Blending Open and Closed Learning Management Systems in a … · 2012. 12. 31. · Since the...
Transcript of Blending Open and Closed Learning Management Systems in a … · 2012. 12. 31. · Since the...
Blending Open and Closed Learning Management Systems
in a Liberal Studies Programme
Sean Dowling and Mark Rossiter
Sharjah Higher Colleges of Technology
Abstract
Online learning at third-level institutions has traditionally been delivered using learning
management systems (LMS) such as WebCT, Blackboard and Moodle. However, despite
these LMS having some advantages such as allowing faculty to manage students’ online
learning and to quickly publish course content, there are also some disadvantages. The main
disadvantage is that traditional LMS-based courses are closed in nature, being both time
bound and walled off. One solution to this problem is to use web-based blogs to deliver online
courses, but this solution also has some associated problems such as privacy issues,
intellectual property concerns and assessment. A way to address the above problems is to
combine open, web-based components and closed, traditional LMS-based components in a
blended LMS. One such blended LMS, used in the Liberal Studies programme at the Sharjah
Higher Colleges of Technology in the United Arab Emirates, is featured in this paper. The
paper describes in detail how the blended LMS has been created by using a locally-hosted,
WordPress multi-site blog to deliver the open, web-based component and a traditional LMS,
Blackboard 9, to deliver the closed component. The benefits of this system are discussed, as
well as the problems encountered during the design and implementation stages.
Keywords: LMS, Blended LMS, open learning systems, liberal studies
Introduction
Since the mid-1990s, the use of enterprise-level learning management systems (LMS), such
as Blackboard, WebCT and Moodle, by educational institutions, particularly tertiary-level,
has been increasing steadily. Not only have the number of LMS installations increased, but
the number of tools provided by LMS vendors and third parties have also increased. These
tools allow faculty to manage their students’ learning and to quickly publish course content.
However, the provision of all these tools is not without some drawbacks. First, the sheer size
of current LMS can be daunting to novice users; therefore, they tend to use only the most
basic tools. In addition, it has resulted in the cost of LMS increasing dramatically. To justify
the costs, institutions expect their faculty to use LMS as much as possible. Another limitation
of current, well-established LMS is the difficulty of integrating emerging, web-based
technologies into the LMS. This, together with limited use of existing LMS tools, has
resulted in LMS-based courses with similar look and functionality and limited creativity.
Finally, learning using current LMS is closed in nature: LMS-based courses are both time-
bound and walled-off.
However, with advances in web-based technology and blogging applications, it is now
possible to design web-based, open LMS that are cost-effective, relatively easy to use and
open up learning. These web-based, open LMS allow content to be shared, greater
collaboration between teachers and students, and for students to become producers, rather
than just consumers, of content. But the fact that web-based LMS are open does cause some
concerns in regard to privacy for all stakeholders, be they institutions, faculty or students.
In this article, an example of a blended learning management system (LMS) that uses both
web-based (open) and traditional (closed) LMS components to deliver a liberal studies
programme is featured. First, the benefits and limitations of traditional and web-based LMS
are outlined. Next, a LMS that blends the best features is discussed. Then, there is a detailed
discussion on how such one blended LMS has been used to deliver a liberal studies
programme in a third-level educational institution. Finally, the benefits of the system, and
some potential problem areas, are discussed.
Current LMS and their benefits/limitations
In the 1990s, universities and colleges were faced with a variety of new challenges such as
rising costs, reduced budgets, different student demographics and increased accountability
(Brown 1998). The introduction of LMS in the early to mid-1990s seemed to be an answer to
these challenges. The main benefit of these LMS was that the standardized interfaces and
tools provided allowed flexible online delivery of learning materials and student support
which “could be centrally managed, resourced and monitored” (Brown, 2010, pg 2). The
result was that by the mid-2000s, LMS were ubiquitous on college campuses in both the US
and the UK (Molenda and Bichelmayer, 2005; Brown, 2010).
