Moodle Moot 2009
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Moodle Moot 2009






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Moodle Moot 2009 Moodle Moot 2009 Presentation Transcript

  • Moving to Moodle - AU Brian Stewart CIO
  • AU Situation – PreMoodle • Majority of courses and students not online • Four flavours of online delivery – School of Business – Web based Lotus Notes – Centre for Innovative Management – Client based Lotus Notes – Centre for Arts and Science – Bazaar and web programming – Centre for Nursing and Health Studies - WebCt • No central support • Poor Integration • No coordination across institution
  • Review - Composition and Evaluation • A review and selection committee was established, composed of representatives from across the University with knowledge and interest in the selection. • The Evaluation had five main categories – Mandate – Administration – Cost – Instructional Design – Teaching and Learning Tools • These categories were detailed out to include the aspects and functions that a desired system should have.
  • Final Selection • Five Month Evaluation using criteria • Moodle with 11 first place ratings and with only one third placement from any of the evaluators. Lotus Notes was second with five first place ratings. • Moodle garnered 40 percent of the total weighted score with Lotus Notes getting 32 percent and WebCT 29 percent. • Moodle had been selected by the group as the best choice for AU with a clear and unambiguous majority.
  • Implementation • Followed Project Management principles • Two Committee Governance structure – steering and operating • Five project domains – Commissioning Infrastructure Daryl Campbell – Content Rodger Graham – Deployment Keri Michelchuz/ Karen Stauffer – Training and Support Karen Rosa/ Jenny Lucas – Research and Development Daryl Campbell • Pilot Graduate – Paced • Pilot Undergraduate- Individualized study • Selected early adopters
  • Lessons Learned • Automation of student administration • Communication • Change Management • CMS for content • Course conversion needed to be staggered and prioritized • Moodle course shells • Contextualize training
  • Benefits • Single LMS Core • Automation of administration functions • Common language and focus • Increased dialogue across intuition • Certainty for future planning and development • Ability to select and develop CMS integration • Improved student service • Reduced complexity • Improved systems management • Fit with culture and skill set
  • Benefits Helpdesk Calls switch from WebCt to Moodle 2006-2007 PreMoodle Total WebCt Q4 2006 - 407 Moodle Q4 2006 - 84 491 Post Moodle WebCt Q4 2007 – 98 Moodle Q4 2007 - 107 205
  • Costs • Transition from existing systems WebCT, Notes, Bazaar – Training and communication – Repurposing content into Moodle – New positions to support Moodle - systems and academic – Integration with existing systems • Management and governance overhead to coordinate activities • Custom development to fit working practices • Development of centralised IT support and delivery infrastructure • Allowing for the nuances of different disciplines
  • Future • Continued systems integration – Alfresco CMS – Gradebook – Newton – myAU Portal – Banner student information system – Social networking • Interoperability with outside systems and resources • Development of organization to support Moodle within Faculties – Develop standards and procedures for delivering courses – Develop policies for course delivery – Redesign of organizational structure
  • Thank You and good luck