DOCSLIB.ORG

A Comparison and Evaluation of Course Delivery Tool of Open

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
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.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • LMS Data Quadrant Report
    November 2019 DATA QUADRANT REPORT Education Learning Management Systems 846 8 Reviews Vendors Evaluated Education Learning Management Systems Data Quadrant Report How to Use the Report Table of Info-Tech’s Data Quadrant Reports provide a comprehensive evaluation of popular products in the Education Learning Management Systems market. This buyer’s guide is designed to help Contents prospective purchasers make better decisions by leveraging the experiences of real users. The data in this report is collected from real end users, meticulously verified for erv acity, Data Quadrant...................................................................................................................7 exhaustively analyzed, and visualized in easy to understand charts and graphs. Each product is compared and contrasted with all other vendors in their category to create a holistic, unbiased view Category Overview ......................................................................................................8 of the product landscape. Use this report to determine which product is right for your organization. For highly detailed reports Vendor Capability Summary................................................................................ 9 on individual products, see Info-Tech’s Product Scorecard. Vendor Capabilities.................................................................................................... 12 Product Feature Summary................................................................................. 24 Product Features........................................................................................................26
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of Distance Learning and Learning Management Systems
    Chapter 1 A Review of Distance Learning and Learning Management Systems Mümine Kaya Keleş and Selma Ayşe Özel Additional information is available at the end of the chapter http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/65222 Abstract In recent years, rapid developments in technology and the web have led to many changes in education. One of the most important changes in education is in the form of distance learning. Distance learning, which is used to define education where educators and learners are physically separated, is not a new concept; however, emerging technologies and the web allow web‐based distance learning and therefore increase its popularity. As a result of these developments, many universities have started to use web‐based distance learning systems to provide flexible education that is independent of time and place. In this chapter, we review all popular, widely used, and well‐known learning management systems and include detailed comparison of some of these systems to allow institutions to choose the right system for their distance education activities. Keywords: distance learning, literature review, educational research, learning manage- ment systems, Moodle 1. Introduction Distance education, which is now also referred to as distance learning or e‐learning, has existed for centuries. Although as Keegan says “the ideas surrounding the educational endeavor are somewhat similar” [1], it is not easy to find a single definition of distance education. While according to North [2], a few definitions even look to define it in terms of a single technology, according to long‐distance teaching [3], others display distance education simply as a recent development of the class into a remote location [4].
    [Show full text]
  • Open Source Learning Management Systems
    Open Source Learning Management Systems Emerging open source LMS markets Recommended LMS for each market Getting off on the right foot By Mark Aberdour Epic Technical Producer, Epic 52 Old Steine Brighton, BN1 1NH United Kingdom [email protected] www.epic.co.uk t: +44 (0) 1273 728686 f: +44 (0) 1273 821567 All rights reserved. You agree that by downloading and accessing this publication that no part of it maybe reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means without the prior written permission of Epic. Full acknowledgement of author and source must be given. ©2007 Epic Reproduction without written permission is strictly forbidden - 2 - An Epic White Paper Contents Executive summary 4 A changing market 4 The oppor tunity for Open Source 5 Emerging open source LMS markets 6 Large enterprise 6 Small and medium sized business (SMB) 6 Government and public sector 7 Primary and secondary education 7 Rapid rollout 8 Market feature matrix 8 The open source landscape 10 Benefits of Open Source 10 Risks of Open Source 11 Myths of Open Source 12 Selecting an open source LMS 13 Market recommendations 15 Large enterprise 15 Small and medium sized business 17 Government and public sector 19 Primary and secondary education 21 Rapid rollout 23 A detailed look at each LMS 24 Atutor 24 DotLRN 25 Ilias 26 Moodle 27 Sakai 28 Getting off on the right foot 30 Appendix A: Active open source LMS projects 32 References 33 Other Epic e-learning white papers 35 Epic Thinking 37 Epic Arena 38 ©2007 Epic Reproduction without written permission is strictly forbidden - 3 - An Epic White Paper Executive summary If you thought that “Open source learning management system (LMS) equals Moodle”, then think again.
