Benoît should ask himself, “How much time will this course take to set up and maintain outside of the usual duties associated with teaching a course?”. Within this question there are really two: one about the initial set up and the other about maintenance, not only for the semester but in future iterations of the course as well. Whichever way he goes, this is a big decision, because, as Coates, James and Baldwin assert, “commitment to one system can mean exclusion from others” (2005, p. 32) and this could entail excluding access to “large libraries of learning objects” (p. 31). An important distinction between Blackboard and Moodle is Blackboard is a commercial system while Moodle is open source.
This question is in no way meant to discount the question of student learning. From what I know (which is admittedly limited at this time) of the two LMSs, they offer similar platforms for asynchronous and synchronous communication, accessing learning resources, and assessment, given that the teacher and/or technical staff know how to use them.
It sounds like his initial learning curve with Moodle will be steeper because he has no experience with it, as opposed to Blackboard, which he will have some facility with through his experience with WebCT. In this setup phase, Blackboard might be easier, assuming Benoît can, against the odds, access the often inaccessible HelpDesk. But Moodle may be easier in the long run, despite him probably needing more than his available 5 hours in the first week or two. It seems that, once up and running, it will be easier for him to update, correct errors, or add new content in Moodle.
Coates et al. mention access, cost and quality (p. 23) as 3 factors to consider when choosing an LMS. Access is better on Moodle, the cost is free on Moodle, and (I am assuming) paid for by the institution for Blackboard, while the quality is probably similar. That gives a slight edge to Moodle, considering the first category.
Lastly, and contrary to my warning above about this being a “big decision”, Benoît should read Stella Porto’s article and consider that fact that his students may be working less and less within the confines of the LMS, instead choosing their own “customized toolboxes” (Porto, 2015) of information from social media and the web at large, in coming semesters.
References
Coates, H., James, R., & Baldwin, G. (2005). A critical examination of the effects of Learning Management Systems on university teaching and learning. Tertiary Education and Management, 11,(1), 19-36.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11233-004-3567-9
Moodle. (2016). Retrieved from: https://moodle.org/
Porto, S. (2015). The uncertain future of Learning Management Systems. The Evolllution: Illuminating the Lifelong Learning Movement. Retrieved fromhttp://www.evolllution.com/opinions/uncertain-future-learning-management-systems/
Hi Randy,
Thanks for a thoughtful post. The focus on the cost of instructor’s time is an important one, as time is always seen as a fleeting resource. One of the keys to this case is, I believe, that Benoit taps into the networking structures available to him through his peers. Certainly, the case suggests that some of them are already successfully using Moodle and I would venture a guess that others are also using Blackboard as it is offered by the institution.
This brings me to the consideration of ‘gains’ and ‘losses’ with each technology decision that we discussed in ETEC 540. Weaving in the counter-LMS narratives of Spiro and Porto present the fact that LMS may have had its run and that students are going to (or want to) move forward into other spaces. Take our own course for example – I like working in the WordPress blog so much more than Connect. Why is that? Simpler interface, open resource, and integration of other media outlets are the first reasons that come to mind. If Benoit is indeed savvy with some of these other design concepts, and is willing to put the time into building a sustainable model separate of the systems in front of him, that may be a good choice!
Victoria
Victoria, Thanks for reminding me, I was missing our old pal, the Reverend Ong! This is very much a case of gains and losses. I actually like the Discussion pages better in Connect, maybe because I used WebCT during my B.Ed and have used Connect through most of MET so I’m just more used to seeing the week’s threads chronologically with the number of posts beside the title and person’s name who posted. But, on the gain side, I do like a lot of the features of WordPress you mentioned above, too.
Hehe, “Reverend Ong” – that made me laugh!
Yes, there are certain benefits of each. I do enjoy the ability to “flag” conversations in Connect whereas I rely on my own memory as to which posts I’ve commented on here. I find myself losing the conversation a little more because of this, although it keeps me engaged and on the site checking more often, too.