Elizabeth Wallace

We are about to launch the Spring 2006 semester at SFU using WebCT Version 4.1 but as soon as we're underway, we'll need to start planning the summer roll-out of Version 6.0.

There will need to be training sessions for instructors and TAs, and this is the time to ask everyone involved to let us know what kind of workshops you would like to attend. Use of tools, such as the combined Chat and Whiteboard Tool? How to write web content that works?  Seminars on the methodology behind assessment, and how the WebCT tools support various philosophies?

You are invited to post messages here that will help us with the planning. Input from colleagues in other institutions who are rolling out CE6 are very welcome.

Beginning in November, 2005, I facilitated a two-week, online seminar in SCoPE. Many contributors posted their views on Learning Management Systems. We began by explaining our reaction to the news from WebCT and Blackboard that they were going to join forces, and then we branched into discussion of Open Source platforms, and Moodle in particular.

Although that seminar has finished, it will be stored in the SCoPE archives, and accessible for anyone who is interested in the views expressed.  However, since the faculty, staff and administrators at SFU are intensely concerned about issues related to the choice of LMS, and engage in ongoing dialogue about educational technologies, it is appropriate to continue the conversation here.

We hope that this forum will not be used only by SFU affiliates. The input of our colleagues across BC and Canada is welcomed, and we invite contributions from the international community of educators.

At SFU, currently, a number of committees are considering whether WebCT is an appropriate platform for faculty and students, and also weighing the benefits of Moodle, Sakai and other platforms.  Although many of us who are engaging in this discussion may not be decision-makers, we can present ideas and information here that will inform the decisions. It's hoped that committee members will take part in the exchanges and find them useful.

Another topic in the list invites comment on the practical use of WebCT @ SFU, and is particularly intended for users who have questions, concerns, problems and ideas related to that platform. But here, lets begin with considering what it is we are looking for in any Learning Management System we might choose. What questions do we need to ask?

It?s the last day of our two week seminar. Thanks go to all the people who have contributed to our discussion, and have helped to illuminate the issues surrounding the WebCT/Blackboard event. Your thoughtful, informed postings have taken us beyond opinion on those two proprietary LMSs, into the world of Open Source and the pros and cons of Moodling at an institution-wide level.

We have just scratched the surface. However, we have raised our voices in concert with others, worldwide, who feel passionately about teaching and learning with technologies. As I wind up my moderator role, I?d like to direct you to the site maintained by Stephen Downes which has been recommended by Cindy Xin. She calls it a ?one stop source? and you can read commentaries by a Who?s Who of activists in the field. Their views will provide a wider perspective than we have been able to manage in our brief time together.

If you have final words for the people you have met in the seminar, please post them here in the next day or so. After that, our discussions will be archived on the SCoPE site and will be available as a resource, but no longer open for additional postings. I?d like to close by sending my thanks to the LIDC staff (Jason, Trevor, Danny and Ben, in particular) who keep SCoPE online and interactive, and to Sylvia Currie our remarkable SCoPE Co-ordinator who is already planning upcoming events. Keep watching for news from her.

But this is not the end of our discussion. At SFU, we are continuing to debate issues and consider our options, and you are all invited to join us in the SFU Special Interest Group (SIG) forum. More and more faculty and staff from SFU are contributing to SCoPE, and we value input from our international colleagues. Let?s engage in vigorous debate as future issues emerge.

Another thread has emerged through dicussion of Open Source vs WebCT/Blackboard. (And let me immediately acknowledge all the contributors who have said that it needn't be either or or, and have pointed out that many institutions support more than one platform.)

Comments are being made about how important it is to have the faculty involved in discussion about the teaching learning environment, and sitting at the table when the question of platforms is settled.

David laments the paucity of discussion among faculty members and points out that the main thrust is: to get the course mounted and the faculty member(s) comfortable with the LMS navigation and administrative features.

Corrie states: Few institutions have a committment to pedagogical innovation.  Most faculty simply teach the way they were taught, and have no incentive to change.  I mean that quite literally.  There is usually absolutely no incentive in the form of release time, extra pay, decreased duties, etc. to take on the additional cognitive load of learning and trying out a new strategy, much less a whole new way of teaching.

Andrew maintains: We need such a [pedagogical] focus in our discussion of online educational environments and this requires faculty input, faculty input not just about the matters of most concern to administrators and computer center personnel but to teachers and students. Of course, if faculty don't rise to the occasion it is up to others to make decisions for them. (And faculty have certainly been known to disappear just when you need them!) But they should be included and if necessary prodded to participate in the discussion in terms of their own concerns.

It's no secret that faculty across institutions claim they are not consulted about LMS issues. But it's also widely apparent that few faculty members turn up when meetings are held to discuss the use of educational technology.  This leaves administrators either making decisions they know will be challenged over the lack of faculty input, or remaining indecisive because they are afraid of a faculty backlash.

So perhaps there is an argument that educators who are not actually teaching (and there are many) should be entrusted to make decisions about an LMS, regardless of how many faculty members want to be involved, or not. Shouldn't educational leaders be empowered to lead, and trusted to take into account the best interests of students and faculty? Would the sky fall if an administrator just made a decision based on the most effective use of resources? Does faculty input really make a difference? 

Anyone who is looking for an excuse to visit the emerging new campus of SFU in Surrey need look no further. Larry Rosen is making a presentation on:

The Law of Open Software: Copyrights, Patents and All That.

Thurs. Dec. 8th , 3:30 p.m.

Lecture Theatre, Room 2600, SFU Surrey.

Information from Daniela: drelja@sfu.ca

Larry Rosen is the author of Open Source Licensing: Software Freedom and Intellectual Property Law.