    [Show full text]
  • Spying on Students: School Issued Devices and Student Privacy (EFF)
    Spying on Students SCHOOL-ISSUED DEVICES AND STUDENT PRIVACY Frida Alim, Bridge Fellow Na e Cardo!o, Se"ior Sta## A or"e$ %e""ie Ge&'art, Re(ear)'er *are" Gullo, Media Relatio"( Anal$( Amul Kalia, Anal$( A-ril 1/, 21.2 ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION EFF3OR% 1 Authors: Frida Alim, Nate Cardozo, Gennie Gebhart, Karen Gullo, Amul Kalia With assistance from: Sophia Cope, Hugh D’Andrade, Jeremy Gillula, Rainey Reitman A publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, 2017. “Spying on Students: School-Issued Devices and Student Privacy” is released under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION EFF3OR% 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary..................................................................................................................................................... 5 Introduction.................................................................................................................................................................. 7 Part 1: Survey Results................................................................................................................................................. 8 Methods..................................................................................................................................................................... 9 Respondents and Overall Trends....................................................................................................................10 Findings..................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Sakai Overview (At Michigan State University)
    Sakai Overview Charles Severance Chief Architect, Sakai Project www.sakaiproject.org [email protected] www.dr-chuck.com KYOU / sakai Boundary, Situation The Sakai Project “The University of Michigan, Indiana University, MIT, Stanford, the uPortal Consortium, and the Open Knowledge Initiative (OKI) are joining forces to integrate and synchronize their considerable educational software into a pre- integrated collection of open source tools.” Sakai Project receives $2.4 million grant from Mellon Sakai Funding • Each of the 4 Core Universities Commits – 5+ developers/architects, etc. under Sakai Board project direction for 2 years – Public commitment to implement Sakai – Open/Open licensing – “Community Source” • So, overall project levels – $4.4M in institutional staff (27 FTE) – $2.4M Mellon, $300K Hewlett – Additional investment through partners What is Sakai? • Sakai is a project - a grant for two years. • Sakai is an extensible framework - provides basic capabilities to support a wide range of tools and services • Sakai is a set of tools - written and supported by various groups • Sakai is a product - a released bundle of the framework and a set of tools which have been tested and released as a unit The Sakai Project Goals of the Sakai Project • Develop an open-source collaborative learning environment – Suitable for use as a learning management system – Suitable for use as a small group collaboration system – Suitable for building research collaboratories – Improve teaching and learning by providing a rich and extensible environment –
    [Show full text]
  • View Booklet
    VIRTUAL THE LATEST TRENDS IN TECH NETWORK WITH YOUR PEERS SHARE YOUR EXPERIENCE WELCOME Welcome to the 2021 West Virginia Statewide Wednesday’s sessions will begin at 9am, with the Technology Conference! We are very pleased that you closing keynote session by Dr. John Spencer. After a could join us for this virtual event. short break for lunch, we will resume sessions at 1pm and end the conference at 4pm. The conference will begin on Monday morning, with a wide selection of round table and panel sessions to The vendor sites will be available throughout the choose from. We will have a lunch break from 12-1pm, conference, so please take the time to visit them at your and at 1pm, we will hear from our opening keynote leisure. speaker, Dr. Alec Couros, after a short introduction from WVNET Director, Dr. Carl Powell. Monday afternoon, we We wish you a very successful and productive will continue with a variety of sessions to choose from. conference experience, and hope you will join us for a face-to-face conference in 2022! Tuesday’s agenda will consist of sessions from 9am until 12pm, with poster sessions from 11-12. We will break Best Regards, for lunch at noon and resume with sessions scheduled West Virginia Statewide Technology Conference from 1-4pm. Committee 2021 4 Sarah Barnes Tracey Beckley Lisa Bridges Harmony Garletts 2021 WVSTC CONFERENCE Tiffany Goff Nathan Justice Michelle Liga Annaliza Marks Cory Morrison Suma Ponnam MEMBERS Phil Snitz COMMITTEE 5 CONTENTS Sponsor Acknowledgments/Special Thanks to Our Premium Level Sponsors ...................7 Keynote Speakers ........................................................................................................................9 Sessions Schedule ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • LMS Task Force Final Report