However, this rapid introduction of LMS was perhaps driven more by administrative needs
than by pedagogical needs, and, according to Mott (2010, n.p.), “several reports confirm that
instructors overwhelmingly use content distribution and administrative tools in the LMS
while using interactive tools only sparingly”. Consequently, having had time to view LMS
more critically, educators have expressed concerns over limitations in performance and
design features of current LMS (Ionnou and Hanafin, 2008), particularly as emerging web-
based technologies are forcing them to reconsider how learning and technology are
combined.
But what are these limitations? Mott (2010) lists three. First, courses delivered using LMS are
time-bound; once a course is finished, students are locked out, thereby limiting opportunities
for lifelong learning. Second, courses are walled off from other courses and the wider web;
therefore, students cannot share and collaborate with others outside their course, negating the
learning potential resulting from the network effect [i.e. the greater the number of users in a
network, the more possible connections exist, resulting in greater opportunities for learning
(Bush and Mott 2009)]. Finally, LMS-based courses are very teacher-centric; material is
uploaded by the teacher and students’ contributions are restricted to uploading assignments,
doing quizzes and perhaps posting to discussion forums (Dowling, 2011b). Lane (2009)
writes that these limitations are caused by the inherent pedagogies of LMS. She believes that
LMS were originally designed based on the traditional approach of presentation and
assessment. The core or default tools that educators encounter are those that allow them to
present content, assess learning and create discussion forums. Once these tools are mastered,
educators, particularly those with limited IT skills, are often content with their use of LMS
and fail to experiment with the more collaborative learning tools that are now being provided
by LMS vendors and third parties. When used in this limited way, Arvan (2009, n.p.) believes
that
“the LMS serves as an affirming technology of traditional teaching. The
instructor doesn’t challenge the LMS very much, and, in turn, the LMS doesn’t
challenge the instructor. The student gets the convenience benefit from
electronic distribution of documents [and grades] but little more.”
So despite having the benefit of allowing faculty to manage their students’ learning and to
quickly publish course content, courses delivered on traditional LMS are very often closed in
nature and enhance teacher-centric pedagogies. Current LMS vendors are attempting to
address these limitations, but another alternative is to use web-based, open learning
management systems.
Web-based LMS and their benefits/limitations
Traditional websites can be designed to function as a LMS. However, designing and
maintaining a website-based LMS requires a range of technical skills, something beyond the
average educator. However, the use of blogs, or weblogs, is a simple alternative. Blogs have
developed considerably over the last few years. In its most basic form, a blog is used to post
information to the Web on a regular basis, with the latest “posts” being on top. Readers of
these posts can also add comments; thereby, making a blog an interactive entity. Current
blogging platforms, for example WordPress, are a lot more sophisticated. Pages can be added
for additional information and widgets (tools) can be added to sidebars that add a lot of
functionality and personalization (see figure 1 below).
Figure 1. Blog with post, extra pages and widgets.
Blogs can be hosted on servers anywhere on the World Wide Web (WWW). This is fine for
individual users or educational institutions with limited resources. However, some
educational institutions may require hosting learning platforms on local servers to allow for
customization and to ensure that important learning resources are not lost. WordPress.org
solves this problem by allowing the blogging system to be downloaded and hosted on a local
web server. In addition, WordPress.org has added a multi-site feature to its blogging
platform. Underneath the root blog, an unlimited number of blogs can be added. The network
administrator can control these blogs, automatically updating all blogs with new releases,
themes and plugins. This ensures consistency across all the blogs in the system, a very
desirable feature in an organization, as well as savings in development and maintenance time.
Whether blogs are hosted on external or local servers, they can be combined into a learning
system, managed individually by faculty and as a group by a network administrator. As the
blogs are web-based, they can be accessed by anyone at any time. In addition, an unlimited
amount of blogs can be added to the system for faculty, students and administrators.
