Learning Management Systems

The Death of the Learning Management System? (part 4)

As I’ve been reading more and more about the EduPunk movement and the related call for the “death” of the CMS/LMS/VLE/etc, I’ve noticed some interesting developments. Some people refer to the LMS as a “prison” that forces teachers to contain all learning in one small corner of the Internet. This is labeled as “inhumane” and “counter-productive” (because of the separation from the rest of the world).

Now the logical counter-argument to that is “what about the traditional grade school classroom?” Are they inhumane and counter-productive because they meet in a school building? Would it be more productive to have 4th graders meeting for class at the local park? Maybe high school English classes should meet at the local mall so that they can have more humane instruction? Well, of course not – the point being that having education happen behind closed doors is not always a bad thing. So why is it such a big deal to some when it happens in online learning?

“Well, some people do that for the entire class online and never take advantage of the resources on the web!” you might reply. True enough – but we have a term for those types of people in the instructional design world: bad course developers! Bad! Bad!

I think that is where I differ from parts of the EduPunk movement and those that hate LMS programs. I am not ever going to base my opinions or arguments on bad instructional design. I scratch my head in confusion at the notion of “LMS-as-prison.” Every time I design a class, I include massive numbers of links to outside sites. I sit with instructors to see how we can get students out on to the web, participating in the global conversation on their subject (even creating some of the conversation and content themselves). And I do this quite easily with older versions of BlackBoard, WebCT, and Moodle.

Most arguments against the LMS, and even studies about their effectiveness, are basically flawed because of this. They look at how classes are used in an LMS, and then based on what they see happening in that class they usually deem the LMS as useless. When I look at the classes they study, I usually just see bad examples of Instructional Design more that a tool that is lacking anything.

Also, I think the use of terms like “Learning Management System” and “Virtual Learning Environment” are misleading. The correct term should be “Course Management System.” These programs should really only be used for administrative purposes – class roles, grades, content repository (all classes need some content – even though it should be kept to a minimum), etc. Also, tools need to be provided for student safety when sensitive topics are discussed. Some topics should be discussed in a closed corner rather than out on the world wide web in some cases.

To say a program manages learning or is a learning environment will give the impression that it is a closed place where learning is imprisoned. It doesn’t have to be that way. Use the LMS program as an adminstrative hub for your class – and then insert a link to something else and get the students out there learning.

Of course, none of this is to say that LMS programs can’t add social tools to their programming. It’s all tools – so the factor that matters is what the instructor does with them… not the tool itself.

I guess that is my big point: stop focusing on tools so much! They are only tools – use them how ever you want!

This is also not to say that I love everything about CMS progrmas. When you really look at it…. there is really no reason why the CMS should cost as much as it does in some cases. And don’t get me started on lawsuits.

The Next Generation of Blackboard

If you haven’t seen this yet, here are some videos of what is brewing at Blackboard Project NG (Next Generation):

http://www.blackboard.com/projectng/

One thing that I find funny: they are really hyping how you can have one account that lets you log in as a teacher or a student for different classes. They still think they invented that. Even though it existed as far back as 1994 in distance education (and Blackboard came in to existence in 1997).

One thing that really bugs me: Am I the only one that notices how they ripped off iGoogle for their interface? Maybe they worked with Google on this – but I doubt it. Maybe Google open-sourced that designed – who knows. The part that bugs me is that BB is suing those that they think copied them – but here they are blatantly ripping off another company. Just not right in my book.

It does seem like Blackboard has listened to customer complaints, and has stopped burying content and activities under so many layers of links. You can also manage classes in other LMS programs from inside Blackboard (Moodle, Sakai, and WebCT are mentioned – but so Desire2Learn… no shock there) so you can see updates, due dates, and other stuff like that – I assume. Nifty – but I wonder if Blackboard is going to do anything to make that functionality go both ways. I doubt it.

Sadly, some of videos also don’t load. Some do. But I still don’t see anything groundbreaking here. I see stuff that is badly needed in online education – but nothing that hasn’t been seen somewhere else before.