    REPORT LMS Exploratory Task Force, 2010-2011 August 13, 2011 Task Force Members: Lorna Wong (Chair), UW System Administration Barbara Barnet, UW-Platteville Jeff Bohrer, UW-Madison Rovy Branon, UW-Extension Jane Henderson, UW-Stout Peter Mann, UW-Madison Sharon McCarragher, UW-Milwaukee Andy Speth, UW-Green Bay Dan Voeks, UW-Madison Jim Winship, UW-Whitewater Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................ 3 KEY RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................ 5 LMS Landscape ..................................................................................................................... 7 Faculty Needs Assessment ............................................................................................ 11 Student Needs Assessment ........................................................................................... 15 Emerging Trends .............................................................................................................. 18 Acknowledgement ........................................................................................................... 25 Appendix 1 – Learn@UW Usage .................................................................................. 26 Appendix 2 – LMS Market Share for Number of Students ................................... 27 Appendix 3 – LMS Market Share for All Institutions ...........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Lms Market Dynamics
    BIG PICTURE LMS MARKET DYNAMICS Spring 2016 Edition Provided by MindWires LLC http://www.mindwires.com/ Powered by: by © 2016, MindWires LLC. All rights reserved. Unauthorized reproduction or sharing is strictly prohibited (see http://mfeldstein.com/lms-subscription-terms-conditions/ for details). Information is based on best available resources. Opinions reflect judgment at the time and are subject to change. MindWires is a trademark of MindWires LLC. All other trademarks are the property of their respective companies. To purchase additional subscriptions for access to this report, go to http://mfeldstein.com/lms-subscription/. LMS MARKET DYNAMICS | 2 CONTENTS Introduction 3 Purpose and Organization of Report 3 Executive Summary 4 Past to Present 5 Section Summary 5 The Past: The Shaping of a Market 5 The Road to Now: A Market in Transition 10 Market Share Today 16 Some Open Questions 20 Drivers of Change 22 Section Introduction and Summary 22 Changes In Product Design 23 New Markets Bring New Opportunities and Threats 30 Further Out on the Horizon 34 The Next Twelve Months 36 Will There Be More Elective Migration? 36 Will There Be Different Winners and Losers? 37 Will the Growth in Other Markets Change Platform Sustainability? 38 Appendix: Data-Gathering Methodology 39 © 2016, MindWIres LLC. Unauthorized reproduction or sharing is strictly prohibited. LMS MARKET DYNAMICS | 3 INTRODUCTION PURPOSE AND ORGANIZATION OF REPORT This report is designed help you understand the ongoing changes in adoption patterns for higher education Learning Management Systems (LMSs, also known as “Course Management Systems” or “Virtual Learning Environments”). It analyzes who is moving to or away from which platforms and how quickly they are moving.
    [Show full text]
  • Student Study, 2015 Note: the Online Version of This Survey May Be Shorter Due to Question Branching Or Question Skipping
    Student Study, 2015 Note: The online version of this survey may be shorter due to question branching or question skipping. Welcome to the 2015 ECAR Student Technology Survey! Study Description Technology is a critical part of undergraduate students’ experiences in higher education. This study explores technology ownership, use patterns, and expectations as they relate to the student experience. The results of this study can be used by colleges and universities to better engage students in the learning process. Furthermore, institutions can use the data to improve IT services, increase technology- enabled productivity, prioritize strategic contributions of IT to higher education, plan for technology shifts that impact students, and become more technologically competitive among peer institutions. We ask questions about your experiences with and attitudes toward technology and your academic experiences. Your responses will help people on your campus and beyond understand how to use technology more effectively to benefit students. There are no right or wrong answers; we would just like you to answer as honestly as you can. Participation in the survey is completely voluntary, and you can choose to exit the survey at any point. Your responses are anonymous. Required questions are indicated with an asterisk (*). This survey might take you up to 30 minutes to complete. Please use the survey’s navigation buttons below to go back or forward within the survey. Using your browser’s navigation buttons may result in lost answers. Conditions and Stipulations 1. I agree to complete this online survey for research purposes and that the data derived from this anonymous survey may be made available to my academic institution in unitary and aggregate formats and/or to the general public in the form of public presentations, reports, journals or newspaper articles, and/or in books.