Therefore, as Dowling (2011b) writes, it is possible to create a huge educational digital
learning space, or “open participatory learning ecosystem” (Seely Brown and Adler, 2008,
n.p.). In this learning space, there is potential for teachers to become learners and for learners
to become tutors and mentors (Banyard and Underwood, 2008). Moreover, as the learning
space expands, the number of connections among members and between members and
content also expands, thereby increasing the number of learning opportunities.
However, use of web-based LMS is not without problems. One major challenge is addressing
issues of privacy, both at an institutional level and a personal level. Institutions may not be
comfortable with content being open to public viewing (Dowling, 2011a); they may have
concerns about losing a competitive edge. Similarly, faculty may have concerns about
intellectual property copyright. Furthermore, Light (2011) writes that some learners may be
very reluctant to publish to a public viewing space, particularly before it has gone through a
drafting process and been vetted by a teacher. Another challenge is that of assessment
management, one of the major strengths of traditional LMS.
A Blended LMS Solution
One solution to the specific limitations of traditional and web-based LMS is to combine the
best features of both. For example, course content could be delivered via a web-based blog.
This ensures that it can be accessed by anyone, regardless of whether they are enrolled in the
course or not. However, content that needs to be kept private, such as assessments,
assignments, student-generated content and grade books, could be accessed via a traditional
LMS. Figure 2 below shows a model of such a blended LMS solution.
Figure 2. A blended LMS solution.
One important thing to note about the above model is the communication patterns with the
World Wide Web (WWW). Using a web-based LMS, communication is two way. The course
content can be accessed by anyone using the WWW; similarly, these users can interact with
the course content by adding comments to the blog hosting the content. However, using a
traditional LMS, the communication flow is one way; links to web-based resources (e.g.
course content) can be put in traditional LMS, but content in the traditional LMS is not
available to WWW users.
In the remainder of this paper, the authors will discuss how a blended LMS, combining an
open, web-based LMS (WordPress blogging platform) and a closed, traditional LMS
(Blackboard 9) has been designed, developed and implemented for a liberal studies
programme at a third-level educational institution.
Introducing a Blended LMS to a Liberal Studies Programme
The research setting
The research featured in this article has been done at the Sharjah Higher Colleges of
Technology (SHCT). SHCT is divided into two campuses, one male and one female, with
861 and 2,366 students respectively. SHCT is part of the federal HCT system, a community
of more than 19,000 students (Emirati nationals) and almost 2,000 staff (multinational) based
at seventeen campuses throughout the United Arab Emirates. HCT has traditionally provided
two and three-year diploma level courses but these are now being phased out by full
Bachelor-level courses (started 2011). As part of the degree programme, students must take a
certain number of liberal studies courses for each year of their studies. The online delivery of
these liberal studies courses is the focus of this paper.
The Liberal Studies programme
The liberal studies programme started in the 2011/2012 academic year. Perhaps the main
reason for introducing for the programme was to develop students’ critical thinking, reading
and writing skills. According to the Hechinger Report (2011, n.p.),
“Students who majored in the traditional liberal arts — including the social sciences,
humanities, natural sciences and mathematics — showed significantly greater gains
over time than other students in critical thinking, complex reasoning and writing
skills.”
Currently, there are four courses: Introduction to Literature, Creative Writing, Critical
Thinking, and Health and Wellness. First-year students are expected to take two of these
courses each semester. Each course consists of four hours of classes per week over an
eighteen-week semester. In the first year of the programme, there were 1,908 student
enrollments, 536 male and 1,372 female (note: the actual number of students was 189 male
and 464 female; most students were enrolled in four courses). A total of 20 teachers taught on
the programme. Table 1 below shows details of student course enrollment and number of
faculty teaching each course.
Table 1 Enrollment in the liberal studies programme and courses Course Semester 1 Semester 2 Male Female Teachers Male Female Teachers Introduction to Literature
79 149 5 73 206 6
Creative Writing 42 150 4 87 222 9 Critical Thinking 0 203 6 125 219 6 Health and Wellness 106 117 4 24 106 3
As the first cohort of Bachelor students progress through the programme, more liberal studies
courses will be developed. Since the programme was being built from scratch, it gave the
course designers opportunities for experimenting with the course delivery, both in the
traditional classroom and online.
