LMS Project

From Dickinson College Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

Tasks

Immediate

  1. Create Master Course for testing (craft and clear with RER)
  2. Create message to send to faculty, put on page
  3. Contact interested faculty directly
  4. Create comparison matrix
  5. Create worksheets
  6. Create evals (for each task and for the whole)

Not so immediate

  1. Create list of things we know we need to handle
    1. Course roll-over procedures
    2. Course copying (faculty2faculty)

Announcement

Bake-off Plan

As approved in the 10/22/2008 meeting:

  1. Create a single master course
  2. Have two versions of the course in each system
  3. Have two machines for each system
  4. Have a set of worksheets for key tasks
  5. Faculty will pick worksheets for tasks they are interested in

Goals and Success Criteria

  • To select the best LMS for Dickinson
    • As good as it needs to be, but not less so
    • As cheap as possible, but not less so
  • To select an LMS that
    • Goes beyond file sharing and integrates LIS services
      • E.g. a content system to integrate Library Services subject guides and information literacy
    • That faculty like, can use easily
    • Whose advanced features faculty can and will use
    • That will improve the student learning experience
    • That will fit with LIS's infrastructure of hardware, software, and system admnistration

Summary of Pat's quick outline

  • Quantify attributes of LMS options such as Blackboard Enterprise, Angel, Moodle and Sakai and present findings and recommendations to the ITS Committee LMS Stakeholder’s group (could be a memo). At the very least this process should rule out one (preferably two) of the options (in October)
  • Demonstrate the remaining options in some public forum(s), perhaps using your idea of a bake-off. Maybe before a faculty meeting? (November)
  • Select limited pilot group for LMS testing in the Spring of 2009. (early November)
  • Oversee the pilot implementation of selected LMS in November/December 2008.
  • Assist faculty in developing reusable content and migrating courses to selected LMS (by January, 2009)
  • Monitor faculty progress throughout their pilot implementation.
  • By March 15th, 2009, complete the evaluation of the piloted LMS and prepare recommendation for transition.
  • Prepare report for presentation to the ITS Committee and inclusion in the April administrative report to the faculty.

Milestones (Fall 2008)

Define the purpose of the project

This has been accomplished, more or less, through the Stakeholders meeting held in September. The idea is pretty simple: we want something better than Blackboard Basic, with at least the following features:

More specific criteria

  • Integration with Banner's registrar data, to automatically create courses and populate with students
  • Integration with ActiveDirectory
  • Ability to import existing Blackboard courses
  • Ability to export courses to a non-proprietary format
  • Less expensive than Blackboard Enterprise (although we are considering it)
  • Close wikis and blogs (to complement our open versions, and to support collaborative group work currently supported by Agora)

Define a realistic field of choices

We are pretty much committed to the following choices:

  • Angel
  • Moodle
  • Sakai
  • Blackboard Enterprise

We need to provide explanations for this field. Among the reasons are the following:

  • The field can't be too big.
  • We want to consider open source options, and NITLE provides two options -- Moodle and Sakai -- by virtue of our membership.
  • We need to consider Blackboard Enterprise because we already use Blackboard. It's expensive but also the path of least resistance (which isn't always a bad thing).
  • That leaves 3 options -- already quite a bit for a comparison involving faculty input, etc. Angel has emerged over the years as a great choice. Ryan Burke and Rafael Alvarado have done research in comparison to other options and have found it to be a leader. But this needs further justification.

Create a Comparison Matrix

  • The terms for this matrix have already been defined.
  • Members of the project team have already researched the info to populated this matrix.
  • We need two matrices:
    1. A presence/absence matrix that shows if a product just has a feature
    2. A more detailed one that compares features. Maybe this is just an expansion of the first. For example, both Sakai and Angel have a wiki -- but Angel's is a lot easier to use.

The questions (as phrased by D. Kelly, re BB Enterprise)

  • What is the initial cost, and subsequent annual costs, of hosting our own LMS servers on campus?
  • What are the system requirements if we host on campus?
    • What LMS remote hosting options are available?
  • What are the associated setup and maintenance costs?
  • Can a remotely hosted system be integrated with our local SIS (Banner)?
  • Are there any restrictions on what faculty can post to a remotely hosted system?
    • Are there established pieces for connecting the LMS with a Banner SIS system?
  • Is it unidirectional from Banner to the LMS for populating courses?
  • How “live” is the synchronization of data?
  • Can grades be pushed back from the LMS to Banner?
    • Can the LMS use Active Directory for authentication?
    • Can the LMS export courses and materials in standard formats (e.g. EMS)?
    • Is there a cost for using the LMS's API tools?

