DRAFT: WSU Learning Management Systems: A Case For Change
Current Situation
The current situation of Learning Management Systems (LMS) at WSU is evolving.
Currently, the Pullman campus uses one LMS, WebCT, while the College of Nursing
and regional campuses uses another, Blackboard Academic Suite. Recently,
Blackboard purchased WebCT and supports two versions of their software, a WebCT
version (Blackboard CE & Vista) and the Blackboard product. The regional campuses,
College of Nursing and Center for Distance and Professional Education (CDPE) run the
original Blackboard on servers based in WSU Spokane. The Center for Teaching,
Learning and Technology (CTLT) at WSU Pullman runs the WebCT version of
Blackboard on servers in Pullman. These two instances of Blackboard have separate
licenses which, combined, will cost the University about $200,000 per year (plus tax).
The combined hardware costs for two instances, plus CDPE’s content management
system, is approximately $50,000. Server hardware amortization also increases the
annual cost. As a general guideline, computing server hardware needs to be replaced
every three to four years.
Based on our experience with Blackboard and Blackboard’s development of one
integrated product (unifying the WebCT and original versions), we can reasonably
predict the following if we continue to use Blackboard:



While Blackboard will be implementing a substantially different version combining
Blackboard Academic Suite with WebCT by early 2009, they will maintain, albeit
with likely reductions in support, the existing versions in 2012. This conversion
will lead to a large and substantial conversion and retraining cost. This
conversion cost will be similar to that of installing a product from a different
vendor.
Blackboard has substantially increased the cost of their licenses. We expect this
trend to continue based upon how much have they raised them in the past
(approximately doubling the cost every two years).
There are only a few vendors authorized by Blackboard for after hours support.
This tight control allows no flexibility in finding cost effective alternatives for after
hours support.
The above mentioned issues prompted our committee to start a search for alternative
LMS solutions. We wished to ensure that, before committing to the new Blackboard
version, there were no alternative solutions that would meet current WSU LMS needs,
enhance our options for improving student online experiences, provide for integration of
new technologies, and might have a more attractive cost picture (including conversion ,
training , and IT costs). As a starting point, we decided to investigate future trends in
the LMS community.
Future Trends
From our own research and in consultation with the Gartner Group (“provides factbased consulting services that help … clients use and manage IT…”), the following
trends are important to consider when looking at an LMS:





Agility – Technologies and expectations for online interactions will continue to
change rapidly. Hence the chosen platform needs to be agile enough to respond
rapidly to these changes. In addition, the technologies used to populate the LMS
with student information and to authenticate users will continue to change. The
LMS must be able to integrate with these other platforms.
Web 2.0 – Faculty and students will demand that online courses incorporate the
latest web-based interactive programs into their courses. The LMS must be able
to handle them effectively.
Flexibility – The LMS must be easy enough to use to encourage technology-shy
faculty and students to use it, but robust enough to engage the technology-savy.
Open Source – Because of an increasing consolidation in the commercial LMS
market and the concomitant monopoly pricing power, there is a strong trend
within academic communities to turn to open-source LMS solutions.
An increasingly complex WSU LMS environment needs simplification– Our
students take courses through DDP, AMS, online, and in-person on a particular
campus – sometimes all in one semester. Our faculty teach via the Distance
Degree Program, via AMS video conferencing, and in-person in on campus
classrooms. Any LMS solution should appear to the user as a single interface.
Options
Keeping in mind the need to move expeditiously because of the Blackboard imposed
time line, the LMS Task Force decided to narrow the options considered to those with
demonstrated success. In addition, we have decided to consider the pros and cons of
both commercial and open-source solutions as well as a secondary option of self
hosting versus hosted solutions. The following products are being considered:




Blackboard
Moodle (open-source)
Sakai (open-source)
Angel (LMS which will be used by all Washington State Community and
Technical Colleges and Washington Online Learning)
Important Considerations
 Assess platforms for environments conductive to student/faculty interaction and
student learning.
 Should we use a Content Management System (CMS) in conjunction with the
LMS? If so, which CMS should be used? Can a CMS already deployed in WSU
meet the needs? Is this the way to answer the need for archival access to
courses?
 Do we host the LMS or do we contract with a third party to host? What are the
benefits and trade-offs of each option?
 How do we best secure the intellectual property of the University, faculty, and
students?
 What type of technical, course design, helpdesk, and pedagogical supports are
needed with each solution? Who should provide each type of support?
 How do we manage the transition in a way that is least disruptive to faculty and
students?



Which solution would provide the best balance between agility and stability?
How should an LMS solution be implemented across the multiple campuses?
What is the cost/benefit analysis for each solution?
As the LMS Task Force undertakes it deliberations, it will be gathering input from a
wide-variety of sources. These will include the faculty, students, and IT staff at each
campus. We will also review reports from other universities who have successfully
implemented various LMS solutions. We will also conduct a review of current LMS
research. The members of the Task Force welcome input and encourage you to
contact us with your comments.
Definitions
LMS, Learning Management System – An LMS is a set of tools, computer software, that
allows users to develop and manage an online class. Blackboard and WebCT are an
LMS-s in use at WSU. We predict that most all classes at WSU will have an online
component that utilizes an LMS.
CMS, Content Management System – A CMS is computer software that is designed to
efficiently store, index, organize, search large amounts of documents. These
“documents” may be web pages, images, audio files, electronic documents, etc.
Open Source – Open source software is software that is not proprietary and whose
license is free. The source code is available for anyone to use, modify, and develop.
Often communities of interest arise around open source programs with community
members contributing to the evolution of the software.
Hosted Solutions – The University would retain all rights to content and would design
and develop courses in-house, but would pay an annual fee to a company which would
provide the hardware, basic software installation, and some technical support.
Members of the LMS Task Force
Tony Wright, Chair, Educational and Public Media, IS, WSU Pullman
Jerry Gordon, Committee Coordinator, Director, Planning and Compliance, IS, WSU
Pullman
Gary Brown, Director, CTLT, Office of Undergraduate Education, WSU Pullman
David Cillay, Associate Dean & Director of Instructional Development and Technology,
CDPE
Karen Diller, Assistant Vice Chancellor of Academic Affairs, WSU Vancouver
Saleh Elgiadi, Director of Academic and Research Technologies, WSU Spokane
Wim Geurden, Director of Information Technology, WSU Vancouver
Larry Hoffman, Director Information Technology Services, WSU Spokane
Aaron Brumbaugh, Media Services Manager, WSU Tri-Cities
Vicki McCracken, Professor, Economic Sciences, WSU Pullman
Alex Merrill, Digital Initiative Librarian, Library Systems, WSU Pullman
LMS Task Force paper.doc 4 September 08