330 likes | 335 Views
DCU and Moodle: The story so far …. Denis Cahalane Barry McMullin Morag Munro UCD, 21 July 2005. Outline. Background:VLEs/e-learning at DCU Why DCU decided to choose a new VLE What we wanted from a VLE platform How we went about selecting a platform
E N D
DCU and Moodle: The story so far … Denis Cahalane Barry McMullin Morag Munro UCD, 21 July 2005
Outline • Background:VLEs/e-learning at DCU • Why DCU decided to choose a new VLE • What we wanted from a VLE platform • How we went about selecting a platform • Why we chose the platform we did (Moodle) • Current Moodle use at DCU • Demo • Technical implications • What we have learned
VLEs/e-learning at DCU Pilot initiatives prior to Moodle deployment in 2003 : • 1999 - 2001: TopClass VLE • 2001 - 2003: WebCT VLE • Custom VLE-like systems: RACeE • Portal pages, mailing lists, web pages: static, interactive
Options • Commitment to a commercial, closed source VLE (WebCT) • Customise in-house tools to provide VLE functionality • Open source VLE
Closed vs. Open Source • Commercial software is “closed source”: the source code is generally unavailable to the users of the product. • Open source software is developed as a public collaboration: the source code is freely available for users to modify and improve (Under the terms of the GNU General Public License). http://www.opensource.org/
What did we want from a VLE? • Aligned with strategic aspirations • Technically viable, scalable • Support various pedagogical models • Intuitive • Functionality • Accessible
Customise in-house tools? Advantages of a VLE over in-house solutions: • Avoid reinventing the wheel • Wider functionality • Integrated, secure access • Collaboration
Open or closed source? • Strategic aspirations: development platform • Avoid vendor “lock-in” • Integration with other systems • Open source not a cost saving device (but perhaps would allow us to apply limited resources in more strategic ways)
Evaluation process (1) Evaluated candidates according to: • Functionality • Usability • Pedagogy • Accessibility • Technical viability and scalability • Existing user community • Projected longevity
Evaluation process (1) Evaluated candidates according to: • Functionality • Usability • Pedagogy • Accessibility • Technical viability and scalability • Existing user community • Projected longevity
Evaluation process (2) • VLE users group: • WebCT users • Staff using custom solutions • Those interested in using a VLE • Forum • Individual consultations • Demo installations
Why Moodle? • Intuitive and user-friendly • Feature rich • Social constructivist underpinning • Supports various delivery models • Large user community • Technically robust • Technical development framework
Risks • Some functional limitations • Scalability: No large-scale deployments • Only room for 1-2 real open source contenders: would Moodle survive? • Migration of existing users • Limited technical support
Moodle use in DCU: 2004/5 • 14000 users • 3400 courses • 560 active modular courses • 50 active non-modular courses • 4000 logged in each week • 800 - 1200 discussion posts per week
Moodle use in DCU • Programme/module delivery and support: • Distance courses: Oscail, Physics, Mechanical Engineering, SALIS • Blended learning • Supplementary materials • Thesis support, group projects • Support units: Careers service, Library etc.
Moodle use in DCU • Staff: • School/Unit discussions/resource sharing • Committees • Working groups • External collaborations
Moodle use in DCU • Second-level students: • CTYI • Science Olympiad • ComputeTY
Moodle use in DCU • Some developmental projects: • European Language Portfolio (ELP) • Student study planner • Giving a voice to Moodle • Groups extension • Gaeilge translation
Training and support • Face-to-face: • Introductory workshops • Advanced workshops • Specialist workshops: Groups, quizzes, Wiki etc • Online training: • Self-paced online course • Four week online tutoring course • Telephone/email/face-to-face support
Demo http://moodle.dcu.ie
Platform • Dell Poweredge 2650, 2*2.8GHz CPU, 2GB ram, 350 GB disk • Redhat Linux AS 3.0, Mysql, Php • Raid 5 disk • Second identical server
Backup • Nightly zip of all courses • Nightly Mysql dump of database • Nightly tape dump to Veritas NetBackup • Nightly copy to second server
Instances on server two • Copy of last night’s database • Testsite – e.g. groups • Latest version – nightly download • 2004/2005 Modules
Support • www.moodle.org • Bug Tracker • Paid support - $2000 per annum
Integration with DCU systems (1) • Ldap authentication to Novell eDirectory • Single sign-on?
Integration with DCU systems (2) • Autocreated 3000 courses • Auto-assign teachers
Integration with DCU systems (3) • Nightly registration of students • Nightly enrolment of students in modules
Risks revisited • Some functional limitations • Scalability: No large-scale deployments • Only room for 1-2 real open source contenders: would Moodle survive? • Migration of existing users • Limited technical support
What have we learned? • Select the VLE that suits your institution • Engage end users in the decision-making process • Flexibility of open source has advantages and disadvantages • Employing an open source VLE as a development platform requires a support framework