lms

1. Susan reported on the Moodle SIG meeting sponsored by Nercomp. She concluded that a meeting like this is very helpful for understanding the user and manager environment; we will try to have someone also go to the Sakai SIG.

Basic observations from the meeting --
Moodle is easy to customize, so it is a temptation to do so, but each change needs to be re-adjusted when you go to the next version. You will need a person who knows PHP and MySQL to handle this, but possibly only part-time. The Core product that is revised and distributed does not include some of the best add-on modules developed by other sites. You have to wait until that site or someone else upgrades the add-ons you most need before upgrading to the newest version.

There are lots of add-on modules of varying quality that would need to be reviewed before adoption. Alternatively you could stick with the core product and minimize customization. The group that controls the Core product seems to be a close-knit club. You can submit change requests to them through a formal process, but there is no direct accountability to the user community. They will develop what most meets their needs and interests; others can develop wha they want and need - and share it -- but outsiders cannot move their changes directly into the Core.

Some noted problems that are not yet fixed in the core are
No way to delete multiple courses at once, except in MySQL, which involves many tables
Gradebook, email and chat are disappointing to the current users

2. Sakai Pilot. James and Susan are completing an application to join the Sakai Pilot project. We reviewed some ideas for the answer to the key question -- how being part of the pilot would contribute to teaching and learning. We agreed with James' ideas and that the chief advantage for us was trying out a key tool in a shared environment.

3. The Sakai Pilot decision will need to be made by us (if we are accepted) in Mid-march. We will therefore work on getting faculty input before that time. Test pilots for the Sakai project have been identified, but if Sakai is not of interest to the faculty at all, we do not want to move forward.

4. Getting student feedback. James will talk with the Student Technology Group and ask them what the best method would be to get input from students.

5. James passed out the results of the faculty survey. We will review and discuss next meeting.

Posted by Linda Bills at 4:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

First, sorry these are a bit late.

We discussed the functions comparison chart and concluded that all the systems have the basic functions we need and that the next step, instead of filling in the function chart details, is to find out what the faculty most care about. Then we will be able to concentrate on function areas that should most effect our decision.

We reviewed the survey document and agreed to send it out with minor changes. We will allow 10 days for responses. In view of this, we decided not to meet on the 23rd, so the next meeting will be on the 30th.

The next meeting will be on Tuesday, Jan 30 at 9:45 in Murray 116

Posted by Linda Bills at 1:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The LMS group is enjoying a short lull from the hectic meeting schedule of the past two months.

The lull in meetings does not mean progress is being made. One Wednesday, January 17th faculty were emailed a survey to help the group better understand needs and experience with LMS. (contact James Fadden for access to this survey)

The results of the survey and knowledge gained at the Nercomp SIG on Moodle will be the topics of discussion for our meeting on Jan. 30. The meeting will start at 9:45am in Murray 116.

Posted by James Fadden at 4:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

At first glance, it might look like UCLA's decision to converge on Moodle for instruction and collaboration university wide is indicative of a shortcoming on Sakai's part. On further investigation, it seems that the decision was more about where UCLA views itself as being able to contribute to the community and alignment with university culture.

In the end, it seems that UCLA's decision could result in a win-win situation down the road for all of the open source LMS and collaboration community. Their continued relationship with Sakai as foundation members demonstrates their belief in that system and bleed-over of UCLA's efforts with Moodle can be assumed without much of a stretch.

Posted by James Fadden at 9:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

As mentioned in the most recent minutes, the group is starting to clarify the current needs and climate from the faculty perspective.

As feedback is always welcome I wanted to share the wiki page(s) I am using to develop the survey.

Please feel free to jump on and make suggestions. Have no fear in destroying anything previous versions can be recovered pretty easily as it is a wiki.

Posted by James Fadden at 10:40 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Here are the notes from the committee Meeting of Jan 3, 2007.
NOTE: future meetings will be Tuesdays 9:45-10:45

ACTION ITEMS:
Draft faculty survey – Susan and James –draft by Jan. 16 meeting
Find faculty for NITLE Sakai pilot – Susan and James – ASAP
OK NITLE pilot application with Karen and Rick
Send NITLE application – DUE FEB 28
Draft functions matrix – Linda and Helen – draft by Jan. 9th meeting

We worked on three issues in this meeting –

How to get faculty input
Whether to apply for the NITLE Sakai pilot
What else do we need to know about the products

Faculty Input
We agreed to prepare and send a survey to the faculty, possibly two – one for faculty who use WebCT and one for those who do not.

Susan and James will draft the survey/s and we will discuss at the meeting two weeks from now.

The survey will serve partly as a needs analysis or wish list and ask questions like:
· What WebCT tools are used
· What tools do they want that are not on WebCT
· What tools in WebCT could be improved and how
· Student reactions
· For non-users, what do you need in a course management system
· Do you want to be involved in focus groups, etc. as part of the decision
· Are you interested in piloting the possible new system

By the last two questions it will be good for finding volunteers and participants.

It will also serve as a reminder to faculty that this process is going on.

The decision process with faculty will be:

· Send the survey
· Based on its results, convene a focus group
· Based on our analysis and focus group input reduce choices to 2
· Do demos for the faculty and students
· Reconvene the focus group of faculty, with students
· Decide on system to pilot

NITLE Sakai Pilot

We decided to try for admission to the Sakai project. If we are accepted but have by then decided not to use Sakai, we can drop out. Susan and James will seek out faculty who will be willing to participate.

Application deadline: Feb. 28, 2007
Pilot period: March –Dec. 2007

Function Matrix

To answer the question of what else we need to know about the products, we will prepare a matrix listing functions or characteristics and determining which products have them.

We will use this matrix in part to round out the faculty survey, and results from the survey to help define the matrix.

Linda and Helen will make a first draft and work on it with James at next week’s meeting.

Posted by Linda Bills at 12:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (1)