A Comparison and Evaluation of Course Delivery Tool of Open

A Comparison And Evaluation of Course Delivery Tool of Open Source Learning Management Systems[1-13] A Comparison and Evaluation of Course Delivery Tool of Open Source Learning Management Systems

Sheetal Uplenchwara, Dr. Manimala Purib aResearch Scholar, Allana Institute of Management Sciences, Pune bDirector, Jayawant Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Group of Institutes Email: [email protected], [email protected]

Abstract

Online Learning is becoming an important tool to allow the flexibility and quality requested by learning process. In the recent past, a great number of open sources learning management system (OSLMS) have been introduced in the market showing different characteristics and services. All these OSLMS reduces cost acquired by proprietary LMS. Market is occupied with large number of OSLMS. So before selecting any OSLMS it is necessary to consider series of features, function and usability of the overall learning system.

The main purpose of this study is to analyze and explore the right decision when choosing a suitable OSLMS platform to meet the requirements of education system. A different criterion needs to be considered while evaluating OSLMS. These criteria includes communication tool, productivity tool, student involvement tool, administration tool, course delivery tool, curriculum design, course delivery tool, software and hardware requirement, pricing and licensing issues. This study focuses on evaluation of course delivery tool of seven OSLMS which includes Moodle, Atutor, Sakai, Ilias, Claroline, Olat and Dokeos.

Keywords: Learning management systems (LMS), Open source learning management systems (OSLMS), Group, Discussion Forum, Blog, Chat, Email, File Exchange, and Video Services

1. Introduction This paper evaluates seven OSLMS. Each OSLMS In the last decade the usage of Internet has been program is based on the ability to accommodate increased gradually and new technologies have different active learning experiences in online improved students education. Based on the new courses. The selected OSLMS are Moodle, Atutor, technologies, learning environments are able to Olat, Sakai, Ilias, Claroline, and Dokeos. provide a wide range of educational alternatives. The comparison includes administrative, faculty Distance learning is one of these alternatives where and student perspectives. A LMS must address the student and instructor are remotely located and are needs of the ultimate end user i.e. the learner. Each flexible with respect to time and place LMS has key features that allow students to be constraint [22]. actively involved in their courses.

LMS have significant role in distance learning, This paper is organized as follows. Section 1 which is also known as virtual learning represents brief introduction of paper. In Section 2, environment (VLE). Halls defines LMS as, literature review has been carried out. Section 3 ―Software that automates administration of training shows base for the selection of OSLMS, need of events‖ [13]. comparison for selected OSLMS and general information about selected OSLMS. A comparative In distance learning process OSLMS are widely study of selected OSLMS is presented in Sections used. OSS represents a social dimension of 4. Section 5 displays results of the study. Section 6 learning through a Persistent, Unified, Multi-User, represents conclusion of the study. and Self-Organizing environment extending beyond the traditional classroom where learners 2. Literature Review build knowledge and understanding through Jamil Ahmad Itmazi and Miguel Gea (2005) [16] collaborative exchanges both within and across have carried out paper surveys of 58 studies of subject area boundaries. comparison and evaluation of OSLMS and proprietary system by comparing functionality.

INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT VOL. NO. 3(1), December 2015, ISSN NO.-2321-8088 Page 1

A Comparison And Evaluation of Course Delivery Tool of Open Source Learning Management Systems[1-13] They have recommended the most widely used proprietary LMS, WebcCT was at topmost OSLMS. Result of the study shows that WebCT is position. Amongst OLSMS, DotLRN was at the mostly used proprietary LMS and Moodle is the topmost position and Moodle was at second mostly used OSLMS. position.