(I must give a disclaimer here – I have pretty much given up on BlackBoard because of the patent and lawsuit silliness. Usuallly, I am not against the big companies, like Microsoft, having a right to exist – even if I presonally don’t like that companies products. But BB has crossed some lines that I feel shouldn’t be crossed.)

Been Too Long Since We’ve Had a Good BlackBoard Jab

Courtesy of Metamedia and Pete – the Adventures of Bollywood Blackboard-wala:

Ep. 1 Paying The Annual Licensing Fee

Ep. 2 Dealing with Customers Looking at the Open Source Alternative

Ep. 3 Dealing with the Patent Invalidation Ruling

Ep. 4 Confronting the Open Source Challenge

Ep. 5 Live from Blackboardwala World 2008

Ep. 6 Dealing with Customers Looking at the Open Source Alternative, Again

Ep. 7 Improving Customer Support

Ep. 8 The Patent Pledge Explained

Ep. 9 The Future of Blackboardwala

Re-Thinking Learning Management Systems: StudentLink

In a field full of hot-topics, one has been catching my attention lately: getting rid of the Learning Management System (or Course Management System, or Virtual Learning Environment). I understand the sentiment driving this discussion: most people are tired of how long it takes for new advances in technology to actually be integrated in to most programs. They want to ditch the LMS application and go to something else. I say, why throw out the baby with the bath water? Why not re-think the learning management system?

Harriet and I recently attend a session about a new e-Learning software solution: StudentLink. They are really re-thinking a lot of what we do in online education. You can see their list of features on their page. We were impressed by the podcast feature, and the fact that they have all class content on one page (like Moodle) and not buried under layers and layers of links (like… [a-hem]… others). Most of the other features were also really nice. Here are four things that I really feel help them stand apart from others:

  • The class page feels more like a FaceBook profile than a course. FaceBook, to me, really hit that sweet spot of putting everything you need on one page, but organized in a way that doesn’t make your head hurt. This is, of course, before you go adding 20 million applications….
  • Groups and organizations are integrated and easy to create. This is pretty rare in LMS programs – getting students communicating across courses.
  • Need a new feature? Just ask them and they will make it for you. Yep – you read that right. They create new features by request. If fact, at the conference we were at we started talking about how instructors really wanted blogs inside of classes, and the guys doing the presentation wrote that down as a good idea. We asked them about another feature that our professors love, and they said that they could add it no problem.
  • They have a website where you use their software for free. Yes, you also read that correct. Straight from their literature: “Studeous is a free web-service with many of the same features as Campus Suite™, although there are some structural differences (no administrator access, no branding, no parent accounts).”

So, off to a nice start. The Campus Suite is not a free program, but it is priced much better than… [ahem…] others. Keep an eye on this one to see where it goes.

More Insanity From “The Lawsuit”

To be honest with you, I hate picking on Blackboard. I really do. They just make it so easy. Campus Technology published an interview with Blackboard’s Chief Legal Officer Matthew Small. I’ll just quote the article – no need to embellish what was said – it’s funny enough.

“this was in a very sophisticated patent jurisdiction that hears a lot of patent cases with a very sophisticated judge.”

I nearly fell over laughing on this one. I’m from Texas, and this jurisdiction was East Texas. Texans hate to be called “sophisticated” in general (to us, it’s better to be a “good ‘ole boy”). I don’t know if they realize that they actually might have insulted the people they were trying to compliment. But, in all seriousness, this one smacks of propaganda. I guess there is just no nice way to say “this was in a rocket-docket jurisdiction that hears a lot of patent cases and always finds in favors of patent holders regardless of prior art.” Blackboard, if you want us to go for this, try filing in a jurisdiction that finds closer to 50-50 on these cases.