Current online course delivery and the sharing problem
At the Higher Colleges of Technology (HCT), online courses have traditionally been
delivered using the Blackboard Vista (BBV) learning management system. BBV courses for
the respective academic courses are created at the start of the semester and teachers, students
and any existing course material are uploaded to these courses. At the end of the semester, the
course is archived. At this point, only specific teachers (the course designers) can access the
course; students and other teachers are locked out. According to Dowling (2012), this
“locking out” is the main reason for the lack of materials being shared between faculty
members and between campuses. Unless manually added, only faculty teaching specific
courses can access the BBV courses and only during the official academic term.
This inability to view and access other courses results in a number of problems. First,
students cannot access material from previous courses and they cannot look ahead to courses
that they would potentially like to study. Second, without requesting special access, faculty
(and students) cannot access useful materials that their colleagues in other campuses are
developing, leading to duplication of resources. Conversely, despite courses having the same
outlines and final assessments, not being able to see the online offerings at other campuses
may result in major differences in content. Therefore, to make learning and learning
resources more open, other ways of delivering online content needed to be considered.
Using a web-based LMS for online delivery of the Liberal Studies courses
To solve the above sharing problem, it was decided to deliver the liberal studies courses via a
WordPress.org multi-site blog. The software was downloaded from WordPress.org and the
system was installed on a local server at Sharjah HCT. This ensured that the hct.ac.ae domain
name was included in the web address (url), a requirement for web-based learning materials
within the HCT system. In addition, by using WordPress multi-site blogs, a network of
individual course blogs could be built under the main liberal studies blog (see figure 3
below); this network could then be managed centrally by the network administrator, ensuring
consistency across all blogs. Most importantly, as the network of blogs was web-based, it
could be shared across the HCT system of colleges. Without the need to gain special
permissions, faculty teaching the same students but different courses could now see what
their students were learning in other courses. Similarly, faculty teaching similar courses
across the HCT system could now access content from the Sharjah liberal studies courses.
There was also a major benefit for students: they would now be able to access resources from
courses that they had previously studied or would study in the future. (Note: The liberal
studies portal can be accessed at http://shc-edtech.hct.ac.ae/liberal_studies/).
Figure 3. The Liberal Studies programme WordPress site.
Another advantage of using the WordPress blog system over Blackboard Vista (BBV) for
course delivery was the level of design flexibility. As shown in figure 3 above, a menu was
added to allow students easy access to their courses. Furthermore, widgets could be added to
give information about faculty, select certain news categories, learning links and year 1
courses (as the programme develops, links to courses in years 2 to 4 will be added). Selecting
these course links gives access to the individual courses (see figure 4 below), which in turn
has links to specific learning modules (see figure 5 below) and other important links. Thus,
an “educational digital learning space” (Dowling, 2011b, n.p.) or “open participatory learning
ecosystem” (Seely Brown and Adler, 2008, n.p.) has been created, something that would have
been very difficult to do using BBV.
Figure 4. The Critical Thinking course site.
Figure 5. A learning module in the Critical Thinking course.
Despite the benefit of a more open learning environment resulting from using WordPress
blogs, there were still some major limitations. The first limitation was in regard to the
delivery of assessments and assignments. All the liberal studies courses required using certain
assessment tools, something which a WordPress blog doesn’t have. The second limitation
concerned issues of privacy. While the blogs could be used as both a content-delivery tool
and as a forum for viewers to add comments, there were concerns about student content being
made available for public viewing. Even though comments could be moderated and male
students probably wouldn’t object to their comments being made public, because of the
cultural sensitivities in the UAE, it would have been difficult to publish the comments of
female students. Therefore, it was necessary to use a traditional LMS to address the issues of
assessment and privacy.
