e-Literate

Present is Prologue

Category: LMS & Learning Platforms

Everything you want to know about Learning Management Systems and whatever comes after them.

  • Building Bridges To Nowhere

    Speaking of both standards compliance and Blackboard, IMS CEO Rob Abel has posted an interesting comment on the Wired Campus’ blurb regarding a Blackboard/SAP integration deal:

    It is important for the readers to understand that there are currently administrative system providers such as Oracle working within the nonprofit IMS Global Learning Consortium to create open standards for the type of integration mentioned between administrative (SAP) and course management (Blackboard) systems. SAP is not currently a member or participant in IMS and, as such, is not involved in this work. Buyers need to understand that proprietary integration schemes limit their choice and involve greater total cost of ownership. There has been quite a bit of “lip service” to standards and we are doing our best to change that. As such, IMS will be developing a certification and compliance program for the next generation of enterprise data exchange and I suggest that buyers look to the IMS web site (www.imsglobal.org) to see which vendors are participating members and which products are compliant.

    This is all of a piece with the Common Cartridge issue. If customers don’t demand standards compliance, then they will remain at the mercy of vendor lock-in. The last thing you want to hear is that you can’t change to a better LMS because the non-standard integration with your Student Information System (SIS) will break.

    Are these standards perfect solutions? Of course not. Standards specifications are rarely perfect and even more rarely perfect on the first try. For example, one LMS developer told me he had concerns that that the current Common Cartridge specification doesn’t give him very good tools for ensuring that his platform fully complies with it. So glitches will happen and the spec will need to be refined. But that won’t happen unless customers demand standards compliance first and then demand improvements to the standards as the needs are identified.

    Despite what some bloggers may tell you, there is plenty of evidence in this industry as well as others that customer demand can drive standards adoption. (SCORM is one good example off the top of my head.) So go ahead and be demanding. Tell the vendors that that you simply will not adopt a platform that locks you in by neglecting standards compliance.

  • Oracle, Sakai, and the LMOS–Part 1

    It’s been a while since I’ve written a post about the notion of a Learning Management Operating System (LMOS). There’s some news out of the Sakai world that’s as good an excuse as any for doing returning to it.

    Apparently Oracle, with the help of Unicon, is going to do quite a bit of work on Sakai in the form of something they call their “Academic Enterprise Initiative” (AEI). According to Oracle’s white paper on the topic, the work includes (but is not limited to) the following elements:

    • Building batch and real-time integration between Sakai and Oracle’s student information system (SIS)
    • Creating flexible integration between Sakai and Oracle’s teaching-related products (most notably their portfolio and gradebook).
    • Making it possible to swap in Oracle collaboration applications (e.g., their discussion forum, calendar, chat, etc.) to replace the analogous Sakai tools
    • Presenting the whole thing through Oracle portal or any other JSR-168-compliant portal (like uPortal, for example)
    • Creating a student data hub that allows for disparate applications to share data while providing a single “source of truth” to avoid duplicate and conflicting content versions

    There’s a lot here to unpack. In this post I’m going to look at some of the specifics of what Oracle has in mind and why this advances the LMOS cause significantly–even for those institutions that will never use a single Oracle product. In a follow-up post, I’ll drill down into some of the specifics of Oracle’s approach and their implications for teaching and learning.

    (more…)

  • Blackboard Conference Call, Part II

    As I said in my previous post, I was allowed to ask quite a few questions of Matthew Small in Blackboard’s patent Q&A webinar tonight. I chose not to ask any regarding the scope or validity of the patent, since I saw no benefit in crossing swords on those issues. Instead, I focused my questions on the potential for broader harm to the industry. Matthew Small took great pains to emphasize that Blackboard’s intentions are narrowly focused on D2L and that this patent is not, in his words, “a game changer.” I wanted to find out if he really believed that, if he can defend it, and if he knows how strong or weak his defense is. My conclusion? My gut is that he believes it. I’m confident that he can’t defend it. And I think on some levels, at least, he knows that his defense is weak.

    In fairness, all of what follows is paraphrase. I don’t have a recording or transcript of the conversation. I invite other participants (including Mr. Small) to correct the record if I get anything wrong or out of context.

    (more…)

  • Blackboard Conference Call, Part I

    Tonight I listened in on the last in Blackboard’s series of Q&A webinars on their patent. To their credit, they let me ask all of my questions. Matthew Small even extended a personal invitation to me to call him with any follow-up questions. I was very happy with all of that. I was far less happy with their answers. But that’s the subject of my next post. For this post, I want to acknowledge what I believe was a genuine effort at outreach on Blackboard’s part and respond in kind. I want to make clear why I could accept Matthew Small at his word regarding Blackboard’s intentions and still conclude that this patent litigation must not stand. I want to say to Mr. Small and the Blackboard management team that this isn’t personal. (more…)

  • What You Can Do About the Blackboard Patent, Part I

    A number of people have commented to me that they wish that they could make a difference in the Blackboard patent fight. In the process, they usually imply that I have some power that they don’t. The thing is, I’m not a decision-maker at my university, I don’t run an Open Source project or professional association, and I’m not in a position to hire an army of lawyers. Basically, I’m just a guy with a blog. If I can make a difference then you can too.

    Here’s something really simple that you can do at your university, regardless of what your role is and regardless of what LMS you use (Even if it’s Blackboard!): (more…)

  • An Analysis of the Latest Blackboard Patent FAQ

    This week, Blackboard issued another FAQ which “is the result of numerous discussions with those interested in better understanding the Blackboard patent.” Do their answers make the topic clearer? Let’s do a question-by-question analysis and see. (more…)

  • eCollege Has Patented the Gradebook

    That’s right. In 2004, eCollege was granted a patent that, as far as I can tell, is for

    • A gradebook
    • An online syllabus
    • A private student journal

    Now, before you panic, ask yourself why eCollege has not sued anyone in the two years since they acquired the patent. The truth is that there are all kinds of reasons to file for a patent that you may never intend to litigate. In fact, one reason that many technology companies today are almost required to file for patents whenever they can is to build a defense against exactly the kind of action that Blackboard is taking against Desire2Learn. (more…)