“I think what’s happening is there are some people in the e-learning community who quite frankly don’t understand patent law, and, if they understood what is typically patentable, what a patent looks like, what a good patent looks like, they wouldn’t read the Blackboard patent and say, “Oh, I don’t think this should be a valid patent.” I think for many of the commentators, this is the first patent they’ve ever read”

The same old tired line from Blackboard – we are too stupid to understand something like patent law. I get tired of shooting this one down, because it is just plain insulting. Patent law is not hard to understand. Get over it. You can’t come up with a good counter argument for most “commentators,” so you resort to blowing smoke. And what does the first patent thing have to do with anything? If that means anything, then why are you trying to patent something that was the first thing you created in 1998? If being the first at something means that you don’t know what you are talking about, then what does that mean about you patenting being the first CMS to have multiple roles for a single user? Hmmmm…..

“When you look at the facts, at the end of 1998–a decade ago–when you look at course management systems and see how many of them allowed a single user with a single logon and a single user account to have multiple roles across multiple courses, none of them did.”

What is sad is that many CMS companies have pointed out that they did have this back even in 1995. It’s even sadder that Blackboard thinks that there is this huge wall of separation between online education and the rest of the online world. For at least a decade prior to 1998, bulletin boards had the ability to allow a single user with a single logon and a single user account to have multiple roles across multiple boards. It would be comparable for someone to come along and patent the concept of a blog in CMS because they were the first to stick one in their software. The course management system did not grow up in a vacuum separated from the rest of the online world.

“But in late 1998, it was not obvious that you would take role-based access control and apply it in the way that we did to a course management system.”

This one makes me sick. I remember discussing this exact issue in an education class while working on my Bachelor’s degree. And I graduated in 1997. Sigh……

The Year That Online Education Died

I’m getting this ominous feeling right about now. Dark clouds are gathering. Crazy things are happening. Is this a sign of the beginning of the end? How bad can this Blackboard patent get?

Campus Technology published as insightful article yesterday called “Desire2Learn CEO Makes Case Against Blackboard Patent, Court Ruling.” I’m glad to finally get to hear from Desire2Learn. I’ve heard plenty from Blackboard’s side of things.

At one level, though, the article is very frustrating. Frustrating because John Baker (CEO of Desire2Learn) has to do verbal back flips to make sure they don’t call down the wrath of Blackboard. Is this really what education needs – we now have to spend more time watching what we say and being careful not to infringe some patent then do any actual innovation. Reason number one that this patent might kill online education this year.

Something about this whole situation has always bothered me, but I couldn’t quite put my finger on it. This article helped me figure it out. Blackboard went out of their way to justify their purchase of WebCT by pointing out that they had competition from Desire2Learn. And then they turn around and sue Desire2Learn to prevent them from competing. How can the U.S. government stand by and watch a company so blatantly do what it can to become a monopoly? “Blackboard’s representative at that trial said with a straight face that if [Desire2Learn] weren’t here, [Blackboard] would have the entire market.” Once again, another reason that online education is being choked to death this year.

This quote really got me: “Blackboard fought against us by using words that weren’t in the patent and weren’t in the claim construction.” They attempted to confuse the jury, use some smoke and mirrors, etc. A year ago, I might have given Blackboard the benefit of the doubt on this one. Not anymore. It’s sad enough that Blackboard even has to start a fight over this; now they prove that they can’t even hold a clean fight. (The public statements made by Blackboard’s CEO are a prime example of trying to confuse people with unnecessary words, so I have little problem believing that they would used the same tactic in the trial.)

The end of the article gives a good summary of what this fight means for online education. Pretty chilling, indeed.

Ready for This? Moodle 1.9 Was Just Released

Are you ready for it? I have to say that I was not ready, basically because I had put off some programming stuff based on the notion that I needed to “wait until Moodle 1.9 was released to move forward.” Doh! But, other than little personal kick in the pants (that I needed), all I can say: about time! It’s good that they did wait to release this version (it’s been nearly a year since 1.8). They went through the longest Beta testing in Moodle history and even had a bug-a-thon to get the glitches out. So that should lead to a pretty slick, nice new version of their product.

I say “should” because Moodle is so popular that I can’t download the new version off of their overloaded download servers!