Hold a "Bake-off" event

Select a place

  • We will use the old ATS space (aka "Digital Scholarship Center")

Select a date and time

  • Looking at November 14th
  • This means announcing on October 31st

Install or set up versions of each LMS

Select test faculty

  • Following Pat's advice -- one from each division -- how about these?
  1. David Glasgow
  2. Jim Hoefler
  3. Dave Richeson (?)

Set up faculty on each LMS account

Create matrix hand-out and/or poster

Advertize event

Create worksheets

  • Add course content
  • Create an assignment
  • Use the drop-box
  • Use the grade book
  • Use the blog or wiki

Experiment with Course import/export

  • I have exported my ANTH245 course, but we need others.

Make a Choice

Prepare for the Spring Pilot

Assumptions

Information

Moodle

Local Installation

NITLE Info

Testimonies

Albion

Westmont

  • Have been using it for 3 years
  • integrated with openLDAP, soon to be transferred to eDirectory/LDAP
  • hosted locally on Linux/mySQL
  • How many staff? I usually spend a couple days before each semester testing out scripts, it takes about a week each summer to upgrade versions and test conversion of the old database, and one of my computer support staff answers the occasional question from faculty and the very rare question from students. Perhaps 1 hour every other week?
  • Custom programming: Westmont staff have written about 4 scripts that pull demographic, course and enrollment information from the MSSQL 'data mart' from our student information system (Datatel). One of these scripts is run each night to update enrollment information.

Macalester

  • Starting its fifth year
  • For authentication it is integrated with our eDirectory/LDAP environment
  • It is hosted locally on Linux & mySQL
  • Our networking and enterprise staff have also done excellent custom work to integrate it with Banner (through Luminis) to automatically create classes, enroll students, etc.. This takes a couple of days to set up before each semester, but then runs without much administration for the remainder of the term.
  • See above.
  • More: "it has gone well, it is a very robust platform. ... That said, there are a growing number of outsourcing options. I have heard good reports about MoodleRooms. They offer hosting and consulting. I've had several great discussions with Michael Penney, who was a CMS lead at one of the Cal State schools before joining MoodleRooms as a director. I'd recommend going with a company who is an official "Moodle partner." This will likely signify that they have a stronger connection to the core moodle team."

Occidental

  • We moved from Blackboard to Moodle at the beginning of this academic year and have it hosted through Remote Learner http://remote-learner.net/ We have been very pleased so far with the service – very responsive and knowledgeable.

Sakai

Contact Info

Usage Info

To create a course, click on Site Setup on the left > New at the top and enter the appropriate information on the pages found there. Look for small, blue buttons with question marks to access Help along the way, and there is full online help and search available in the instance; look for Help in the links on the left.

Your campus may create up to 10 courses with up to 100 users (combined faculty and students) in the Basic Service. This shared Sakai instance requires NITLE to add all of your faculty and student users. Please send me the first and last name of each user, and his or her campus email address. Please send as many as possible at one time showing the three separate fields, perhaps as an Excel or CSV file. I will indicate when they have been added and then you can notify your users they have access to NITLE’s Sakai Basic Service, to change their temporary passwords of <OMITTED FOR WIKI>, and they may join courses that have been created.

You will be added to the NITLE-Sakai listserve email list, and we are gradually transferring all of this collaborative interaction to our Sakai Community Project Site where you will find tips, techniques, forums, messages and eventually training material.

https://sakai.nitle.org/osp-portal/site/65545717-f7e0-41b3-00bd-1e838c272b60

Research (R. Alvarado)

