Selection of an Open Source Application

KU: Although increasing numbers of colleges and universities are adopting open-source applications to support their online teaching and learning, there are still a lot of myths about the benefits and challenges of open-source software. What drove you toward considering and selecting an open-source learning-management system?

RS: We looked at this decision as being a lot more than about selecting a technology—it was about a new direction for UCLA. First, it was a commitment to becoming part of a larger community of educators and institutions; second, it was about open source; third, it was about a common toolbox to support teaching, learning, AND collaboration; and fourth, it was about UCLA units and individuals working together to provide a common service that supports rapid innovation. Our goal is to benefit through contributing to and learning from a global partnership that holds values of access and cooperation matching those of UCLA.

KU: What are some of the opportunities or benefits that you see open source providing your program and how are you ensuring that they can be realized?

RS: This is a hard question to answer right now because we are very new to this. As mentioned earlier, we see real opportunity and benefit from working with a global community on an open project that will also work with other open projects (for example, Sakai AND Moodle). We have little interest in being tied to large commercial vendors who are guided by larger market forces that have little to do with UCLA teaching, learning, and collaboration needs. It is our belief that other individuals and institutions that gravitate to open-source communities will share some common set of values. We found that Moodle had a particularly strong, mature, and sustainable community whose culture and processes were consistent with our own.

We are planning on becoming active members of the Moodle community once we have the expertise to provide value back to that community. We think this is a good start to realizing the potential of open source. We are also planning on working with institutions and organizations that share a commitment to interoperability.

KU: What are some of the challenges that you anticipate coming with your selection of an open-source platform and how are you addressing them?

RS: Like a lot of universities, we are fiercely independent at every level—as individuals, as departments, as schools and divisions. It is part of our culture and we have had success with it, seeing it as fundamental to innovation. We have not had a lot of experience collaborating with open-source communities. We have much to learn about being good collaborators internally and externally. Once again, we thought that Moodle was an open community in which we could actively participate.

KU: As you might be aware, the State University of New York (SUNY) just went though a process where they identified a “preferred” LMS vendor. During the evaluation process, all open-source software options were flatly rejected by SUNY System Administration and many of the SUNY campuses. Why do you think that UCLA was willing to select an open-source option? Do you think that UCLA is particularly well positioned to take advantage of the benefits of an open-source application? If so, why?

RS: This is an interesting question. I think that we were at home with the fundamental values of open source, particularly in the instructional arena, where local developers work with faculty to build custom solutions to meet discipline and pedagogical needs. We know that making a good decision about open source is really the same thing as making a good decision about commercial software or any other major investment. You need to understand your requirements, understand how the software will meet them, and evaluate your options based on those criteria. Open-source and commercial software have different characteristics that you evaluate, but it is all a matter of understanding your own requirements and then exercising some discipline and rigor in your evaluation process. We also learned that you need to understand your institutional culture and technical expertise and evaluate your own capacity to achieve success. Fundamentally we saw opportunity with open source and unacceptable risk with a proprietary option. We have confidence in mature open-source software, a strong community, and our ability to make our choice successful.

KU: What was it that you and the evaluation team really liked about Moodle?

RS: First, it is important to recognize that there are things that we liked about a number of open-source applications including Sakai, and there are things that we saw as disadvantages with Moodle. On the aggregate through, we felt that Moodle was a better choice for us and how we want to leverage the benefits of open source and the community that surrounds a project. We really liked the fact that Moodle was a mature project with a robust community and is a richly featured application. We decided that Moodle could quickly meet many of our teaching, learning, and collaboration needs in its current form and would likely be adopted reasonably quickly by our faculty. We also liked the Moodle community, which functions in part as an established hierarchy, similar to Linux, with the core design group identifying priorities based on suggestions for changes through informal discussion and community contributions. It is active, responsive, and robust. An overview of some of the benefits identified by the evaluation team include rich and stable functionality in the tools most commonly used and valued by instructors, a rich set of administrator tools and user documentation, and a community that has a proven track record of timely bug fixes and development of new features. In addition, UCLA has some experience with Moodle with at least three UCLA units already using it for instruction.

The Future of Open Source Software in Higher Education and of Moodle

KU: Whenever we select critical organization-level software we are thinking about medium- to long-term viability of the technology, organizational costs, lock-in, and other factors that we hope will position us well. With this in mind, where do you see open-source learning-management systems generally and Moodle specifically in five years?

RS: Our choice was focused on selecting the best launching platform for developing a robust environment to support teaching, learning, and collaboration. From what we could directly evaluate and what we could learn from others, Moodle’s progress over the past five years indicated that it will remain a stable and responsive technology platform that tracks (and in some cases) leads this application space. For example, new tools appear rapidly; standards are implemented; accessibility, pedagogy, and end-user experience drives design; and it has a global vision and commitment to global education. Our expectation and our intention with a dual focus on interoperability is not that the Sakais and Moodles will merge, but rather that the functionality we need will be best met by combining the best of breed across this application space.

KU: What about other proprietary systems?

RS: It is encouraging to see the engagement of proprietary solutions with initiatives focused on the development and (true) implementation of standards, open API definitions, and an architecture that enables a mix and match of tools.

Experience Sharing

KU: During my last five positions (prior to my current role at Penn State), I was involved with an LMS selection process. I know that there are many institutions considering evaluation processes right now. Do you have any advice for other institutions and colleagues that are contemplating a new LMS?

RS: Think beyond LMS/CMS—think about the faculty experience and the student experience. Understand your faculty-driven usage requirements and your long-term architecture. Be brutally honest about your own culture, funding, expertise, and processes. Focus on the significant differences, particularly those that will be difficult for you to influence, compensate for, or fix. Be prepared to invest fully in making your decision successful.

KU: What were one or two of the big lessons that you and your team learned during the process?

RS: Ask your faculty to drive the process with usage requirements, then ask your IT experts to describe the implementation of those requirements. Bring in some colleagues from peer institutions to help by asking tough questions and providing a different viewpoint. Give your faculty the information they need to make a sound decision. Make your decision a successful one.

Concluding Remarks

RS: It’s an old saw, but is once again evident in our experience—the process has been at least as important as the decisions. By the time we reached a decision, we had a community that had built some level of common understanding of why this mattered and what we could achieve together. There are many people I could name as pivotal to the work, beginning with the faculty on the FCET, the participants (and for the staff, their supervisors!) in all of the workgroups and subgroups, the institutions who spent time helping us with the assessment by freely sharing information, and our executive sponsors who continue to advocate for institutional support. We have a long road ahead of us and already another fine group shepherding the process of implementing UCLA’s first CCLE. To stay tuned, visit http://www.oit.ucla.edu/ccle.

Thank You

Ruth, first thank you for the time that you put into this interview, your thoughtful responses, and your willingness to share your experiences. I also want to thank Heather Chakiris, who leads the World Campus Advising team, for reviewing the text for clarity. I also want to invite comments and questions to this posting. Ruth has generously agreed to follow this posting and to respond to questions and comments posed as comments to this post.

Please feel free to comment on this posting and ask questions of Ruth.

Posted: Monday, March 12th, 2007 at 3:54 am
Filed under: OSS and OER in Education Series
Join in: comment | trackback

Tags: OSS and OER in Education Series

Add, bookmark, share, etc.: RSS 2.0 | del.icio.us | Digg