But here are the new features that Moodle highlighted in their release announcement (all of which sound pretty sweet):

  • The Moodle gradebook is all new – designed from the ground up to support expansion and integration with other systems.
  • For all you pedagogo-philes out there, they added integrated support for outcomes. What this means is that learning goals can be tied to individual courses and activities and can be graded.
  • Moodle code has been review and tweaked to obtain a “huge” increase in performance. This will apparently be most noticeable on large sites.
  • One word: tagging! They made tagging core to the programming. Users, blogs, courses, and even external sites can now be easily linked together through simple tags. They mention sites like Flickr and YouTube, so I can’t wait to test drive this one.

I also have to note that test banks can be shared across a Moodle installation (nice) and they have created a single-sign on e-Portfolio integration with the Mahara open-source e-Portfolio program (sweet). You can read a full list of release notes on the Moodle site.

Blackboard Wins Patent Lawsuit Over Desire2Learn

Of course, this is no big surprise. And it really means nothing. The Lawsuit was filed in Lufkin, TX – a known rocket docket circuit that almost always finds in favor of the patent holder. No matter how insanely wrong the patent is.

Which really means absolutely nothing, unless you are Desire2Learn or the next company that Blackboard goes after. The rest of the world knows that a victory in Lufkin means that the patent is almost guaranteed to be bogus. But Blackboard will probably continue to stand by their patent, and continue to use creepy language to insult the rest of us (“I am so embarrassed by the reaction of the academic world” – really? Are we infants that you should be “embarrassed” by us? Are we so stupid and you so smart that we embarrass you? Please…).

I’ve read the Blackboard patent. It’s not that hard to understand (most patents aren’t). I don’t know why the CEO of Blackboard has to make it sound like patent law is that hard to interpret – unless he really does find it hard to understand. I’ve read both sides’ interpretation of the patent, also. I don’t see how they can claim to have created something in 1997 that I was writing college papers about in 1995. Or how a judge could ignore the massive amount of prior art in this case and say that the patent was actually valid. That’s Lufkin, Texas for ya.

Thanks to Desire2Learn for fighting against this. Keep up the good work, and maybe someday sanity (and justice) will prevail….

The Death of the Learning Management System? (part 3)

This is the third post in a series examining this topic. See the first two posts for background and a brief disclaimer that sets the stage for this discussion.

So, I’ve been going on about how we need to save the Learning Management System. I gave a list of things that need to happen with current LMS programs for this to happen. But – we’re not there yet. What can one do with the current LMS programs to integrate global communication, ongoing class communication, and active learning?

To be honest with you, if the LMS can’t add this kind of stuff in someday, then it should die. For now, all you can do is link to other sites from inside of your LMS.

Since we are not there yet (Blackboard, Moodle, and a few other companies have shown signs of promise in this area), here are some ideas of what schools and universities can do in the mean time. I will start with the most radical one first.

Install and use an LMS that has already integrated social networking tools. I only know of one that exists so far, but there may be others out there. As reported here last year, DrupalEd mixes parts of Moodle, Drupal, Elgg, OpenID, and MediaWiki together. It is still new, and some people tend to be squeamish when going with solutions this new, but it is open-source and available for use.

Install tools school-wide on your servers. Want to use blogs or wikis in learning? Then get together others that also want to and petition your IT department to install them on your school server. This has proven successful at UT Arlington. Blogs, wikis, and other tools have been opened up to faculty, students, groups, or anyone else employed with the university to use. The log in for these are also tied to the University’s NetID system, so everyone uses one password for everything… including the existing WebCT LMS.

Decide as a school or university to officially use a specific website for a specific tool. This is sometimes easier said than done. Maybe you can’t install a certain tool on your school servers, or it makes more sense to use another site (like in social networking). Then why not make it easier on everyone and decide on an official one to use – maybe even setting up an official presence on that site?

Decide as a program to use a set of websites. Setting up your own blog or choosing an official social networking site really sets up extra areas for students and teachers to bring people in to your school’s online presence. But you also want to get students out on the web, interacting with others outside of your school (like on discussion boards or blogs). If students have to go to one site for one class, and then another site for another class – they will end up with too many sites to track and will eventually dump some. Why not work together with other instructors in, say, a specific program to choose two or three good sites for your program. Sites that students will use in all classes. Give teachers the freedom to have class-specific sites, but also create a school presence on forums, wikis, blogs, and other sites related to your subject that can keep students connected after the class is over.

