Moodle as Solution
Presentation to the Surrey School District Technology Steering Committee
Background
School District # 36 (Surrey) is the largest school district in British Columbia with over 70,000 students. The only district approved implementation of a Learning Management System (LMS) is at our district’s distributed learning (online) school, Surrey Connect, where the writer of this report works as a teacher. At Surrey Connect, we use Blackboard 9.1 to coordinate e-learning for over 4,000 students who are registered in almost 11,000 course instances (Surrey Schools, 2012).
The Problem
Our experience shows that Blackboard offers a platform that students and instructors find easy to use. However, Blackboard has significant limitations. These include:
- no integration with BCesis student information system
- limited ability to customize the LMS & build SD#36 specific solutions
- a gradebook with limited functionality
- blog and wiki components that compare unfavourably to web 2.0 alternatives
- cumbersome integration for social media (twitter, facebook)
Moodle as Solution
As Amaral & de Almeida (2009) have noted, Blackboard, despite its efforts to be innovative, is hampered by a legacy of LMS development that emphasized teacher-centered didactic instruction. On the contrary, Moodle is widely recognized for its focus on socially-mediated pedagogy:
“One of the main advantages of Moodle is that its underpinning pedagogy is social constructivism that supports role sharing and enables each participant to be a teacher as well as a learner” (Bonk & Pan, 2007, p. 10)
As Open Source software, Moodle can be freely downloaded by users. Moodle can readily be altered and this has prompted the development of a sizeable worldwide Moodle learning community that relies upon crowdsourcing to continuously improve learning environments (Miranda, 2011). Such collaboration is very similar to the learning community that we wish to foster in Surrey. Our district’s publicized focus on Collaborative Learning is a theme that ties in well with the social constructionist principles that have guided the development of Moodle since its inception in 2002.
Moodle is the most widely used LMS in the world (Bansode & Kumbhar, 2012). At the time of this report, Moodle.org recorded that 62,518,735 users had accessed 59,613 registered Moodle sites in 222 countries (Moodle Statistics, October 6, 2012). Forty percent of Canadian universities use Moodle which makes it the most deployed domestic LMS (Contact North, 2012). In contrast, Blackboard use is on the decline in Canada. Blackboard currently has a 36% share of the Canadian post-secondary market – down from the 76 % it enjoyed in 2005 (Contact North, 2012). A primary reason for falling interest in Blackboard has been cost. In a comprehensive LMS evaluation study, Berking and Gallagher (2011) note that switching to an open source LMS platform from a commercial alternative resulted in savings of 50-60% for some institutional users.
Using a Total Cost of Ownership analysis, the North Carolina Community College System (NCCCS) noted a significant savings per-user by switching to Moodle from Blackboard. With a user base of 850,000 students, and economies of scale, NCCCS was able to realize a cost savings of 75%:
(NCCCS, 2010)
We don’t suggest that SD#36 will save 75% by switching to Moodle, but raise the example to remind management that proprietary LMS pricing can be very costly. Presently, our district online school, Surrey Connect, pays licensing and hosting costs to use Blackboard that amount to $14 per user per course (Sablok, 2012, personal interview). With almost 11,000 courses and hosting taking place through a 3rd party provider, this amounts to an operational cost of $154,000 per year. This figure does not include the salaries of the 3 full time technologists that we employ to administer the LMS.
District technology manager Akash Sablok has helped provide some cost estimates if Surrey Connect were to move from Blackboard to Moodle. According to Sablok (2012), our district already has the server capacity to support a Moodle installation for Surrey Connect. Because Surrey Connect’s web hosting is currently done offsite, Sablok estimates that one additional technologist would need to be hired to support an in-house Moodle solution. He recommends that the three existing technologists be trained to help with the server. He figures the cost of an additional technician, including employee benefits, will be $70,000. With current hosting and licensing fees amounting to $154,000, this is an appreciable savings from the current situation.
