Group items tagged

"Sakai is an alternative Learning Management System, similar to WebCT. Brock evaluated WebCT and alternatives such as Sakai for use as Brock's primary Learning Management System (LMS) starting in the 2009 academic year. A Pilot of Sakai with 50 courses and 27 instructors was conducted for the 2007 academic year. Instructors had the option to include the course that they were teaching in this pilot. Sakai is a free and community source based product that offers a different take on learning on-line. Moodle, which was also being evaluated in a smaller scale is a free open source option. A representative advisory group was struck to co-ordinate the pilot and help shape the decision. Please feel free to leave informal feedback below. This group conducted a pilot and submitted the results (below) to the University Senate and the Provost and Vice-President. A decision was made by the Provost and Vice-President based on this information to implement a Sakai-based system as Brock's Primary LMS."

"As Casey Green said in my recent interview with him, the LMS space is a "market in transition." In 2005, the year that Blackboard acquired WebCT, the two platforms had a combined total of 75.6% U.S. higher education market share, and the next closest competitor had barely cracked 2% market share. Today, the situation is substantially different and changing rapidly. But the narratives around exactly what's happening tend to be off. Typically, I hear the frame as being a contest between Blackboard and "open source." Has "open source" (by which we mean Moodle and Sakai, the two open source LMSs with significant market share in the United States) made inroads into the market? If you read what the majority of sell-side financial analysts1 are writing, you may see the claim that "open source" is not putting a major dent in Blackboard. If you talk to Moodle or Sakai advocates, you might hear that they are crushing the company in sales. Neither account is really capturing what's happening in the market, so I'm going to try to explain what we know about what's really going on in a two-part series. In this post, I'll talk about what the data are telling us so far about the recent shifts in the market, describe how colleges and universities come to decide that they need to go to market for an LMS, and assess the degree to which we may see an uptick in the number of schools that decide to look around and evaluate our options. In the second post, I'll describe how the next four years of market transition may be different than the previous four and what signs we should be watching for to see which way the market is going to break."

"The following is a reflection on and response to a paper by Lisa Lane (2009) in First Monday titled "Insidious pedagogy: How course management systems impact teaching". I've been struggling with keeping up with reading, but this topics is closely connected to my thesis and the presentation I'll be giving soon. The post starts with my thoughts and reactions to the paper and has a summary of the paper at the end."

Course management systems, like any other technology, have an inherent purpose implied in their design, and therefore a built-in pedagogy. Although these pedagogies are based on instructivist principles, today's large CMSs have many features suitable for applying more constructivist pedagogies. Yet few faculty use these features, or even adapt their CMS very much, despite the several customization options. This is because most college instructors do not work or play much on the Web, and thus utilize Web-based systems primarily at their basic level. The defaults of the CMS therefore tend to determine the way Web-novice faculty teach online, encouraging methods based on posting of material and engendering usage that focuses on administrative tasks. A solution to this underutilization of the CMS is to focus on pedagogy for Web-novice faculty and allow a choice of CMS.

"Many universities are currently, or have recently, reviewed their enterprise LMS including my own employer. Unfortunately we haven't made our review process public but many universities have been generous enough to provide information about their reviews. The following list are some of the publicly available LMS reviews that I have found. These were really useful in developing and informing our own review and I hope that by bringing them together in one place it will be useful for others. I have provided links to each institutions review documents and a quick summary of their process. I have included the eventual choice of LMS but of course this is a very small sample and shouldn't be taken as being indicative of any particular trend in LMS selection. The list is not presented in any particular order. If you know of any other publicly available LMS review documents please let me know and I will add them."

"The Delta Initiative, a consultancy group, just did a terrific webinar in cooperation with the Cal State system on the state of the LMS. This is not one of those predict-the-demise or predict-the-next-flux-capacitor presentations, though. It's just an excellent, down-to-earth institutional view of how LMS adoption is going in the real world and what the challenges are, especially for large university consortia."