STC 2010

2,717 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Education
0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,717
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
7
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
41
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

STC 2010

  1. 1. Migrating to Moodle – Faculty, Student and Technological Perspectives on Adopting an Open-Source Learning Management System<br />Keith Landa<br />Purchase College<br />http://www.slideshare.net/keith.landa<br />http://tinyurl.com/STC2010Moodle<br />
  2. 2. Focus on teaching & learning<br />- Robust set of activities & resources<br />- Add-on modules from the community<br />- Moodle development pathway<br />Integration<br />- Other systems<br />- Web 2.0 world<br />Why Moodle @ Purchase?<br />Costs<br />- No licensing costs<br />- Similar support costs<br />Flexible open architecture<br />Risk management<br />- Risks of open source<br />- Commercial products have different risks<br />
  3. 3. Background – Purchase – 2008<br />Liberal Arts and Sciences plus Arts Conservatories<br />~4200 FTE<br />ERes electronic reserves<br />Web enhancement of F2F courses<br />
  4. 4. LMS review @ Purchase<br />Context: faculty dissatisfaction with Blackboard; superficial use of LMS; escalating costs<br />Fall 2008: faculty task force established; faculty survey; discussion of selection criteria (functionality, technical requirements, costs)<br />Spring 2009: Moodle production system established; pilot Moodle courses (~20); student survey (key driver); ongoing communication; development of general sense among faculty that ‘we’re going with Moodle’….<br />Summer 2009: summer faculty workshop series (new); course conversion and course prep; consolidation of electronic reserves into Moodle courses<br />Fall 2009/Spring 2010: transition year; immediate termination of ERes; one more year of Blackboard; faculty assisted to move courses to Moodle; ongoing Moodle workshops; termination of Blackboard at end of year<br />
  5. 5. Faculty Blackboard uses<br />
  6. 6. LMS desired features<br />Distribute materials<br />Library services<br />Integration with SIS<br />Course communications<br />Links to external web sites<br />One stop shopping for students<br />Discussion forum<br />Gradebook<br />New media (blogs, wikis, podcasts)<br />Drop boxes<br />Student collaboration tools<br />Course reports<br />Self-directed lessons<br />Online quizzing<br />Real-time tools (chat, etc)<br />Clickers<br />
  7. 7. Student ratings<br />
  8. 8.
  9. 9. Focus on teaching & learning<br />- Robust set of activities & resources<br />- Add-on modules from the community<br />- Moodle development pathway<br />Why Moodle @ Purchase?<br />
  10. 10.
  11. 11.
  12. 12.
  13. 13. Implementation – course migration<br />Blackboard - ~1000 courses; ERes – substantially more<br />ERes – document download, upload to Moodle<br />Blackboard – Moodle can import Blackboard course archives (zip files), but…. (problems with the Bb archives)<br />Temp services staff - ~300 hours from May to Aug 2009, primarily ERes migration<br />Bb course migration on request during 2009/2010 year<br />
  14. 14. Implementation – faculty development<br />Spring 2009 workshops: hour long sessions, various topics; early adopters; 28 faculty<br />2009 Summer Faculty Workshop Series: new programming, not just Moodle; half- and full-day workshops; stipends; 36 faculty at Moodle sessions<br />Fall 2009: Moodle Kickoff workshops; Getting Started, Gradebook, Learning Activity; 98 faculty<br />
  15. 15. Implementation – server config<br />Virtual servers for production and for test/dev<br />More control over test environment<br />Windows Server 2008 x64<br />4 CPUs<br />4 GB RAM<br />30 GB C: drive; 100 GB E: drive<br />MS SQL and PHP<br />
  16. 16. Spring 2010 analytics<br />
  17. 17. Why Moodle @ Purchase?<br />Costs<br />- No licensing costs<br />- Similar support costs<br />Risk management<br />- Risks of open source<br />- Commercial products have different risks<br />
  18. 18. Cost comparisons<br />
  19. 19. SUNY Delhi – hosted Moodle<br />Analysis for 3 years<br />https://confluence.delhi.edu/display/CIS/LMS+Migration<br />
  20. 20. Focus on teaching & learning<br />- Robust set of activities & resources<br />- Add-on modules from the community<br />- Moodle development pathway<br />Integration<br />- Other systems<br />- Web 2.0 world<br />Why Moodle @ Purchase?<br />Flexible open architecture<br />
  21. 21. Consumer Moodle<br />Moodle runs fine out of the box, no need for developers<br />Active developer community worldwide<br />Extend Moodle with add-on blocks and modules<br />Web 2.0, LMS as home base<br />
  22. 22. Google Maps mashup<br />
  23. 23. Lightbox Gallery<br />
  24. 24. Lightbox Gallery<br />
  25. 25. Web video<br />
  26. 26. Moodle - Google<br />Modules and plug-ins: http://moodle.org/mod/data/view.php?id=6009<br />
  27. 27.
  28. 28. Mahara – Moodle integration<br />
  29. 29. Moodle development @ Purchase<br />Streaming Flash video resource<br />E-reserves resource – promote use of our electronic databases<br />Moodle-specific helpdesk<br />
  30. 30. Focus on teaching & learning<br />- Robust set of activities & resources<br />- Add-on modules from the community<br />- Moodle development pathway<br />Integration<br />- Other systems<br />- Web 2.0 world<br />Why Moodle @ Purchase?<br />Costs<br />- No licensing costs<br />- Similar support costs<br />Flexible open architecture<br />Risk management<br />- Risks of open source<br />- Commercial products have different risks<br />

×