Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
The Future IMS (Instructional Management System)
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

The Future IMS (Instructional Management System)


Published on

Presentation developed while combing the landscape of where IMSs or LMSs (instructional management systems, aka learning management systems) are heading.

Presentation developed while combing the landscape of where IMSs or LMSs (instructional management systems, aka learning management systems) are heading.

Published in: Education

1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide


  • 1. The Future IMS for Higher Ed (Instructional Management System)Lesley BlickerNovember 2008
  • 2. Instructional Technologies – Predictions through 2013
    • Continued development of Web 2.0 tools
    • 3. Continued exploration in immersive virtual worlds as learning environments
    • 4. Growth in number of products which have 3D “engines” built in (e.g., Second Life, Lively, 3B, EON Reality)
    • 5. More 3D modeling, robotics, holographic software used in education
    • 6. Increase in use of Webtops (PageFlakes, NetVibes, iGoogle)
    • 7. Repurposing of the IMS* as we know it
    • 8. Emergence of startups with radically different IMS concept, but focused on single course, not enterprise or integration with SIS, LDAP
    • 9. ~10-15% of faculty experimenting with tools outside of IMS to accomplish more student centered learning and digital content creation
    • 10. Attempt to layer interactive tools on top of IMS
    • 11. Move towards building and sharing 3D learning objects
    • 12. No let up in plea for open APIs and interoperability
    • 13. 7-8 years – primary Web interface begins morphing to 3D; 2D lives alongside 3D or in it for a while
    • 14. Increased use of Open Source products for enterprise applications
    * Instructional Management System © Lesley Blicker
  • 15. Current State of the Current IMS Products
    Two primary categories for higher education:
    Large enterprise systems that scale, integrate with key administrative systems such as SIS, LDAP, email
    • Proprietary (e.g., D2L, eCollege, Blackboard
    • 16. Open Source (e.g., Sakai, Moodle)
    Small innovative IMSs, designed for individual course level, not likely to go enterprise, but are integrating with lots of social technologies, act and feel more like social technology
  • 17. Current IMS (CMS) – What’s the Beef?
    Unilateral publication formats
    Labeled as false start; replicated existing classrooms
    Assumes more passive consumer of information
    Monolithic and they don’t play well with others (API’s not truly open) – lack of interoperability
    Scott Leslie’s Video: The Future CMS slide 34 – 35
  • 18. Current State of the Enterprise IMSs
    In the 3rd Phase of Add-Ons and Bundling
    Adding more tools in general as well as limited Web 2.0-like tools or proprietary mashups
    Going some measure towards integration with other software or increasing interoperability via open APIs
    But may still lack sufficient agility for early adopters who think the current IMS format is too limiting
    Tend to be reliable, scalable, and integrate with core administrative systems (SIS, LDAP, email)
  • 19. Current State of the Current IMS Products
    Agility, act more like social systems, allowing student created content
    Reliability, integrations
    Small innovative applications developed primarily for the course level, more open API. Do not expect to grow to enterprise systems or be able to integrate with administrative systems anytime soon or in the foreseeable 3-5 years
    Reliable, scalable, enterprise systems, integrate or interface with key administrative applications, no programming allowed (D2L, BB, eCollege, Angel)
    Open Source systems, more open APIs, can develop custom applicational integrations but will need cadre of programmers to do so (Sakai, Moodle)
  • 20. Characteristics of Innovative IMSs
    Newcomers are starting to emerge with radically different IMS designs:
    • Built-in Web 2.0 functionality
    • 21. Boundaries going well beyond the course space
    • 22. Integration with dozens if not hundreds of applications through pre-loaded and customizable widgets (open APIs)
    • 23. Social networking is matter-of-fact
    • 24. Multiple-way sends are matter-of-fact
  • My Predictions for the Future IMS
    We won’t see the innovative products turning into enterprise applications anytime soon for complex reasons
    The enterprise application will be part of a mix of systems for tracking learning experiences which will:
    Run side-by-side with more flexible and interoperable approaches. Faculty will invent their own PLEs (personal leaning environment) I.e., g, M. Wesch using NetVibes)
    Recede in importance as the primary unit of the virtual course site and will morph to an LMOS (Learning Management Operating System), maintaining administrative functions for enterprise systems (e.g., SIS integration, managing grades) and would provide the backbone for layering (instructional software living on top of the IMS)
    Not likely to do it all (incorporate enough open API/integration with other technologies and remain reliable and able to integrate with SIS, core technologies needed for student integration)
  • 25. The iGoogle, Netvibes Phenomenon to Create a Personal Learning Environment
    A Portal to Media Literacy, M. Wesch – min 28
  • 26. Current Examples of Widget Integration
    Look to
    Wikis or
    Facebook as examples for adding widgets
  • 27. Requirements of Future IMSsThe Short List
    Interoperability and extensibility (open architecture) to allow for ease of integration with host of existing applications such as Web 2.0 apps, student-created content apps, live video conferencing, audio streams, etc.
    Better means of tracking learning outcomes to close the loop with accreditation reports
    Blending or integrating with 3D virtual worlds
    Good interface/viewability for portable content, via cell phones, PDAs
    Easy content migration in and out of system
    Integration with electronic reserves
  • 28. Who Am I Watching?
    LearnHub (watch video)