Matjaz Kljun, Jernej Vicic, and Branko Kavsek The report of commonwealth (2003) of learning [6] (2007) [18] have reviewed 31 LMS comparison has evaluated OSLMS like Moodle, Lon-Capa, and evaluation (research papers written between Ilias, DotLRN, and Atutor. Comparison parameter 1998 and 2006) papers. Comparison methods includes maintainability, usability, reliability, includes Feature comparison , Learning paths scalability etc. Each feature was evaluated on the support, SCORM specification, OSS compliance, basis of 0-5 scale. Study shows that Atutor has Student centered, Learning tools based, Technical supported 42 features. Ilias has supported 41 specification, Conversational Framework, features. Moodle has supported having 37 features Questionnaire based, Features usability, and Use- and LON-Capa has supported 37 features. case and feedback .The study reveals that present LMS development tries to catch up with standards, Sabine Graf & Beate List (2005) [25] have although the SCORM standard is unfortunately not evaluated 9 OSLMS. The main focus was on as widely supported. adaptation issue. Qualitative Weight and Sum Approach was used for this purpose. Comparison Peter Lengyel, Miklos Herdon and Robert Szilagyil includes Atutor, Dokeos, DotLRN, ILIAS,Lon- (2006)[23] have done the comparison amongst Capa,Moodle, OpnUSS, Sakai, Spaghettilearning. Atutor, Moodle and OLAT by considering various The adaptation issues include communication tools, parameters like support and compatibility to learning objects, user data management, usability, standards, content development, content authoring / technical aspects, administration, and course editing tools, modularity, backup tools, user management. Rank was given to each platform. authentication, video conferencing, group facility, Moodle has achieved the best evaluation values. chat facility, XML support, system requirements. Ilias has second rank and Dokeos has third rank. The study shows that Moodle was at higher ATutor, LON-CAPA, Spaghettilearning, and Open- position supporting 13 features out of 14. USS were ranked equally at the fourth position, whereas Sakai and dotLRN were ranked last. Atutor and OLAT have supported 9 features. Guzin Tirkes (2010) has [12] done the comparison Jing Liu, Men and Jun Han (2009) [17] have amongst Atutor, Moodle, OLAT and Dokeos by compared and evaluated 5 OSLMS namely Atutor, considering support and compatibility, content Moodle, Sakai, Calroline and Dokeos. They have development and editing tool, modularity, backup, not ranked the LMS. The study shows that Moodle user authentication, video conferencing, online is better for process assessment. Sakai can be used examination question, group, chat, email etc. for better summary assessment. For community Result of their study shows that Moodle had all 17 purpose Sakai is perfect. If the teacher is novice features, Atutor and OLAT have supported 12 user in teaching Claroline can be used. For features, whereas Dokeos has supported 15 functioning of videos Dokeos is best. features. Cansu Cigdem and Guzin Tirkes (2010) [4] have Barbar A.Lewis and Virginia M. MacEntee compared Moodle, Atutor, Dokeos, Olat. Result of (2005)[3] have evaluated WebCT, v.4.1; the comparison shows that Moodle has achieved BlackBoard, v. 6.1; Jones E-education; Educator; best result with many pedagogical features. Other Angel; .LRN; McGraw Hill Page out; Moodle; and OSLMS have all basic functionalities. e-College AU. They considered various comparison features like content development, Thair M. Hamtini and Hussam Nawwaf Fakhouri discussion area, group participation, calendar, chat, [29] have evaluated 9 OSLMS namely Dokeos, student study tool, audio, video, student progress Claroline, IWT, ILIAS, Moodle, Atutor, LON- and email. Study shows that amongst the CAPA, OpenUSS, ADA. The minimum criteria

INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT VOL. NO. 3(1), December 2015, ISSN NO.-2321-8088 Page 2

