 |
 |
Just a thought. It seems to me that Moodle is being singled out here because it's open source and commenting negatively on it in public is unlikely to result in any legal action. It would be brave/foolish LEA to dismiss a named Microsoft VLE in this way! -----Original Message----- From: Virtual Learning Environments [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Walker - Ted Sent: 17 May 2006 12:24 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [VLES] LEA Advises against Moodle!!?? 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 This email is confidential to the intended recipient(s) and represents the views of the sender and not necessarily Bromley College of Further and Higher Education, which accepts no related responsibility. ***************** 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