e-Literate

Present is Prologue

Category: Ed Tech

The “Ed Tech” category includes posts about educational technology products themselves, including LMSs and other learning platforms, adaptive learning and other digital curricular materials products, learning analytics, and educational apps of all types. It also includes technical aspects of ed tech products, especially interoperability.

  • Blackboard Owes Desire2Learn Over Three Million Dollars

    IOU
    (cc) photo credit: zolierdos

    I’m a little late on this one, but late last week the U.S. Court of Appeals denied Blackboard’s rehearing petition. Their only recourse now would be to appeal to the United States Supreme Court and hope that the court miraculously decides to hear their case. As a result, Blackboard will have to return roughly $3.3 million to Desire2Learn, wiping out 100% of the company’s earnings for 2008.

    This does not mean that the litigation is over. Blackboard is still suing D2L in Canada for infringement of the original patent, and the company has been granted continuation patents (basically revised versions of the original patents) that they could assert.

  • UNC's Sakai Evaluation Results

    The University of North Carolina, a current Blackboard customer that is evaluating Sakai, just published a very interesting report of their findings so far. Among other things, it’s a good model for schools that want to do a thorough evaluation of a platform and have the resources (i.e., staff and time) to do it right. Here’s the excerpt of it that UNC chose to publish in their blog post announcing its release:

    The findings of the pilot are positive, leading the Sakai Action Group to recommend ITS continue to fund Sakai for the 2009-2010 academic year, implement student information system (SIS) integration, when possible, expand the number of participants using Sakai, and research a possible future migration path.

    The whole report is worth reading, but here are some of the highlights from my perspective:

    • There are relatively few comments from faculty or students about functionality gaps in one direction or the other. To the contrary, the platforms were seen by many as being functionally equivalent. LMS’s have reached that “good enough” stage where they are starting to commoditize.
    • There were two exceptions to the “equivalent functionality” rule. First, a number of users seemed to appreciate Sakai’s more flexible permissions structure. I have written about the under-appreciated importance of groups and permissions on many occasions. The second was the ability to use Sakai for non-course work groups, projects, communities, etc. Blackboard has this capability, but you have to pay extra and license it separately. Frankly, I don’t know how they get away with it. No other LMS that I know of charges you twice for what is 95% the same functionality.
    • There were lots of comments on usability, and almost all of them broke in Sakai’s favor. First of all, this confirms the point that I’ve made a few times here that usability is often more important than functionality. From UNC’s data, it looks like faculty and students were able to do more with Sakai while making fewer calls to the help desk. Which brings me to the other part of this. Three years ago, Sakai’s usability was bad to the point of being embarrassing. But it absolutely kicked Blackboard’s butt in UNC’s review. This is strong affirmation of the huge strides the Sakai community has made in usability.

    Good stuff.

  • Moodle, Wave, and Widgets (Oh my!)

    Scott Wilson , Paul Sharples, Dai Griffiths and Kris Popat have an article up on their work embedding Wave-enabled widgets into Moodle using Wookie. (Try saying that ten times fast.) What they envision is very similar in a lot of ways to what my former SUNY colleagues and I were thinking about when we proposed a Learning Management Operating System. Of course, that was 2005, so we were thinking about portlets rather than widgets. The lower barrier to entry and client-side nature of widgets are game changers.

    Anyway, it’s a very good piece, well worth reading. A couple of points jumped out at me. First:

    Rather than just being a like-for-like replacement, the Widgets update in real-time without any page refresh, and this affects user behavior. Rather than clicking links to launch tools or to view content, the Widgets encourage more of a “monitoring” mode of operation, with users navigating to a course page, then leaving it open in the background, occasionally bringing it into focus to see if any new conversations were happening in the chat widget, or the voting results had changed.

    If this finding bears out with further research, it could be a fairly big deal. For one thing, it has the potential of making the learning environment a lot stickier and more Facebook-like (in a good way). At the same time, it should force some pretty substantial refactoring of core LMS tools, which simply aren’t designed for monitoring. The two models are likely to clash.

    Here’s another interesting—and problematic—bit:

    Another consequence of Widgets is that far less tracking information is available at a micro-level, as interactions with Widgets are not made available to the VLE. This implies that a new model for tracking will need to be developed for such systems; this may be a useful opportunity to reconsider tracking in more sophisticated terms than page views and hits. For example, it may be useful to separate out measures of attention, using something like APML[12], and measures of user effort, using something like User Labor Markup Language (ULML[13]).

    The thing is, we’re  just now beginning to develop models where we can identify at-risk students and, more importantly, help them self-identify and self-remediate based on the data from the learning environment. The fact that this trend is in direct tension with the whole Web-2.0-in-the-learning-environment trend is underappreciated. We need to solve this problem.

  • List of LMS Evaluation Projects

    Mark Smithers has a post up listing all the public LMS evaluation projects by universities he knows of. This is a great service to the community; if you know of any others, please let Mark know.

  • Introduction to the Special Issue on Distributed Learning Environments

    This post is a bit of a tease. Our special issue of the On the Horizon (OTH) has been published. OTH is neither open access nor Creative Commons licensed, but they do have a very liberal policy about authors retaining copyright. I intend to find a venue in which all the issue articles can be published under some sort of Creative Commons license, authors permitting. (Suggestions for that venue are welcome; right now I’m leaning toward Connexions.) In the meantime, I’m republishing my introductory editorial for the issue, which really just provides a synopsis of the articles and tries to highlight the common threads. Many thanks, by the way, to journal editor Tom Abeles and to Emerald publishing.

    Here goes:

    (more…)

  • Blackboard vs. Moodle: North Carolina Community Colleges Assessment

    A while back, I wrote a post giving advice to small schools about selecting a new LMS. That post turned out to be reasonably popular. Today somebody sent me a link to a study done by the North Carolina Community College System comparing Blackboard to Moodle and, in particular, talking about the experience of some small colleges that had migrated from the former to the latter. The results are pretty consistent with the advice I gave.

    Here are the highlights, along with their correlations to my earlier points: (more…)

  • Blackboard Files Yet Another Lawsuit

    Best Lighter In The World!
    photo credit: michelle.irish

    You may recall that Blackboard purchased a patent in what appeared to be a fruitless attempt to countersue TechRadium, the company that sued them for patent infringement over their emergency warning system and that now is suing Twitter. It turns out that the purchase was not quite fruitless after all, because Blackboard used it to get some sort of cross-licensing agreement with TechRadium (with undisclosed terms) in return for TechRadium dropping the suit.

    Well, that apparently freed up some bandwidth on Blackboard’s legal team, and you know what they say about idle hands. Blackboard is now pre-emptively suing the individuals from whom they purchased the patent. Washington Business Journal has the scoop:

    (more…)