Hi Ted,
Thanks for this. I think we need to get to the bottom of who's
responsible for the three specific statements that:
1) Moodle won't meet national requirements
2) Moodle relies on local expertise
3) Moodle will be incompatible with other systems for exchanging information
ie, is this coming from the DfES or is it just Leicestershire's spin.
I'd also be interested in seeing the DfES advice that's referred to
here. I would be surprised if there's any evidence to support these
statements.
I guess the waters are muddied by the confusion introduced between 'home
grown systems' and Moodle. I suspect that a 'home grown system' based on
proprietary code would be as open (or indeed more open) to criticism
than one based on Moodle or other open source VLEs.
Of course I've no problem with "schools should not buy a VLE" ;-) The
economies of scale arguement don't really follow through when one of the
options has the same licence costs for a 150 pupil primary school, as a
whole local authority or a 180,000 strong unviersity. The whole of the
funding policy here (see
http://publications.teachernet.gov.uk/eOrderingDownload/2102-2005.pdf)
is predciated on a commercial model - I've not seen any cost-benefit
analysis of in-house Moodle hosting vs aggregated commercial licences,
but they jolly well should have examined this, in light of
http://www.govtalk.gov.uk/documents/oss_policy_version2.pdf.
So heads get a choice of 'keep the money you'd have spent on licence
fees and use a VLE that your teachers can adapt to fit their way of
working' vs 'give the money to the LA to provide a solution for you,
that meets the government's specification'.
Miles.
Walker - Ted wrote:
> I'm glad I raised this can of worms - I think there are a whole host of
> points coming out of it.
>
> I am happy to share the text of the letter - perhaps that would best be
> done off list. It clearly, as suggested, does come from a DFES roadshow.
> The most relevant paragraph reads:
>
> "Current advice from DFES is that schools should not buy a VLE
> individually but that they should bulk buy either through their LA or
> Regional Broadband Consortium. Home grown systems based on 'open source
> software', e.g. Moodle, were not to be preferred as they will not meet
> national requirements, they relied on local expertise and will be
> incompatible with other systems for exchanging information. Also that
> families of schools should use the same VLE to facilitate sharing of
> materials and work on transition projects."
>
> I understand the issues are somewhere along these lines:
>
> Total cost of ownership: We do have about 25 hours a week of technician
> support time, but this isn't as a result of using Open Source software,
> it is a web designer who we use for training and development of all
> e-learning and web developments. It is helping us build up a culture of
> innovative use of online teaching and learning, and we would benefit
> from this regardless of brand of learning platform. In fact, the nature
> of Moodle lends itself to much more open and distributed management and
> we can allow teachers and even students to manage courses within it.
>
> Specific local knowledge: I set up a Moodle installation on my laptop,
> from scratch, in an hour or two as a pilot (including downloading
> software etc.) ICT support were therefore able to install a corporate
> version on a hosted server very quickly. The main issues were opening up
> ports, network speed etc, which are dependent on our relationship with
> our RBC. Our technician, who is now the resident expert, had never heard
> of Moodle when he joined us in December, but the transparency of the
> system makes it straightforward to get on top of.
>
> Common sign in: We have set up LDAP so that users simply log on with
> their network password. No problems. We are interested in developing
> Shibboleth (which I understand will cross authenticate with other
> platforms - Bodington et al) as well as Moodle, and see that as a
> potential route for sharing resources with the Moodle or 'open source'
> "family of schools", as and when we make suitable relationships.
>
> Interoperability: We have not yet managed to link Moodle with SIMS (our
> current MIS). I think there are issues here, and my hope was that BECTA
> would be forcing SIMS to conform to much more transparent standards,
> although I'm not much of an expert. This is my most serious concern.
>
> Commercial support / future developments: There are commercial
> organisations available to support Moodle and other open source software
> for those who need it. Even if we disbelieve the philosophy that says
> Moodle will continue to be developed and in the public source, why is it
> any more vulnerable to having the plug pulled than Blackboard / WebCT or
> any other commercial incarnation that can only survive whilst there is a
> market (and when the product is discontinued the provider will have no
> interest in providing support)? Any commercial product is likely to have
> upgrades and changes over the development cycle, and it may well be that
> in 5 years time we will have all had to change / upgrade / reengineer
> our platforms anyway. As I understand it Moodle is SCORM compliant and
> pretty transparent.
>
>
> I think Moodle is a great product, and was definitely an appropriate
> choice to develop the use of a learning platform and e-learning culture
> within this institution in the current timescale. We went along this
> road because we thought it would be a positive help towards improving
> teaching, learning and the school culture; it just seemed to be a bonus
> as we thought that it was also in line with DFES best practice. It would
> be a shame if the DFES, RBCs and LAs discourage schools from this and
> try to direct us into a corporate project where we feel we have no
> ownership.
>
>
> ================================================================
>
> DISCLAIMER
>
> You are also advised that the views and opinions expressed in this E-mail message and any attachments are the author's own, and may not reflect the views and opinions of Rawlins Community College.This E-mail message, (including any attachments), is intended only for the person to which it is addressed, and may contain confidential information.
>
> If you are not the intended recipient, any review, retransmission, disclosure, copying, modification or other use of this E-mail message or attachments is strictly forbidden.
>
> If you have received this E-mail message in error, or have any concerns regarding this E-mail, please contact the Network Manager ([log in to unmask]) and delete the message and any attachments from your computer.
>
> ================================================================
>
> ***************** List information: *****************
> Remember - replies go by default to the entire list.
> Access the list via the web on http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/vle.html
> To unsubscribe, email [log in to unmask] with the message: leave vle
>
>
--
Miles Berry
Deputy Head, St Ives School, Haslemere
http://stiveshaslemere.com
http://elgg.net/mberry/weblog
***************** List information: *****************
Remember - replies go by default to the entire list.
Access the list via the web on http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/vle.html
To unsubscribe, email [log in to unmask] with the message: leave vle
|