Using a traditional LMS for assessments and student-generated content
As the Higher Colleges of Technology were in the process of piloting a new LMS,
Blackboard 9 (BB9), it was decided to use this to deliver assessments, or tests in BB9
terminology (see figure 6 below).
Figure 6. Assessments on BB9.
In addition, BB9 had the added advantage over the previous LMS, Blackboard Vista (BBV),
of rich interactive tools such as discussion forums, blogs and wikis. Even though the LMS
environment is closed, using these tools would create a more open learning environment,
giving students more learning opportunities in the process. Table 1 below shows the BB9
discussion boards for the Critical Thinking course. Each section of students had their own
discussion board, which contained a number of forums and threads within these forums (see
figures 7 and 8 below).
Table 1 Discussion Boards on in the Critical Thinking BB9 course
Figure 7. Example of an individual section discussion board.
Figure 8: Example of a discussion thread.
However, it’s important to note that the WordPress blog and the corresponding BB9 course
were not mutually exclusive; for those with login credentials (i.e. students and teachers
enrolled in specific courses), the BB9 assessments and online discussions could be accessed
via the blog (see figure 9 below). Similarly, the content delivered via the blog could be
accessed by BB9 weblinks (see figure 10 below).
Figure 9. Links in the WordPress blog to BB9 assessments and discussion.
Figure 10. BB9 weblinks to learning modules on the WordPress blog.
Both the WordPress blogs and the BB9 courses were part of World Wide Web (WWW), the
only difference being that the blogs could be accessed by anyone whereas BB9 course access
was restricted to registered users. Figure 11 below illustrates the interactions between the
WordPress blogs, BB9 courses and the WWW.
Figure 11. Liberal Studies Programme blended LMS.
Discussion
The Survey
Mid-way through the second semester, a short survey was sent to the twenty faculty teaching
in the liberal studies programme. The survey consisted of fourteen questions using a four-
point Likert scale, one open-ended question and a space for additional comments. Sixteen
faculty, whose responses were anonymous, completed the survey and their responses are
shown in the Appendix. Perhaps the most striking result from the survey was that all
respondents either agreed or agreed strongly that the concept of blending open and closed
components to deliver online materials, both in general and for the liberal studies programme,
is good. In addition, the majority of the respondents felt that for future liberal studies course
development, using a blended LMS consisting of open WordPress blogs and closed BB9
components was favourable to that of just using BB9. The results from this survey indicated
that faculty saw benefits to using more open learning materials.
The Benefits of using an open, Web-based LMS
There were some clear benefits to using a web-based LMS. First, as most course content was
open, liberal studies students and teachers, irrespective of the courses in which they were
enrolled, could access a wide range of learning materials. In fact, any web user, be they HCT
students or faculty from other campuses or external parties, could now access, and comment
on, the liberal studies courses. This has another potential benefit: the wider audience, and
subsequent closer scrutiny of courses and learning material, may encourage course designers
to be more careful with their course design, be it for the want of praise or the fear of ridicule.
From an educational technology perspective, it is hoped that by showing alternative methods
of content delivery to faculty, they will be encouraged to experiment with ways to make their
content more accessible, and shareable, to others. In addition, as the authors felt that both
students and faculty were becoming bored with extensive use of the Blackboard LMS, using
alternative ways to deliver learning materials would perhaps freshen up the teaching and
learning experience. Finally, using WordPress multi-site blogs as the web-based LMS opened
up other interesting possibilities. As an unlimited amount of sites can be created, there is the
possibility to provide sites to both teachers and students so that they can develop ePortfolios,
personal websites or communities of practice, creating a large, open learning network in the
process.
However, observations from the implementation of the blended LMS, and the results from
the survey, also indicated that there were a number of problem areas to be addressed.