A Comparison And Evaluation of Course Delivery Tool of Open Source Learning Management Systems[1-13] include Social Networking Tools, Productivity management, course category creation, course Tools & Software Installation, Administration setting features, enrollment methods, E-commerce Tools & Security, Presentation Tools and Material payment method. Distribution, and Management Features. Based on the functionality of these platforms Qualitative All these subcategories have different features. All Weight and Sum (QWS) and the Analytic of these features are evaluated by downloading Hierarchy Process (AHP) approach was used for each OSLMS from its respective site and then the evaluation process of these OSLMS. Intelligent installed. Each of these features and its evaluation Web teacher was at first position. Claroline was at result with respect to Moodle, Atutor, Olat, second position and Moodle was at third position. Dokeos, Sakai Ilias and claroline are discussed The most frequently used open source system in below. Jordan universities is Moodle. 4.1 Course Management 3. Selection of OSLMS Managing course is a tedious and time consuming From the above literature review it is clearly task. It becomes an integral part of the higher observed that most of the studies include education system. Course management provides set comparison and evaluation of Moodle, Atutor, of tools to instructors. With the help of these tools Olat, Dokeos, Sakai, Claroline, Ilias, LON-CAPA, it becomes easier to manage course online without OpenUSS, ADA, Spaghettilearning, DotLRN and programming language knowledge. With respect Olat. Selection of OSLMS is based on rating to instructor, course management includes course given by this study. creation category, uploading of course materials, class exercises, quizzes and tests. Also there is a Research Gap that evaluated research papers are backdated. Current 4.1.1 Course creation features comparison and evaluation is not available. So it Course creation include managing course i.e. is necessary to carry out latest evaluation of all creation, updation and deletion of course. these OSLMS to know its current capabilities in today’s learning scenarios. The table below displays different course With the help of past studies, the selected OSLMS creation features of Moodle, Atutor, Olat, Dokeos, are Moodle, Atutor, Olat, Sakai, Ilias, Claroline, Ilias, Sakai, and Claroline. [1,2,5,7,9,10,14,15,19, and Dokeos. The table below displays general 20,21,26,27]. Letter Y indicates presence of feature information of these OSLMS which include and that cell is filled with Green color. Letter N developer name, first release date and its version, indicates absence of feature and that cell is filled latest version. [Refer Table1: General information with Red color. Letter NF indicates feature not about the selected OSLMS, Appendix A] found. [Refer Table 2: Course creation features of OSLMS, Appendix A] 4. Comparative study of OSLMS features OSLMS features are divided into category as From the table it can be observed that 4 features are learner tool, support tool and technical compared for all OSLMS. Moodle possesses all 4 specification. Each of these categories has features and topped ranked. Other OSLMS different types of subcategories. supported only 2 features. Learner tool includes subcategory as communication tool, productivity tool and student 4.1.2 Course category creation involvement tool. Support tool includes Course category creation helps to organize all subcategory as administration tool, course delivery courses created by teacher / instructor. There are tool, and curriculum design tool. Technical default course categories as well as teacher can specification tool includes H/W and S/W create course category according to their requirement, pricing and licensing. requirement. For example: - In case of Moodle there is default course category as Miscellaneous. The above figure shows category course delivery tool which are having features like course

INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT VOL. NO. 3(1), December 2015, ISSN NO.-2321-8088 Page 3

A Comparison And Evaluation of Course Delivery Tool of Open Source Learning Management Systems[1-13] In Atutor default course category is openlearn Sakai, and Claroline. [1,2,5,7,9,10,14,15,19, courses and community courses. In Ilias default 20,21,26,27] [Refer Table 6: Course enrollment course category is default and collaborative having features of OSLMS, Appendix A] additional writes and creates permission to members. In Dokeos default course category is From the table it can be observed that 12 features language skill, Pc skill, and projects. In Claroline are compared for all OSLMS. Moodle is at top default course category is Sciences, Economics, most position and supporting all 12 features. and Humanities. Atutor, Olat and Claroline are at second position, supporting 8 features. Dokeos, Illias and Sakai are The table below displays course category creation supporting 6 features. features of Moodle, Atutor, Olat, Dokeos, Ilias, Sakai, and Claroline. It includes managing course 4.1.5 Other course related features category. [1,2,5,7,9,10,14,15,19,20 ,21,26 ,27] It includes features such as uploading of files, use [Refer Table 3: Course category creation features of mathematical editor, export and import of course of OSLMS, Appendix A] etc. The table below displays other course related features of Moodle, Atutor, Olat, Dokeos, Ilias, From the table it can be observed that 10 course Sakai, and Claroline. [1,2,5,7,9,10,14,15, 19,20,21, category creation features are compared. Moodle is 26,27] [Refer Table 5: Other course related features at top position supporting all 10 features. Claroline of OSLMS, Appendix A] is at second position supporting 8 features. Caroline is supporting 7 features and Atutor is From the table it can be observed that 27 features supporting 6 features. are compared for all OSLMS. Moodle scores first rank by supporting all 27 features. Dokeos is at 4.1.3 Course Setting Features second position, supporting 16 features. Ilias scores Course setting features include setting course third rank by supporting 15 features. name, course id, theme, language etc. for the course. The table below displays course category 4.1.6 E-commerce Payment setting features of Moodle, Atutor, Olat, Dokeos, If course owner wants to charge any course fees Ilias, Sakai, and Claroline. It includes managing from student, then he can charge course fees from course category. [1,2,5,7,9,10,14,15,19, 20,21, student with the help of E – commerce payment 26,27] [Refer Table 4: Course setting features of method. The payment can be for entire course or OSLMS, Appendix A] may be for some of the module of the course. For E- commerce payment, third party gateway is used. From the table it can be observed that 18 features are compared. Moodle is at top position supporting The table below displays E-commerce payment all 18 features. Ilias scores second position by features of Moodle, Atutor, Olat, Dokeos, Ilias, supporting 15 features. Sakai is supporting 15 Sakai, and Claroline [1,2,5,7,9,10,14,15, features. 19,20,21,26,27] [Refer Table 7: E-commerce payment features, Appendix A]