    [Show full text]
  • Education Learning Management Systems Category Report Vendor
    April 2019 INTERNAL USE ONLY CATEGORY REPORT Education Learning Management Systems Blackbaud onCampus Canvas Moodle Sakai Blackboard Learning Management Software D2L Brightspace PowerSchool Learning Schoology 899 8 Reviews Vendors Evaluated Education Learning Management Systems Category Report How to Use the Report Table of Info-Tech’s Category Reports provide a comprehensive evaluation of popular products in the Education Learning Management Systems market. This buyer’s guide is designed to help Contents prospective purchasers make better decisions by leveraging the experiences of real users. The data in this report is collected from real end users, meticulously verified for veracity, Data Quadrant...................................................................................................................7 exhaustively analyzed, and visualized in easy to understand charts and graphs. Each product is compared and contrasted with all other vendors in their category to create a holistic, unbiased view Category Overview ......................................................................................................8 of the product landscape. Use this report to determine which product is right for your organization. For highly detailed reports Vendor Capability Summary................................................................................ 9 on individual products, see Info-Tech’s Product Scorecard. Vendor Capabilities....................................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • LMS Data Quadrant Report
    November 2020 DATA QUADRANT REPORT Education Learning Management Systems 938 9 Reviews Vendors Evaluated Education Learning Management Systems Data Quadrant Report How to Use the Report Table of Info-Tech’s Data Quadrant Reports provide a comprehensive evaluation of popular products in the Education Learning Management Systems market. This buyer’s guide is designed to help Contents prospective purchasers make better decisions by leveraging the experiences of real users. The data in this report is collected from real end users, meticulously verified for erv acity, Data Quadrant.................................................................................................................. 6 exhaustively analyzed, and visualized in easy to understand charts and graphs. Each product is compared and contrasted with all other vendors in their category to create a holistic, unbiased view Category Overview .......................................................................................................7 of the product landscape. Use this report to determine which product is right for your organization. For highly detailed reports Vendor Capability Summary................................................................................8 on individual products, see Info-Tech’s Product Scorecard. Vendor Capabilities......................................................................................................11 Product Feature Summary................................................................................. 23 Product Features........................................................................................................25
    [Show full text]
  • Sakai Overview
    Sakai Overview Jim Farmer Sakai Community Liaison Electronic Learning Environment Seminar SURF Foundation Amsterdam – 29 September 2005 KYOU / sakai Boundary, Situation What is Sakai? • Sakai is a two year project which transitions to a broader community for the long term • Sakai is an extensible software framework to support a wide range of tools and services • Sakai is a set of tools - written by the project and by the community • Sakai is a product - a released bundle of the framework and a set of tools which have been tested and released as a unit • Sakai is a community of “partners” The Sakai Project Goals of the Sakai Project • Develop an open-source collaborative learning environment – Suitable for use as a learning management system – Suitable for use as a small group collaboration system – Suitable for building research collaboratories – Improve teaching and learning by providing a rich and extensible environment Chuck Severance, July 2005 The Sakai Product (and Tools) Ctools – Production Sakai at University of Michigan Sakai 1.0 Tools Admin: Alias Editor (chef.aliases) Help (chef.contactSupport) Admin: Archive Tool (chef.archive) Membership (chef.membership) Admin: Memory / Cache Tool Message Of The Day (chef.motd) (chef.memory) My Profile Editor (chef.singleuser) Admin: On-Line (chef.presence) News (chef.news) Admin: Realms Editor (chef.realms) Preferences (chef.noti.prefs) Admin: Sites Editor (chef.sites) Recent Announcements Admin: User Editor (chef.users) (chef.synoptic.announcement) Announcements (chef.announcements) Recent
    [Show full text]