The Problems of using a Blended LMS for Liberal Studies Programme
The initial problem with using the blended LMS, specifically the web-based, open
component, was persuading faculty to make their materials available to all. In the initial
meetings with the four course designers, three of them had no objection to their content being
made public, but one was hesitant, citing instances of materials being misappropriated in the
past. The survey also revealed that 56% of the respondents were reluctant for their learning
materials to be made openly available on the internet (despite the fact that they all agreed to
the concept of blending open and closed LMS components). One reason for this was concerns
about intellectual property. Despite the fact that it is illegal to take something from the Web
and make it your own, in reality, it’s a very easy thing to do. Persuading faculty of the
benefits of Open Educational Resources and Creative Commons licenses may convince some
faculty to be more comfortable about sharing materials on the Web. In addition, there were
concerns about materials being criticised because of incorrect use and the fact that they were
still works in progress. The hurried nature of the liberal studies programme development was
perhaps responsible for this: materials were being developed as the courses were being
taught. Ideally, the courses should have been developed, piloted, corrected and then made
openly available.
Once the initial problem of persuading the course designers to open up their content was
overcome, the next problem was to persuade them to use a WordPress blog for content
delivery. Faculty had become comfortable using shared network drives and the Blackboard
LMS to deliver content. Using the blog meant adding another layer of technology, and
learning how to use it, to faculty members’ already busy schedules. While adding content to
WordPress blogs is a relatively straightforward process and something that the selected
courses designers mastered without too much difficulty, it still required an investment of time
and effort on their part to acquire the necessary skill set. One particular area of difficulty was
uploading materials to a web folder. Initially, this was done using Adobe Dreamweaver and
later using a simpler, Windows-based solution. However, after initially creating the content
pages, it was noted that after changes were made to materials, the updated materials were not
uploaded to the web folder (see figure 12 below). This was reflected in the survey results:
access of the learning materials by both faculty and students was done predominantly via a
network drive as it was easier to put new or updated material there. To solve this problem, it
would be necessary to make access to the web folder the same as working with a normal
network folder. Once the initial link has been set up in the blog, any changes made to the
content would automatically be reflected in the blog. Also, one faculty mentioned in the
survey that it was difficult to customize the blogs because they didn’t have access. This was
done deliberately so as to keep the blogs organized; however, it indicates that there is a need
for faculty to have their own WordPress blogs. They could then use these blogs to customize
the teaching of their courses and make additional materials available for their students rather
than relying on the network drive.
Figure 12. Note from course designer about location of updated versions.
Another problem that needed to be overcome was the concern that students (and teachers)
might be confused with having content split between the WordPress blog and the equivalent
BB9 course. This was made even more confusing by the fact that they had to access the
network drive for updated versions of content (see figure 12 above) and additional learning
materials. Having all content within the BB9 courses would have been less confusing for
everyone. The solution to this was to provide weblinks within the BB9 courses to the learning
modules on the blogs. However, this option was rarely used: the survey indicated that the
network (G) drive was by far the most common way for both students and faculty to access
the learning materials.
The survey also indicated that faculty were unhappy with BB9 due to technical problems. In
the first semester, when use of BB9 was still in the pilot stage, there were problems with
online assessments which resulted in some faculty switching back to paper-based
assessments. While this problem was not the result of using a blended LMS, it did create
some negativity towards using a blended LMS for online delivery. In hindsight, it would have
perhaps been better to have used BB Vista, our older, and more reliable, LMS in conjunction
with the WordPress blogs. Faculty would have then only had to get used to one new system.
Another problem, from the perspective of the educational technology department, was
supporting both the web-based and traditional LMS. This involved extra time and effort in
setting up the systems and training and supporting faculty. There is no doubt that continuing
to use Blackboard, in particular BBV, as our main tool to deliver online courses would have
required fewer resources.
A final problem was the lack of a driving force behind the uptake and continued development
of the blended LMS solution. One of the authors, as educational technology coordinator, set
us the system and trained the course designer, but had very little developmental input after
that. The other author, as the programme supervisor, had hoped to spend additional time on
making the WordPress blogs more dynamic and an integral part of the programme. However,
due to work constraints, this was not possible. It is hoped that he will have the opportunity to
do this in the next academic year, thereby making the blended LMS a more effective
teaching/communication tool.