Create one instance of a tool per class for all students to use each semester. Sometimes, you might just have to go at this active learning thing alone. Consider having students contribute to a group project – say a blog or wiki – instead of creating individual projects. For example, create a class blog and put students in groups. Each group posts with a tag that identifies the group they are in. When a new semester starts, keep the same blog going, with the same tags, but with new students in the groups. Old students can come back to the same blog, and people from around the world can visit the blog to contribute to the conversation. If you have every student create their own blog every semester, you and the students will have a hard time keeping track of each other’s blogs, and outside people will be less likely to join the conversation.

No matter what you do with any tool, try to keep four goals in mind: keep it manageable (especially over the long haul or for future adopters), create a place where the world will want to come join with you and contribute, get students out on the web contributing to the global conversation, and create methods to continue the class’s global conversation after the class is over.

Have any other ideas? Share them in the comments.

The Death of the Learning Management System? (part 2)

This is the second post in a series examining this topic. See the first post for background and a brief disclaimer that sets the stage for this discussion.

As I mentioned in a previous post, there are several concepts in the “Death to the LMS” campaign that I agree with. Here is a list of some the ideas that I think all online instructors should use when designing an online course:

  • To truly learn, students need to get out of their LMS shells. They need to engage the world around them – publishing content for people other than classmates to read, and participating in the global discussion that surrounds the topics covered in class.
  • Students need to think critically and blog their experiences for others to read.
  • Students need to work collaboratively with other students in their class.
  • Students need to socialize with other students that aren’t in the same classes they are in.
  • Students need to continue learning on a particular subject beyond the last class date.

These ideas I agree with – mainly because they are all forms of active learning. But I don’t feel that these are necessarily reasons that we should kill the LMS. I feel that that these are reasons that we should push LMS companies to add some features and functionality to their programs, rather than dumping the LMS and using websites that offer these tools.

The main reason I fell this way is future scale. Dumping the LMS and doing stuff from the list above in a set of free Web 2.0 sites is great for one class. Your students will probably learn a lot and love the class. But what happens when more classes at your school or university begin adopting this? At some point, it will become too scattered and unmanageable for your students… and for your school. Social interactions will suffer. The web landscape will be littered with the shells of dead blogs and wikis, abandoned because students had too many to keep up with.

I think a better approach that can sustain a manageable future scale for active learning is to push LMS companies to add functionality to their programs that will allow educators to move students outside of the LMS when needed. Some of the things we could push companies to do:

  • Add a multilevel blog system. One that gives each user a blog, as well as course blogs, teacher blogs, group blogs, etc. Give users the ability to publish one entry to multiple sources. Give each blog the ability to be seen by the outside world with a short, simple url (but keep the ability to hide it behind the LMS password system for users that are still learning or need to limit access for whatever reason. And, yes, there are good reasons for that.)
  • Add a social network to your program. They are not that complex. Just look at the popular ones (MySpace, Facebook) for ideas. Even go so far as to give your networks the ability to interface across colleges, or even with existing social networking sites.
  • Create extension tools for classes that allow certain activities to continue beyond the course cut-off date.

However, once you get all of these tools in to an LMS, you could still run into problems. As long as courses are trying to interface with the global idea-exchange marketplace, while still operating as a lone ranger class – separate and not connected to other courses at their own school or university – you are going to end up with a different set of problems. Instructors will actually need to get together with other instructors at their school or in their program and map out what students will learn, as well as what tools and techniques they will use in those classes. Think about it: what if five classes in the same Spanish program all went to five random discussion boards over five different semesters to participate in the global discussion on Spanish culture? There would be a ton or repetition and scattered-ness. But what if all the Spanish instructors got together and picked two or three discussion boards that all students would participate on across all five classes? I hate to use a cliché word – but that would be synergy.

Next time I will look at specific suggestions that classes and programs can use to actually accomplish this kind of synergy and active learning, even if their LMS does not support it.