Such savings will be of little benefit if users are not satisfied with Moodle. Butler University (Miranda, 2011) has released a report that summarizes the findings of a number of leading LMS evaluations and surveys. The study notes that Moodle has received the endorsement of EDUCAUSE and that the vast majority of institutions that have switched to Moodle have reported increases in student satisfaction with their LMS.
To ensure that Moodle is suitable for eventual district-wide use, we propose that Surrey Connect implement a Moodle server on a pilot basis. If results are favourable, then the district may wish to consider system-wide implementation. To facilitate the assessment of Moodle, we propose that district management and Surrey Connect staff develop an evaluation rubric that examines Moodle on factors such as:
- Intuitiveness – capacity of the user/teacher/administrator to complete tasks logically and efficiently
- Functionality & Interactivity – LMS tools (blog, wiki, discussion board, mobile App, chat, live classroom, social media integration) support collaborative learning
- Accessibility – suitable supports for the visually and hearing-impaired
- Scalability – LMS can be upgraded to meet increased usage
- Interoperability – ease by which LMS integrates with BCesis & other district systems
- Reliability – LMS operational 99.9% of the time
- Sustainability – Total Cost of Ownership demonstrates sustainable cost projections
- Administrative Efficiency – effective process for student registration, disaster recovery
- Security & Privacy – LMS hosts student information securely
- User satisfaction – LMS provides a quality Web 2.0 experience
(adapted from NCCCS, 2010 & Kirner, Custódio, & Kirner, 2008)
Conclusion
Cost savings alone provide a compelling case for the Surrey School District to examine Open Source LMS alternatives. A well-documented history of favourable usability and interactivity support the use of Moodle as a cost-effective and pedagogically enhanced alternative to Blackboard. If we, as a school district, wish to promote collaborative learning, then it’s time that we move to a LMS option that is built upon the principles of social constructionism. As the leading open source and socially guided LMS platform in the world, Moodle provides a powerful solution towards this school district objective.
References
Amaral, M.A. & de Almeida, M. (2009). Usability assessment in Moodle. Conference on Interactive Computer Based Learning. November 05 – 07, 2009. Florianopolis, Brazil. Retrieved from http://wright.ava.ufsc.br/~alice/icbl2009/proceedings/program/pdf/Contribution029.pdf
Bansode, S.Y. & Kumbhar, R. (2012). E-learning experience using Open Source software: Moodle. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology. Defence Scientific Information and Documentation Centre (DESIDOC). 32 (5), 409-416. Retrieved from http://publications.drdo.gov.in/ojs/index.php/djlit/article/view/2650
Berking, P. & Gallagher, S. (2011). Choosing a Learning Management System. Advanced Distributed Learning (ADL) Co-Laboratories. Retrieved from http://www.adlnet.gov/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/choosing-lms-v.2.4_201104132.pdf
Bonk, C. J., & Pan, G. (2007). The emergence of open-source software in North America. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 8(3), 1-17.
Contact North. (2012). Learning Management Systems in Ontario: who’s using what? Ontario Distance Education & Training Network. Retrieved from http://www.contactnorth.ca/sites/default/files/contactNorth/files/pdf/trends-and-directions/lms_series_-_module_1.pdf
Kirner, T.G.; Custódio, C; Kirner, C. (2008). Usability evaluation of the Moodle system from the teacher’s perspective. International Association for Development of the Information Society (IADIS) International Conference on e-Learning. Retrieved from http://www.iadis.net/dl/final_uploads/200805L048.pdf
Miranda, J. (2011). Butler University Learning Management System (LMS) Evaluation 2011-2012. Retrieved from http://blogs.butler.edu/lms/files/2011/08/executive-summary.pdf
Moodle.org (October 6, 2012). Moodle statistics. Retrieved from http://moodle.org/stats/
North Carolina Community College System (NCCCS). (2010). Open Source Collaborative Moodle Assessment Report. Retrieved from http://oscmoodlereport.wordpress.com/
Sablok, A. (October 4, 2012). Personal Interview.
Surrey Schools (2012). Surrey School District Achievement Contract. Retrieved from https://www.surreyschools.ca/Publications/Surrey%20School%20District%20Achievement%20Contract.pdf