Conclusion
The 2011/2012 academic year was an important one for the Higher Colleges of Technology;
it was the beginning of the move to a full Bachelor-level programme. As part of this move, a
compulsory liberal studies programme was introduced; students would be required to take
liberal studies courses for each semester of their four-year Bachelor’s programme. Sharjah
Higher Colleges of Technology introduced four new liberal studies courses as part of
students’ first-year programme. The learning materials for these courses were made available
to students using a blended LMS approach. Most content was delivered via a web-based,
open WordPress multi-site blog. Content that needed to be kept private, for example
assessments and student-generated content, was delivered by a traditional, closed LMS
(Blackboard 9).
Despite the benefits, such as open access and the potential to create more learning
opportunities, of using the blended LMS, there were a number of problem areas to be
overcome. These problems include the reluctance of faculty to share learning resources, the
extra time and effort required to master new technologies, and confusion resulting from
multiple sources of content deliver. While there is no doubt that blended LMS have the
potential to create a richer learning environment and that faculty are generally enthusiastic
about using them, without addressing the above problems, faculty may be reluctant to move
away from using traditional, closed methods of delivering online content to those that are
more open.
References
Arvan, L. (2009). Dis-Integrating the LMS. EDUCAUSE QuarterlyMagazine, 32 (2).
Banyard, P. & Underwood, J. (2008). Understanding the learning space. elearning Papers, 1,
1-12.
Brown, S. (1998). Reinventing the university. Alt-J Research in Learning Technology, 6 (3),
30–37.
Brown, S. (2010). From VLEs to learning webs: the implications of Web 2.0 for learning and
teaching, Interactive Learning Environments, 18 (1), 1-10.
Bush, M. & Mott, J. (2009). The Transformation of Learning with Technology: Learner-
Centricity, Content and Tool Malleability, and Network Effects. Educational Technology
Magazine, 49 (2), 3-20.
Dowling, S. (2011). Web-based learning – Moving from learning islands to learning environments.
TESL-EJ, 15-2, September 2011. Retrieved from http://www.tesl-
ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume15/ej58/ej58int/.
Dowling, S. (2011). Digital learning spaces: An alternative to traditional learning
management systems? Proceedings of the 4th Annual Conference on e-Learning
Excellence in the Middle East, Dubai. Retrieved from
http://seandowling68.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/digital_learning_spaces_sdowling.pdf.
Dowling, S. (2012). Open Learning Management Systems – a Case Study. In S. Dowling, C.
Gitsaki, C. Gunn & J. Raven (eds.), eLearning in Action, Volume 1, (in press). Abu Dhabi:
HCT Press. Retrieved from
http://shct.hct.ac.ae/events/edtechpd2012/articles/Open_Learning_Management_Systems.
pdf.
The Hechinger Report. (2011). What are most students learning in college? Not enough,
study says. Retrieved from http://hechingerreport.org/content/what-are-most-students-
learning-in-college-not-enough-study-says_4979/.
Ioannou, A. & Hannafin, R. (2008). DEFICIENCIES OF COURSE MANAGEMENT
SYSTEMS: Do Students Care? The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9 (4), 415–
425.
Lane, L. (2009). Insidious pedagogy: How course management systems impact teaching.
First Monday, 14 (2). Retrieved from
http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2530/2303
Light, D. (2011). Do Web 2.0 right. Learning and Leading with Technology. February, 2011.
pp. 10-15.
Molenda, M. & Bichelmeyer, B. (2005). Issues and trends in instructional technology: Slow
growth as economy recovers. In M. Orey, J. McClendon & R. M. Branch (eds.),
Educational media and technology yearbook 2005, 30, 3-28. Englewood, CO: Libraries
Unlimited.