4.1.4 Course Enrollment From the table it can be observed that 4 features are Course Enrollment method provides a different compared related to E commerce payment for all method to course instructor for enrolling of OSLMS. Moodle and Dokeos are at top most students in respective courses. In each OSLMS position supporting 4 features. Dokeos is at second there are different methods for student enrollment position, having 4 features. Atutor and Olat scores such as manual enrollment, self-enrollment, and second position and supporting 3 features. Others join the course with course password or guest are not supporting E-Commerce payment method. access. Moodle is supporting Paypal, DPS payment The table below displays course enrollment express gateway, Datatrans as a third party features of Moodle, Atutor, Olat, Dokeos, Ilias, gateway. Atutor allows third party as Mira

INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT VOL. NO. 3(1), December 2015, ISSN NO.-2321-8088 Page 4

A Comparison And Evaluation of Course Delivery Tool of Open Source Learning Management Systems[1-13] Pay, PayPal, Beanstream, Moneris Canada or 5. Result Moneris USA. Result of the above comparison and evaluation can be summarized as follows. The able below shows In Olat PayPal and Credit card methods are top 3 OSLMS with respect to course delivery tool. available. The price for admission to the group is [Refer Table 10 and Table 11: Ranking table of specified here. The group is subsequently booked OSLMS and summary of features supported by by paying with either PayPal or credit card. OSLMS, Appendix A] [1,2,5,7,9,10,14,15,19,20,21,26,27] 6. Conclusion 4.1.7 Grading Tool Above summarized table shows that total 76 Grading is important aspect of education system. features are compared related to course delivery For grading, continuous evaluation needs to be tool. From the study we can conclude that Moodle carried out. There are various ways to evaluate is at 1st rank having 122 features. Ilias is at 2nd student progress. Teacher can evaluate student rank having 85 features. Sakai is at 3rd rank having progress through classroom tests and assignments 51 features. or may be through activity participation. References Grading evaluates the quality of a student’s work. 1. Atutor demo portal, ―www.atutor.ca/atutor th The same grade is communicated to student. /demo.php‖, last accessed on 18 December Depending upon the grade, student gets motivated 2014. 2. Atutor documentation,‖ about their study, about their focus and their www.atutor.ca/atutor/ docs/‖, last accessed involvement in the course. Grade brings student on 18th December 2014. and teacher closer. So that is why grading plays 3. Barbara A. Lewis, Virginia M. MacEntee, important role in assessment process with respect ―Learning Management Systems Comparison‖, to learner and instructor. Proceedings of the 2005 Informing Science and IT Education Joint Conference The table below displays grading tool features of Flagstaff, Arizona, USA – June 16-19 4. Cansu Cigdem and Guzin Tirkes, ―Open Moodle, Atutor, Olat, Dokeos, Ilias, Sakai, and source learning management systems in e- Claroline [1,2,5,7,9,10,14,15,19,20,21,26,27] [ learning and Moodle‖, IEEE, Refer Table 8 and 9 : Grade Settings & Grade EDUCON,education engineering 2010-The items of OSLMS, Appendix A]. future of global learning engineering education, 978-1-4244-6571-2/10/ 2010- From the table it can be observed that 23 features IEEE, April 14-16, 2010, Madrid, Spain. are compared for all OSLMS. Moodle is at top 5. Claroline documentation, ―http://www.siteground. com /tutorials most position and having all 23 features. Ilias is at th /claroline/‖, last accessed on 20 second position, having 8 features. Dokeo and December 2014. rd Sakai have 6 features ranked at 3 position. Atutor 6. Common wealth of learning, ― COL LMS and Claroline have least number of features that is Open Source Repor‖, t July 2003 (Rev. 16 3. Atutor is having only course email facility. October 2003), Page 1 of 22 7. Comparison of Moodle and Atutor, ―http://skillspark.ca/info/ATutor_vs_Moodle.p 4.1.8 Student Tracking df‖, last accessed on 20th December Student tracking helps in monitoring student 2014. progress, document that they have accessed , 8. Difference between forum and blog, content accessed, module or course that they have ―http://www.web- finished, completed activity and he table below strategist.com/blog/2008/01/28/understanding- displays files sharing features of Moodle, Atutor, the-difference-between-forums-blogs-and- th Olat, Dokeos, Ilias, Sakai, and Claroline. social-networks/‖, last accessed on 20 December 2014. [1,2,5,7,9,10,14,15,19,20,21,26,] 9. Dokeos demo portal, ―https://www. softaculous. com/ demos/Dokeos‖, last accessed on 18th December 2014.

INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT VOL. NO. 3(1), December 2015, ISSN NO.-2321-8088 Page 5

A Comparison And Evaluation of Course Delivery Tool of Open Source Learning Management Systems[1-13] 10. Dokeos documentation,‖ www.dokeos.com/ 20. Olat documentation,‖ http://www.olat.org/ documentation/‖, last accessed on 19th OLATDOCS/‖, last accessed on 25th December 2014. December 2014. Group, ―en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group‖, last 21. Ozkul, ―E-learning and education‖, May 2003, accessed on 20th December 2014. paper presented at first national symposium on 11. Guzin Tirkes, ―Open Source Learning electric, electronic and computer engineering Management System in E-learning and education, Turkey. Moodle‖, IEEE Educon Education 22. PeterLengyelMiklosHerdon and Engineering Apr 2010, pages- 14-16, ISBN RobertSzilagyi, ―Comparison of Moodle and 978-1 4244- 6571-2. ATutor LMS’s‖, summer university on 12. Hall B, ―New technology definitions‖, Information Technology in agriculture and http://bandonhall.com/public/glossary/index.ht rural development – August 2006, ml, last accessed on 5th July 2014. pages-21-28, ISBN-963-87366-0-7. 13. Ilias demo portal, ―www.demo.ilias.de/‖, last 23. Podcast, ―http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podcast, accessed on 17th December 2014. last accessed on 20th December 2014. 14. Ilias documentation, ―http://www.ilias.de 24. Sabine Graf & Beate List, ―An Evaluation of /docu/‖, last accessed on 17th December 2014. Open Source E-Learning Platforms Stressing 15. Jamil Ahmad Itmazi and Miguel Gea, ―Survey: Adaptation Issues‖, Proceedings of the Fifth Comparison and evaluation studies of Learning IEEE International Conference on Content Management Systems‖, IADIS Advanced Learning Technologies International Conference on Applied (ICALT’05) I0-7695-2338-2/05 , 2005 IEEE Computing 2005, ISBN: 972-99353-6-X. 25. Sakai demo portal,‖ www.testdrivesakai. 16. Jing Liu, Hailong Men, Jun Han, com/‖, last accessed on 25th December 2014. ―Comparative Study of Open-source E- 26. Sakai documentation, ―http://sakaitutorials. learning Management Platform‖, 978-1-4244- unc. edu/‖, last accessed on 19th December 4507-3/09/, 2009 IEEE 2014. 17. MatjazKljun, JernejVicic, and BrankoKavsek, 27. Sakaidocumentation,‖ https://sakai.rutgers. edu ―Evaluating Comparisons and Evaluations of /helpdocs /blogger.html‖, last accessed on 19th Learning Management Systems‖, Proceedings December 2014. of the ITI 2007 29th Int. Conf. on Information 28. Thair M. Hamtini and Hussam Nawwaf Technology Interfaces, June, 2007, ISBN: Fakhouri, ―Evaluation of open-source E- 953-7138-10-0, pages 25-28. Learning platforms based on the 18. Moodle documentation,‖ http://docs.moodle. Qualitative Weight and Sum approach and org‖, last accessed on 20th December 2014. Analytic Hierarchy Process‖, 19. Olat demo portal, http://demo.olat.org/ olat/auth‖, last accessed on 25thDecember 2014.

INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT VOL. NO. 3(1), December 2015, ISSN NO.-2321-8088 Page 6

A Comparison And Evaluation of Course Delivery Tool of Open Source Learning Management Systems[1-13]

Appendix- A Table 1: GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE SELECTED OSLMS

Sr.N OSLMS Name Developer Name First release date and Latest o version version 1. Modular Object-Oriented Martin Dougiamas Version : Moodle 1.0, Moodle 2.7.2 Dynamic Learnin (Moodle) 20th August 2002 8 September [19] 2014 2. Atutor[2] University of Toronto Version : Atutor 1.0, Atutor 2.2 Late 2002 march 2013 3. Online Learning And Trainin University of Zurich, Switzerland Version 1.6 — on May Olat 7.8.2.3 g(Olat)Olat [21] 7, 2002 August, 2014 4. Sakai[27] University of Michigan, Indiana Version : Sakai 10.1 University, Massachusetts Institute of Sakai 2.9.3, Technology, Stanford University, March 2005 University of Michigan, uPortal and the Open Knowledge Initiative 5. (Integrated Learning, University of Cologne Version 1.0, Ilias 4.4.4 Information and Work November 2, 1998 July 2014 Cooperation System")Ilias [15] 6. Collaborative eLearning and Catholic University of Louvain, Year 2000 Claorline eWorking platform Belgium) First release version 1.12.0 RC3 (Claroline) [5] information not available 7. Dokeos[10] Dokeos SPRL(French developer January 5, 2004, 2 RC2 Thomas De Praeter) version -1.0 March 1, 2013;

TABLE 2: COURSE CREATION FEATURES OF OSLMS

Sr.No OSLMS Name eo

Ilias

Olat

Sakai

Dok

Atutor

Moodle Claroline

1 Addition of Course Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 2 Deletion of Course Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 3 Enable course request Y N N N N N N 4 Bulk course create options Y N N N N N N Total no.of features available 4 2 2 2 2 2 2

INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT VOL. NO. 3(1), December 2015, ISSN NO.-2321-8088 Page 7

A Comparison And Evaluation of Course Delivery Tool of Open Source Learning Management Systems[1-13]

TABLE 3 : COURSE CATEGORY CREATION FEATURES of OSLMS

Sr.No OSLMS Name ne

Ilias

Olat

Sakai

Dokeo

Moodl

Atutor Claroli Creation of category for course(category wise 1 Y Y N Y Y N Y courses) 2 Editing of course category Y Y N Y Y N Y 3 Moving of course category Y N N N N N Y 4 Hiding of course category Y N N N N N Y 5 Deletion of course category Y Y N Y Y N Y 6 Setting course category depth Y N N N N N N 7 Creation course subcategory Y Y N Y N N Y 8 Assigning users a role in course category Y Y Y N N N N 9 Default course category for each OSLMS Y Y N Y Y N Y 10 Default course request category(courses requested by users will be Y N N N N N N automatically placed in this category) Total no.of features available 10 6 1 5 4 0 7

TABLE 4: COURSE SETTING FEATURES OF OSLMS

ai eo

Sr.No OSLMS Name or

dle

Sak

Dok

Ilias

Olat

Moo Atut Clar oline 1 Setting course short name Y N Y N N Y N 2 Setting course full name /course title Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 3 Setting course description Y Y Y N Y Y Y 4 Setting Course start/end date Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 5 Setting external link to course Y N Y Y Y Y Y 6 Setting unlimited access to course Y Y N Y Y N Y 7 Setting Limited access to course by Y Y Y N Y Y Y setting [start time - end time] 8 Setting Course Format Y N N Y Y Y Y 10 Assigning course Id number Y N Y Y N Y Y 11 Course summary Y N N N Y Y N 12 Uploading of course summary file Y N N N Y Y N Number of sections to be assigned to the 13 Y N N Y Y N N course 14 Selection of theme for a course Y Y Y Y Y N Y 15 Selection of language for a course Y Y N Y Y Y Y 16 Managing items/topics(Add, update, delete, view) in course Y Y N Y Y Y Y 17 Create syllabus item by adding total no.of items(bulk add) Y N N N Y Y N 18 Add attachment for items/topics Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Total no. of features available

