16 Matching Annotations
  1. Aug 2020
    1. Moodle has over 50% of market share in Europe, Latin America, and Oceania.[48]

      Importance of Moodle internationally

    1. Course Management Systems (CMS)

      This is a good snapshot of the CMS / LMS in higher-ed in 2003.

    2. Meanwhile some institutions in the USA have created various open source products which are providing an alternative to commercial vendors.

      Was Moodle not a thing at this point? Tracking the rise of open source LMS is important. I wonder what the current market share for open source & home brew is in the US; in Canada; in Europe; in Africa; etc. My understanding is that Moodle has a much bigger market share outside the US than inside.

    3. The most significant vendors by volume and size are WebCT (www.webct.com) and Blackboard (http://www.blackboard.com). There are many other vendors in this market place such as desire2learn (http://www.desire2learn.com/), a system in use at the University of Wisconsin at Madison.

      WebCT, Blackboard, and D2L were already the big 3 in 2003.

    1. The following table reflects a summary of the previous research we have conducted in which we generated a conceptual framework of major features in order to evaluate and compare the major K-12 LMSs (Watson, Lee, & Reigeluth, 2007).

      Table of k-12 LMS with core functionalities (PLATO, Pearson Digital Learning, and Achievement Technologies)

    2. LMSs are more typically utilized in corporate settings with many available systems on the market, including NetDimensions EKP, Saba and SumTotal Systems (Carliner, 2005), as well as Lotus, Oracle iLearning and Cornerstone OnDemand, among others (Learning Circuits, 2005). A 2006 survey highlights the features most common-ly found in the corporate LMSs currently being utilized (2006 Survey of Learning Management Systems, 2006).

      Description of the corporate LMS market.

    3. While LMSs can currently perform some of these functions, limitations exist which are hindering the full realization of LMSs’ potential

      OK. They do acknowledge that their describing an ideal rather than an actuality.

    4. In an Information Age model of education, an LMS will assess learners’ current knowledge and skill level, work with teachers and learners to identify appropriate learning goals, identify and sequence instruction appropriate for the individual learner, assess learner performance products, store evidence of attainments, sup-port collaboration and generate reports to pro-vide information to maximize the effectiveness of the entire learning organization.

      This is a vision for the LMS, not a description of. It feels like their definitions are overly optimistic throughout this article.

    5. Or as Connolly (2001) puts it, “LMS provides the rules and the LCMS provides the content” (p. 58).

      Again, this feels like a dated distinction, one that has since been flattened.

    6. A CMS “provides an instructor with a set of tools and a framework that allows the relatively easy creation of online course content and the subsequent teaching and management of that course including various interactions with students taking the course” (EDUCAUSE Evolving Technologies Committee, 2003, p. 1). Examples of a CMS include Blackboard, Angel, Sakai, Oncourse and Moogle. However, Blackboard is a good example of the confusion that exists regarding these terms as it is commonly referred to in the literature as an LMS.

      This is interesting. What they are calling a CMS comes to be the fairly standard (I think) definition of the LMS. They even identify Blackboard (the model LMS) as a CMS.

    7. The American Society for Training & Development (Learning Circuits, 2005), recommendsthese following functional requirements for a corporate LMS:

      Functional definition of the LMS from 2005. This might be useful in tracking change.

    8. Lessons are provided based on the individual student’s learning progress.

      Individualization / Adaptive Learning as an early functionality (goal?) of the LMS

    9. Bailey, G. D. (1993). Wanted: A road map for understanding Integrated Learning Systems. In G. D. Bailey (Ed.), Computer-based Integrated Learning Systems (pp. 3-9). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

      This seems like one of the earliest sources in this article. I wonder how early this article is in explicitly discussing the LMS qua LMS.

    10. n LMS is the infrastructure that delivers and manages in-structional content, identifies and assesses in-dividual and organizational learning or training goals, tracks the progress towards meeting those goals, and collects and presents data for super-vising the learning process of an organization as a whole (Szabo & Flesher, 2002). An LMS deliv-ers content but also handles course registration and administration, skills gap analysis, tracking and reporting (Gilhooly, 2001).

      Defining the LMS based on its functionalities. Some of these pieces surely have been added or subtracted from LMSs over time. Course registration for example is now part of systems like Elucian's Banner. Surely there could be a heuristic model of the LMS with concentric rings of functionalities.

    11. The term ILS was coined by Jostens Learn-ing, and LMS was originally used to describe the management system component of the PLATO K-12 learning system, content-free and separate from the courseware (R. Foshay, personal com-munication, October 24, 2006).

      Claim that ILS was coined by Jostens Learning. LMS was the management system component of the broader ILS.

    12. LMS has its history in another term, integrated learning system (ILS) which offers functionality beyond instructional content such as management and tracking, personalized instruction and integration across the system (Bailey, 1993; Becker, 1993; Brush, Armstrong, Barbrow, & Ulintz, 1999; Szabo & Flesher, 2002).

      Earlier term for LMS is ILS, "integrated learning system." They also make a claim here about the functionalities that are central to an LMS.