Revolution 2.0

War of the LMS, or, How does Moodle stack up Against Blackboard?

Abstract:

With this research paper, I will examine an academic library’s need for a learning management system or LMS and whether or not academic libraries would be better served with a paid-subscription services (Blackboard) or an open-source platform (Moodle).  By providing an overview of the various LMS platforms, I will be able to identify the needs of an academic library through library literature articles and my own analysis.  I will provide evidence of other universities whom have pursued similar paths.  Essentially, this paper will examine the pros and cons of using the free, open source LMS system, Moodle, over the paid subscription services from Blackboard and what type of environment and user population would be best served by such a change.

Moodle, in the right environment, has the ability to strengthen the connection between librarians who provide user instruction and information literacy for faculty and students.  Moodle has the opportunity to enhance students’ overall learning experiences in and out of the classroom by building better connections between students, faculty, and librarians.  Additionally, a service like Moodle, can also create stronger bonds between students to group experiences.  Moodle is capable of becoming more of an educational social space than Blackboard.

While this paper will cover a lot of the technical aspects of comparing and contrasting an open source LMS with a paid-subscription based LMS, I will also connect this to the theories and culture of Library 2.0 in the LIS world

Description:

Learning Management Systems (LMS), in one form or another, are generally always found in Universities and colleges and in quite a few academic systems, libraries are involved in an LMS, whether it be managing an LMS for the university or using it in a similar capacity to that of faculty for Information Literacy or other user instruction based courses. These days it seems that the choices a university has in choosing an LMS is Blackboard or other. That is a little bit of a generalization but in that generalization lies some truth. Blackboard has established itself as the lone powerhouse in LMS platforms. It would be safe to assume that most university systems currently subscribe to some version of Blackboard. The issue, however, is that with that power follows fewer competitors and ever-rising subscription fees. Some universities and colleges are beginning to only be able to afford the basic versions of Blackboard and that can threaten to diminish the educational experiences of students. This is forcing smaller universities to consider LMS alternatives, especially during times of such a volatile economy and shrinking budgets.

Of course Moodle is one of the biggest and most well open LMS alternatives to blackboard, which will also be the focus of this value assessment, but some other systems include, Docebo, eFront, Dokeos, Claroline, ATutor, ILIAS, OLAT, Sakai, .LRN, Openelms, and Ganesha (Sampson). Other alternatives can include, with some creative thinking, turn Content Management Systems (CMS) into LMS platforms. For example, Michael Stephens and Kyle Jones, using Wordpress with the plugin, BuddyPress, have created a beautiful and highly functioning LMS.

Open source software is not always the answer to a University’s LMS needs of a university nor is it intended to be a short-term solution. This is paper is not necessarily a proponent of open source platforms nor does it pledge any allegiance to paid subscription services such as Blackboard, but rather an assessment of the alternatives, particularly Moodle, and what types of libraries could benefit from an open source LMS. There are very definite pros and cons to both open source and paid subscriptions and every university system is different whether it’s because of size, needs, budget, etc.

For academic libraries with librarians involved in the sort of do-it-yourself, guerilla IT tacts and mentality such as Elmhurst College, a switch to an open source platform could not only save the library thousands of dollars, but also provide a more customized and intuitive LMS environment for students and faculty. Blackboard offers great services, however, only it is harder for smaller universities like Elmhurst to afford the more advanced versions. It is not fair for students of smaller academic systems to receive a lesser educational experience based strictly from a financial standpoint, and yet at the same time, Blackboard does have the right to make money, and they should not be faulted for that in the slightest. This is where open source systems can be so effective.