18 9 9 11 15 12 INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT VOL. NO. 3(1), December 2015, ISSN NO.-2321-8088 Page 8

A Comparison And Evaluation of Course Delivery Tool of Open Source Learning Management Systems[1-13]

TABLE 5: OTHER COURSE RELATED FEATURES OF OSLMS

Sr.No OSLMS Name

Ilias

Olat

Sakai

Dokeo

Atutor

Moodle Claroline 1 Deletion of multiple courses Y N N N N N N 2 Create a copy of an existing course Y Y Y Y Y N N 3 Allow guest access to course Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 4 Allow renaming of course Y N N N N N N Preventing teachers from editing course 5 settings Y N N N Y N N 6 Upload multiple files at once in a folder(zip form) Y Y N Y Y Y Y 7 Edit uploaded text online Y N N Y N Y Y 8 Release content based on student viewing Y N N N N N N 9 Exporting a course by copying it. Y Y Y Y Y Y N 10 Importing courses Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 11 Hide work in progress Y N N N N N N 12 content item sorting Y N N N Y N N 13 E-Mail to new members when added to course Y Y N Y Y Y Y 14 Accessibility features for course. Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 15 Setting of departmental URL for created course Y N N Y N N Y 16 Uploading of courses through file Y Y N Y Y Y N 17 Using an existing course as a template Y N N N N N N 18 Available default course icon Y Y Y N N Y N Displaying course activity report and showing the number of 19 views for each activity and resource Y N N N N N N 20 Uploading of files from desktop to server Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 21 Uploading of files with ignoring file size limit Y N N N N N N 22 Activity Completion Tracking Y N N N N N N 23 Use of mathematical editor for course Y Y N Y Y Y N 24 Block students for activity copy and paste N N N Y N N N 25 Show course language Y Y N Y N Y N 26 Add course to personal desktop Y N N N Y N N 27 create and edit certificate Y Y N Y Y N N 28 Enables map settings Y Y N Y Y N N

Total no.of features available 27 14 7 16 15 12 8

INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT VOL. NO. 3(1), December 2015, ISSN NO.-2321-8088 Page 9

A Comparison And Evaluation of Course Delivery Tool of Open Source Learning Management Systems[1-13]

TABLE 6: COURSE ENROLLMENT FEATURES OF OSLMS

Sr.No OSLMS Name

Ilias

Olat

Sakai

Dokeo

Atutor

Moodle Claroline

1 Manual enrollment Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 2 Self-enrollment / registration Y Y Y Y N Y Y 3 Request Membership Y N N N Y N Y 4 Join with Course Password Y N Y N Y N N 5 Registration of trainer / teacher by self Y Y Y Y N N Y 6 Registration of trainer / teacher by admin Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 7 Guest Access Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 8 Course meta link(bring enrolments Y N N N N N N from other course) 9 Cohort sync Y N N N N N N

10 Creating course student list for Y Y Y Y Y Y Y registration purpose

11 Importing course student list for registration Y Y Y N N N Y purpose

12 Exporting student course list for registration Y Y N N N Y N purpose Total no.of features available 12 8 8 6 6 6 8

TABLE 7: E-COMMERCE PAYMENT FEATURES OF OSLMS

Sr.No OSLMS Name

Ilias

Olat

Sakai

Dokeo

Atutor

Moodle Claroline

1 E- commerce Payment currency Y Y NF Y N N N 2 E-commerce payment for entire course Y Y NF Y N N N 3 E-commerce payment for specific module Y N Y Y N N N 4 E-commerce payment for specific session Y N Y Y N N N

Total no.of features available 4 2 2 4 0 0 0

INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT VOL. NO. 3(1), December 2015, ISSN NO.-2321-8088 Page 10

A Comparison And Evaluation of Course Delivery Tool of Open Source Learning Management Systems[1-13]

TABLE 8 : GRADE SETTING FEATURES OF OSLMS

Sr.No OSLMS Name e

Ilias

Olat

Sakai

Dokeo

Atutor

Moodle Clarolin 1 Display grade category wise(Assignment, quiz etc) Y N Y Y Y Y Y

