Proposal
Dear Principal Lidle,
I am writing you in regards to our district’s mission to promote greater e-learning opportunities in our instruction. In the May-June 2010 staff newsletter, our Superintendent touts the importance of e-learning in our district, stating that it provides students with “the choice of how they learn, the rate of speed in which they learn and, to some extent, the teaching style that matches best their own learning style.” I am a strong believer that e-learning, when implemented effectively, can greatly enhance student learning. For this reason, I am proposing that our school adopt a learning management system (LMS) called Moodle to facilitate our school’s e-learning goals.
Moodle is a free software program that allows teachers to create online courses for students. Similar to all LMSs, Moodle provides teachers with “a variety of tools to support student learning and parental communication” (Perkins & Pfaffman, 2006, p. 35). Moodle allows teachers to post lesson plans, display announcements, use an online grade-book, upload slide shows, and post assignments with due dates for students and parents. Additional tools include discussion forums, real-time chat, quizzes, and Wiki (Perkins & Pfaffman, 2006). All these Moodle tools are user-friendly and adaptable to the instruction needs of teachers.
Unlike other LMSs, Moodle is open source, meaning that no license is required to operate or change the software, thereby saving our district hundreds if not thousands of dollars compared to implementing another LMS. Furthermore, Perkins and Pfaffman (2006) also state that Moodle only has a set up time of approximately 15 minutes. They both testify to Moodle’s user-friendliness and benefits in terms of promoting student learning by providing multiple case studies.
My recommendation to use Moodle is based on a detailed comparison evaluation of various LMS options. Using a rubric similar to one developed by an international team of educators in my educational technology program, the World Languages Department at our school critically researched and appraised the affordances and consequences of four different LMSs. The rubric that was based on Bates’ (2003) SECTIONS framework for evaluating technological tools and Panettieri’s (2007) recommendations for selecting an LMS. Moodle outranked all the other LMSs with this rubric. The following link shows in detail how we assessed Moodle with our rubric: https://blogs.ubc.ca/barkhurstetec565a/proposal/lms-evaluation-rubric/
In terms of resources needed to implement Moodle, we would need to have the Technology Department’s assistance to bring a Moodle serve online. Links for several Moodle hosting service websites can be found on Moodle.org. With the proper training, the Technology Department should be able to bring a server online within a couple weeks to a month. In terms of a budget, “prices range from $100/year for a class to about $1000/year for an entire school or district” (Perkins and Pfaffman, 2006, p. 37).
I hope you strongly consider adopting Moodle based on my department’s research, evaluation process, and our findings. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me at school.
Best regards,
Brian Barkhurst
References
Bates, A.W. & Poole, G. (2003). Chapter 4: A framework for selecting and using technology. In Effective Teaching with Technology in Higher Education:Foundations for Success (pp. 77-105). San Francisco: Jossey Bass Publishers.
Perkins, M., & Pfaffman, J. (2006). Using a course management system to improve classroom communication. Science Teacher, 73(7), 33-37.
Panettieri, J. (2007). Addition by subtraction. University Business, August, 58-62. Accessed online 11 March 2009. <http://www.universitybusiness.com /viewarticle.aspx?articleid=845>