  1. Annual fee for an appropriate license
    1. $12,000 or $25,000 (see next item)
    2. One time fees: from $2,750 to $6,500
    3. For first year: MAX = $31,500 and MIN = $14,750
    4. Comparable to on-site Angel hosting license alone.
  2. Off-site hosting options and costs
    1. Basic Service
      1. Free with NITLE membership
      2. 100 users, 10 courses
      3. Good for pilot
      4. Contact NITLE Liaison (RR) to set up
    2. Standard Service
      1. <= 3000 users with 90GB: $12,000/yr
    3. Customized service
      1. Customization via consultation
      2. <= 3000 users: $25,000/yr
      3. $2,500 set up fee
    4. Additional storage
      1. $2,000/100GB/yr
    5. Authentication
      1. LDAP binding = $1,500 (one-time)
      2. Shibboleth = $2,000 (one-time)
    6. Consulting (for Banner integration)
      1. $125/hour
      2. Estimate for Banner integration: 10 to 20 hours = $1,250 to $2,500
  3. System requirements for on-site hosting
    1. NA
  4. Integration with Banner to create courses and populate with students (and associated costs)
    1. Yes.
    2. Requires consulting.
  5. Integration with Active Directory (and associated costs)
    1. Probably. The system supports it, but not sure if NITLE does.
  6. Importing of existing Blackboard courses (and associated costs)
    1. Yes.
    2. With consulting fees if necessary.
    3. See new deal to "integrate" with Blackboard: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/07/15/sakai
  7. Exporting to standard format (e.g. EMS)
    1. Yes.
  8. Extensible architecture (e.g. building blocks, modules, etc.)
    1. Yes.
  9. Standard feature set (e.g. gradebook, wiki, discussion groups, etc.)
    1. Yes.
  10. Special features worth noting (e.g. content system)
    1. Content system: "Materials can be imported or copied from one course site to another. Each user has n area called "My WorkSpace" which can contain materials that are global across the entire system. The materials from My Workspace can be imported into any course site. This allows each instructor and student to maintain their own local space which is only readible to themselves which can be copied into various project and course sites as needed."
    2. Eportfolio: Open Source Portfolio (OSP); not sure if hosted by NITLE with Sakai
    3. See this LongSight discussion on Sakai's Repository.

Cool Stuff about Sakai

  • Resources -- this is their Content System.
    • You can import RefWorks lists into Sakai
    • Google Scholar integration

Angel

Product Info

Blackboard Enterprise

Research (D. Kelly)

  1. Initial and annual fees
    1. Per communication with Peter Atsaves, this would be provided once they have discussed a timeline and evaluation plan.
    2. Per Rafael, this option would run about $40-45K per year
  2. Off-site hosting options and fees
    1. Blackboard ASP
    2. 99.7% operational availability guarantee
    3. 24x7x365 customer support
    4. Storage space never capped, with option for additional storage purchase on demand
    5. Bandwidth never capper, with option for additional bandwidth purchase on demand
    6. SSL encryption
    7. Redundant Tier-1 Internet connections
    8. Can be integrated with local Banner system
    9. Per communication with Peter Atsaves, a fee would be discussed after a conversation.
  3. On-site hosting system requirements
    1. Details relate to a “Small Institution Configuration”, 1,000-10,000 users, with 500-1,000 active courses and up to 1,200 active users
    2. Assumes application layer clustering and hardware load balancing
    3. 1-2 Dell PowerEdge 1950 or 1955 Blade Servers
    4. 2x Dual Core Intel Xenon processors
    5. 8GB memory
    6. Calibrated to 2 Java Virtual Machines per dual core server
    7. Database storage capacity, assuming 200 faculty with a 5GB quota and 3,000 students with a 500MB quota: 2.5TB
  4. Integration with Banner SIS
    1. Banner can act as the system of record to populate Blackboard courses, students, etc
    2. Updates can be done live or as snapshots
    3. Grades can be pushed back from Blackboard to Banner, but this requires customization by Blackboard Consulting
    4. Also supports integration with Luminis
    5. Supports Oracle
  5. Integration with Active Directory for authentication
    1. Blackboard can use AD, LDAP and CAS for authentication
  6. Exporting courses to standardized formats
    1. Compliance with IMS, SIF, SCORM, and NLN standards
  7. Extensible architecture
    1. Building Blocks open API
  8. Standard feature set
    1. Course management, including migration of courses between semesters
    2. WYSIWYG content authoring
    3. Adaptive release of course materials
    4. Syllabus builder
    5. Learning units of sequenced lessons
    6. Course Cartridges
    7. Calendar, tasks and internal Email messaging
    8. Discussion Board
    9. Group Projects for collaborative assignments
    10. Virtual Classroom (live chat and virtual classroom)
    11. Assessments and surveys
    12. Assignments
    13. Gradebook
    14. Reporting and Performance dashboards to track student progress
    15. Multi-language support
    16. Peer and self-assessment tools
    17. SafeAssign anti-plagiarism tool
  9. Special features
    1. Compliance with IMS, SIF, SCORM, and NLN standards

Resources

Retrieved from "https://wiki.dickinson.edu/index.php?title=LMS_Project&oldid=42454"