Mott, J. (2010). Envisioning the Post-LMS Era: The Open Learning Network. EDUCAUSE
QuarterlyMagazine, 33 (1). Retrieved from
http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Quarterly/EDUCAUSEQuarterlyMagazineVolum
/EnvisioningthePostLMSEraTheOpe/199389.
Seely Brown, J. & Adler, R. (2008). Minds on Fire: Open Education, the Long Tail, and
Learning 2.0. EDUCAUSE Review, 43 (1). 16–32. Retrieved from
http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Review/EDUCAUSEReviewMagazineVolume43
/MindsonFireOpenEducationtheLon/162420.
Appendix: Survey Results
3. If you answered “Agree Strongly” or “Agree” to question 2, please give your reasons.
• Some are context specific and may be misconstrued
• It's my intellectual property and it's of high quality. The internet materials are 90%
substandard in many ways.
• Majority would be fine but not everything
• I think it is good to have the material "out there" from the point of view of sharing with
other colleges. Also, this hasn't been done yet, but the idea that the overarching Liberal
Studies site could become a forum for all sorts of things and help create a dept identity.
However we need the BB Learn component as it will provide the security we need for
student output in this culture (especially female). Also the obvious advantage of automatic
marking.
• I am happy to share with a sharing group but not just give materials to anyone who may
not use them in the correct way, and then the author can look very 'stupid" - voice of
experience here!
• My only concern about my materials being made open to everyone is that they are always
works in progress. I often change parts of my materials to fit the needs of a particular class
or improve sections I think did not work as well as I would have liked. If one version of
the materials becomes 'the course', then I think those materials are a misrepresentation of
what actually happens in my classes.
• I don't use the materials exactly as laid out - I don't think any teacher does. I like to be able
to customise them for each class's needs
• If I spend hours developing lessons, I do not want people in competing institutions to be
able to just grab them and go into their classes with them. It's an issue of intellectual
property.
• I feel they need to be checked very well and some times that is very difficult.
8. Other Comments
• Online delivery of liberal studies courses is very convenient for students and for teachers as
well. I’m a new faculty and I’m still learning the various ways of online delivery of courses
and I’m strongly in favour of it. Thanks.
• It would be very useful to have some data on how often technical glitches interfered with
lesson/assessment delivery; how well students coped with this type of delivery; how
effective it was in terms of students' learning. Which specific features make it useful not
just from the administrative perspective as a repository for materials and assessment
tool.And the most important question - as learners do we learn i.e. process and retain
information faster because we use faster devices???
• I have not used bb9 yet, sorry
• The contents and the teaching methodology may need to be changed. However there may
also be issues with internet problems online.
• The problem with the WordPress site is that it is not possible (or perhaps possible but not
easy) to customize materials. My preference was to deliver in OneNote because of the
ability to write notes on it, and have students write on it too. Also to insert links to any
other material I was going to use, and to do so in an impromptu way. You can't do this if
you are asking students to download from the WP site rather than the G drive. However, it
is good to have the WP site there as a reference and a backup, and we should also try to
make it into a department news site/forum.
• BB9 changes too much and has the logic the designers - not the shop floor. I do not find it
attractive, nor easy nor.... Blogs have more feedback and local team input - colour,
interactive components etc- or are a gateway. And they are free!
• I did not answer the questions that did not apply to me.
• TBH I have not used the WordPress blogs. My students have enough problems coping with
finding the G:\ drive. It's easier to keep things in one place and the G:\ drive allows me to
customise.
• The main problem for us was that BB9 was not stable and using it for assessments was
very stressful. We opted for pen and paper tests to avoid the chaos of a BB9 quiz not
working properly.
• I did not use word press, other faculty loaded up content, I am sure once I use it , it would
be good.
• The mixture of WordPress and BB9 gave the best of both worlds. The WordPress meant
students really had open access to independent learning materials without the more
cumbersome entry into a blackboard system and some technical issues students had off
campus with BBV. The BB9 site gave the security needed to run assessments and closed
discussions.