Proposal
Dear Decision Makers,
The purpose of this proposal is to explain the reasons why I think Moodle should be adopted as a Learning Management System (LMS) for my course, and possibly for our institution, instead of spending precious education dollars updating our current system. I believe, as do Brown et al. (2010), that “pedagogy rather than technology should be the central business driver” when it comes to making decisions about which LMS to choose in education; in other words the technology must be able to do whatever it is you need it to do in order to teach effectively. Therefore, while testing the Moodle system I took into consideration the ten pedagogical criteria introduced by Brown et al. (2010), the SECTIONS model developed by Bates and Pool (2003), and the “Seven Principles of Good Practice” described by Chickering and Ehrmann 1996) with regard to using technologies. Not surprisingly the models proposed in each article have many points of overlap. The following are the points that I felt were most important to pay attention to for my teaching purposes while testing the Moodle platform: cost; ease of use for students and teachers; tools to promote active learning and “communities of inquiry”; tools for grading and feedback; and personalisation and flexibility of the platform. After making this decision, I went to EduTools (accessed through the ETEC 565 course site) and to Moodle itself to see who won.
Testing the System or Why Moodle?
I used the EduTools online tool to compare our current system with Moodle. Looking at the chart (←click here), you can see that both systems tied on most points however, the greatest difference was recognized in the area of cost. Moodle is an open-source system that can be downloaded for free whereas our current system demands an initial start-up fee and continued payment for technical support. Panettieri (2007) asserts that “Roughly 24 percent of schools with LMS deployments wind up with buyer’s remorse.” There are two ways to avoid “buyer’s remorse”; the first is to thoroughly test the system before you adopt it, which I have done here, and the second is to avoid paying for it all. Again, Moodle can be implemented for free. Although it is true that sometimes free products are inferior, if something is free and as good as its costly competitor then it is well “worth” it. The second area in which Moodle appears to be superior to our current LMS is in its ease of use. Moodle allows students greater ability to search within the course for past chat sessions and virtual classroom recordings. This can also be very beneficial for students who require repetition in learning.
Conversely, our current system appears to be better than Moodle in its ability to e-mail the entire class at once and its ability to allow students to share their personal folders with other students in the dropbox area. However, I feel that students should be checking in on the course site regularly (and most do) where teachers can easily post messages under “Latest News” or “Upcoming Events” and files can be shared amongst students via e-mail. Overall Moodle scored slightly higher than our current system, therefore, Moodle won!
As for my personal experience, I spent a few hours beginning my own course in Moodle and I was surprised with how easy it was for me to adapt to the system. I enjoyed personalising (←click here to see) my site by choosing a template and adding a banner which I made at bannerfans.com. I also appreciate Moodle’s capability of adding RSS feeds to the course. This will provide students with a richer learning experience by providing and prompting discussion opportunities regarding real life, up to date events. Comparing my brief experience with Moodle and my three year experience with our current LMS, I find that Moodle is much quicker and easier to adapt to. Furthermore, being an open-source system, there are numerous free online video tutorials for everything from uploading files to creating tests and everything in between. Moodle won again!
Resources Required
As mentioned Moodle can be downloaded for free but there is an option to pay $100 per course or $1000 per school for hosting services (Perkins and Pfaffman, 2006). This may be a favourable option for our institution since we are accustomed to having our current system managed for us and we may not have the in-house technical support required. Also, many of the teachers at our school will be new to the system and may require initial support.
The time required to mount the course must also be considered. Thinking back on my experience creating a course on a rather tedious and un(user)friendly system, I believe it will take approximately eighty hours to create a fully developed course in Moodle. This is time already compensated for with our current system for out-of-class activities and therefore no added expense should be seen. In fact, it is quite likely that by adopting Moodle our institution will save money and increase student and teacher satisfaction.
References
Bates A. W. & Poole, G. (2003). A Framework for Selecting and Using Technology. In A.W. Bates & G. Poole, Effective Teaching with Technology in Higher Education (pp. 75-108). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 4.
Beatty, B. & Ulasewicz, C. (2006). Faculty perspectives on moving from Blackboard to the Moodle learning management system. TechTrends, 50(4), 36-45. Retrieved May 25, 2011 from http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/10.1007/s11528-006-0036-y
Brown, M., Paewai, S., & Suddaby, G. (2010). The VLE as a Trojan mouse: policy, politics and pragmatism. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 8(2), 63-72. Retrieved May 25, 2011 from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ895694.pdf
Chickering, A.W. & Ehrmann, S.C. (1996). Implementing the seven principles: technology as lever. American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, 49(2), 3-6. Retrieved June 7, 2011 from http://www.tltgroup.org/programs/seven.html
Panettieri, J. (2007). Addition by Subtraction. University Business, August, 58-62. Accessed online 9 June 2011. http://www.universitybusiness.com/viewarticle.aspx?articleid=845
Perkins, M. & Pfaffman, J. (2006) Using a Course Management System to Improve Classroom Communication. Science Teacher, 73(7), 33-37.