-first-century learning management systems while frequently using them to deliver twentieth-century instruction. This has been one of my recurring frustrations with educational technology in the fire service and made Weller’s (2020) chapter on the 2002 Learning Management System feel surprisingly current. More than 20 years later, there is marginal progress from using 21st-century learning management technology to deliver information in a 20th-century format.

To be fair, the LMS solves a significant organizational problem. Systems such as Canvas and Vector Solutions allow organizations to distribute content, assess knowledge, document completion, and manage enormous amounts of training data. The problem is that we sometimes mistake managing learning for facilitating it. We have taken the traditional IFSTA (International Fire Service Training Association) firefighter training manual, PowerPoint lecture, multiple-choice test, and completion checkmark and moved the entire process online. We replaced turning the page with clicking “Next.” We created an IFSTA manual with Wi-Fi.

Changing the delivery medium does not necessarily improve the learning. I recently watched a YouTube video, What Scientists Found About Audiobooks, that discussed research suggesting students may learn course material more effectively by reading it than by listening to it (The Upgrade with Makai Elías Calles, n.d.). That led me to the accompanying study by Daniel and Woody (2010), who compared students who read course material with students who listened to the same material as a podcast. The students who read the material scored significantly higher on the subsequent quiz (M = 8.16) than those who listened (M = 5.91), leading the authors to conclude that students remembered primary course content better when they read rather than listened (p. 200). Interestingly, the podcast group initially preferred the audio format, but simply taking the quiz caused that preference to drop as learners became aware of gaps in their own understanding. Convenience and learner preference, therefore, are not necessarily evidence of learning.

That does not mean the answer is to return to the textbook. Simply adding narration, video, or animation may make the IFSTA manual more colourful, but it does not necessarily make the learner think.

Weller’s (2020) discussion of Connectivism offers a useful challenge to this model. He describes learning as engagement with knowledge and people distributed across a network rather than simply transferring knowledge from educator to learner (p. 116). That is already how firefighters learn. Knowledge moves between instructors, firefighters, departments, research organizations, conferences, incident debriefs, and practical experience.

The Between the Chapters discussion of Personal Learning Environments (PLEs) and Personal Learning Networks (PLNs) made that connection even clearer. If a PLE describes the tools and spaces we assemble around learning, the PLN describes the people and relationships within it. The participants discuss the value of conference “hallway conversations” and side chats and how these informal spaces can challenge gatekeeping and bring more people into the conversation (Pasquini, 2021, 36:10).

This is where I think our current use of LMS technology still falls short. The technology is powerful enough to create something much closer to a virtual conference than a correspondence course. Live classrooms, breakout discussions, collaborative spaces, side chats, and persistent conversations could intentionally foster the informal learning that happens outside the conference room rather than reducing interaction to the obligatory forum post and two equally obligatory replies.

Generative AI adds another possibility. Instead of merely presenting information, an AI-supported LMS could introduce cognitive friction by changing scenarios, questioning decisions, challenging assumptions, and adjusting difficulty based on learner responses. A firefighter who correctly identifies changing smoke conditions does not need another slide telling them they were right; give them another problem. Those decisions, mistakes, and disagreements could then become material for the same discussions and virtual hallway conversations that strengthen the PLN.

Perhaps the problem is not the LMS at all. We have technology capable of connecting learners, creating conversations, adapting scenarios, and challenging decisions. We just keep asking it to only turn the page for us.

References

Daniel, D. B., & Woody, W. D. (2010). They hear, but do not listen: Retention for podcasted material in a classroom context. Teaching of Psychology, 37(3), 199–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986283.2010.488542

Pasquini, L. (Host). (2021, March 16). Between the chapters: Personal learning environments [Audio podcast episode]. In 25 years of ed tech: The serialized audio version. https://25years.opened.ca/2021/03/16/between-the-chapters-personal-learning-environments/

The Upgrade with Makai Elías Calles. (n.d.). What scientists discovered about audiobooks [Video]. YouTube. https://youtu.be/wVU_XbcDc4s

Weller, M. (2020). 25 years of ed tech. Athabasca University Press. https://doi.org/10.15215/aupress/9781771993050.01

AI Usage Disclosure

ChatGPT was used to assist with editing, organization, APA 7th edition formatting, and refinement of language. The ideas, arguments, professional examples, source selection, and interpretation of the course materials are my own. AI-generated suggestions were critically reviewed, fact-checked against the original sources where applicable, and revised before inclusion.