2 Display grades only - without the category totals column Y N N N N N N 3 Display aggregates - Category total column only Y N N N N N N Display full view - grades and the aggregates (the totals 4 column for the category) Y N N N N N Y 5 Sort the grade column wise Y N N N N Y N 6 Searching and filtering the grade book Y Y N N N N N 7 LAEgrader Report Overview Y N N N N N N 8 UploadPDF grade report Y N N N N N N Grade import plugins - Which allow data to be imported 9 from external sources Y Y N N N Y N

Grade export plugins: Which allow 10 you to export grade data for other systems Y Y N N N N N

11 Online grading method- Rubrics Y N N N N N N 12 Online grading method- marking guide Y N N N N N N Total no.of features available 12 3 1 1 1 3 2

TABLE 9 : GRADE ITEMS FEATURES OF OSLMS

Sr.No OSLMS Name e

Ilias

Olat

Sakai

Dokeo

Atutor

Moodle Clarolin 1 Activity-based grade items Y Y Y Y Y N N 2 Grade item -General information about the grade item Y Y N N Y Y N 3 Grade to pass(minimum grade to pass) Y Y Y Y Y N Y 4 Grade display type(min-max range, %, letters) Y Y N Y N Y N 5 Decimal points to be considered in grade Y N N N N N N Hidden: Whether this grade item should be hidden from 6 students. Y N N N N N N Hidden until: An optional date after which the grade item 7 will no longer be hidden (i.e. a grades release date) Y N N N N N N Locked: Whether or not to lock this grade item. A locked 8 grade item doesn't accept changes to its settings or grades Y Y N N N N N from its related module. Locked after: A date after which the locking will be 9 effective, usually after the grades release date. Y N N N N N N 10 Manual grade items Y Y N Y Y N N Total no.of features available 10 6 2 4 4 2 1

INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT VOL. NO. 3(1), December 2015, ISSN NO.-2321-8088 Page 11

A Comparison And Evaluation of Course Delivery Tool of Open Source Learning Management Systems[1-13]

Result Result of the above comparison and evaluation can be summarized as follows. The table below shows top 3 OSLMS with respect to course delivery tool. TABLE 10: RANKING TABLE OF OSLMS First ranked Second Third ranked Total Features compared OSLMS ranked OSLMS Sr.No compared and evaluated OSLMS features Moodle All other OSLMS are supporting 2 1 Course creation 4 (4) features Course category Moodle(9) Claroline(7) Atutor(6) 2 10 creation 3 Course setting 18 Moodle(18) Ilias(15) Sakai(14) Other course related Moodle(27) Dokeos(16) Ilias(15) 4 28 features Moodle(12) Atutor, Dokeos, 5 Course enrollment 12 Olat, Illias, Claroline(8) Sakai(6) Moodle, Atutor, Others not supported 6 E-Commerce Payment 4 Dokeos(4) Olat(2) these features. (Note: Figures in bracket indicates total number of features available for that OSLMS)

TABLE 11: SUMMARY OF FEATURES SUPPORTED BY OSLMS

OSLMS Rank ranked

Third Third

Fourth

Second ranked ranked ranked ranked

Seventh

OSLMS OSLMS OSLMS OSLMS OSLMS OSLMS OSLMS

xthranked

First ranked

Fifth

OSLMS name

Olat

Illias

Sakai

Atutor

Dokeos

Moodle

Claroline

Total No.of Features supported by

38 28 22 18 17 12 OSLMS 74

INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT VOL. NO. 3(1), December 2015, ISSN NO.-2321-8088 Page 12

A Comparison And Evaluation of Course Delivery Tool of Open Source Learning Management Systems[1-13] Authors

Sheetal R. Uplecnhwar is currently working as an Assistant Professor at Allana Institute of Management Sciences, affiliated to Savitribai Phule Pune University. She has done M.Phil in IT, MCA, MCM. Currently she is pursuing Ph.D in Computer Management from Savitribai Phule Pune University. She has written various research papers in national and international conference. Her

research domain is use of ―Open Source Learning Management System in educational institutions of Pune region‖.

Dr. Manimala Puri, Director, JSPM’s Abacus Institute of Computer Applications, Pune, India has over 30 years of teaching as well as administrative experience in the field of technical education. Also registered Ph.D. Guide under University of Pune. Distinction of being deputed at All India Council for Technical Education- An apex body infield of technical education under Ministry of Human Resources and Development, India.

INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT VOL. NO. 3(1), December 2015, ISSN NO.-2321-8088 Page 13