Both Sakai and Moodle are two open-source course management systems that are now installed in a test environment at WOU. The cost of licensing either software package for use at WOU is $0.
The WOU test instance of Sakai can be previewed here. Sakai doesn't seem to differentiate between a student and an instructor, so go ahead and create a course.
The WOU test instance of Moodle can be previewed here. Once you have created an account, contact tdknabe@wou.edu and he will set you up as an instructor.
I would expect that if WOU commits to a non-WebCT solution for the future, there would be a transition period where both products would be in production allowing for sufficient time to transfer courses to the new system.
Additional thoughts on Sakai can be found here.
I will notify you here when both/either product(s) are in a production environment.
Please post your comments and evaluations to this blog.
Hi Bill - thanks for the links and info. My ideas follow:
(1)identify 10 faculty who are using WebCT and use them as a test group for the suggested software. Test the software using an actual classroom scenario for 1-2 terms before full scale implementation.
(2)develop tools / code so that WebCT data bases, classes, content can be exported directly to the new CMS software environment (this could represent a huge amount of work for a faculty member to reconstruct a class from scratch).
(3) I think that open source code is great as long as there is community support / acceptance. If the free code works as well as purchased code, and can be adapted to needed uses with minimal retooling, then we should go for it.
(4) The big question I have: wasn't webCT used for online courses? Can these courses be migrated to the new CMS environment without rebuilding from scratch?
s.t.
Steve just reminded me of a note taken during a conference call with our WebCT representative and technical support:
WOU currently owns WebCT 6.x. WOU is currently running WebCT 4.x. WebCT has a tool that partially supports a full migration from 4.x to 6.x. WebCT stated that despite the migration tool, there would still be substantial work on the part of the faculty member to migrate to the new release.
There are currently no plans to migrate from 4.x to 6.x.
In a seperate call with the WebCT sales representative, when asked about the WebCT/Blackboard merger, she stated that in 4 years there would be a completely new product. In the mean time they would continue to support both products.
Bill--
At the Academic Infrastructure Committee last week, I mentioned I'd be
sending you some links to other OS course software. It's taken a bit, but
here are the links, together with a few observations. These may be things
you already know, but I thought they might be useful.
I started from here . Comments on that article mention Sakai, which you've been investigating; LON-CAPA, a project of Michigan State with National Science Foundation support found here; and Moodle , based in Australia and used worldwide. While they have a lot in common, there are differences. For whatever reason, Sakai especially attracts large universities; Moodle appeals to small schools and to individual departments and programs (possibly less labor-intensive to manage?); LON-CAPA has a mix of big and small.
These, as well as most other such products, both OS and proprietary, are profiled here. The profiles are apparently derived from the publishers' descriptions, not from hands-on use testing, so there is a lot they don't tell, but they give some idea what the developers' priorities are.
Humboldt State, which uses Moodle, has very substantial introductory material on that system for both faculty and students (click the "Login as guest" button). They seem very pleased with having migrated from Blackboard. They provide links to other happy switchers, including George Fox, which is leaving WebCT: .
With any of these systems, we aren't locked to a single source; we can use other materials and software. For instance, MIT is part of the Sakai consortium, but we could use MIT's OpenCourseware with one of the other systems. Moodle makes a point their stuff can be smoothly integrated with universities' own enrollment and records software.
Both LON-CAPA and Moodle seem more concerned about accessibility and browser independence than Sakai, which is targetted at only IE/Win and the Geckos, and only the latest versions, explicitly excluding all versions of Safari, IE/Mac, and Opera. That is, I'm guessing, a result of the way Sakai uses javascript. I found an archived discussion at the Sakai site about the accessibility implications of javascript--the focus was almost entirely legal: whether their use of javascript would be considered compliant under WCAG 2 when that reaches final form. The difficulties it might pose for students whose browsers or adaptive devices don't work well with javascript didn't get much attention (or, so far as I could tell in a fast look, testing). (I searched for "Lynx" on the Sakai site and got no hits.) By contrast, LON-CAPA and Moodle can drop into a text-only mode for legacy browsers as well as for text browsers like Lynx. These systems use javascript to create pop-ups, for instance, but they provide simple workarounds. Moodle is supposed to work with any browser that can handle HTML 3 or better.
It would probably be a good thing to get the Office for Students with Disabilities into the discussion fairly early in looking at anything we might use.
Hope this is some help.
Sincerely,
Richard Corning