Running Head: MOODLE SERVER PROPOSAL
Moodle Server Proposal
Higher Colleges of Technology Foundations English Program
E-Portfolio Assignment # 2
Elizabeth Danielle Norris
University of British Columbia
ETEC 565A Section 66C
Submitted to: John P. Egan
June 12, 2011
MOODLE SERVER PROPOSAL
Introduction
The Foundations English Program (FEP) at the Higher Colleges of Technology (HCT)
has used Learning Management Systems (LMS) but has yet to make use of an open source LMS.
Unlike HCT’s current LMS, Blackboard Vista (BBVista), open source software such as Moodle
is free with no licence restriction. I believe that Moodle is the way forward for the FEP. This
proposal gives a brief overview of what Moodle is and how it can benefit FEP faculty and
students. It also includes a comparison of Moodle to Blackboard Vista. Finally, it outlines the
resources required for adopting Moodle.
Why Use Moodle for Foundations English?
Moodle is grounded on constructivist theory which emphasises student interaction to
build shared knowledge. Constructivism sees learning as a fluid process that engages learners in
reflective dialogue. Language learning, as with most learning, needs to be a social process – a
process made more effective through interactions with others. Students will also need more
language practice to meet the new IELTS Band 5 entrance requirements.
Moodle is an excellent platform for engaging students in communicative language
learning both independently and in class and is favoured among the FEP faculty over BBVista
(see Appendix A, LMS Evaluation Rubric). Many of Moodle’s features support the
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) approach adopted by the FEP faculty. CLT
emphasizes learner autonomy, the social nature of learning, curricular integration, focus on
meaning, diversity, thinking skills, alternative assessment, and teachers as learners (Jacobs &
Farrell, 2003).
MOODLE SERVER PROPOSAL
Learner Autonomy. Given that constructivism focuses less on direct knowledge transmission
and more on the process of constructing, reorganizing and sharing knowledge, students need to
understand how to manage their own learning (Reinders, 2010). Moodle gives students more
flexibility in customising their learning experience by creating avatars; posting messages;
embedding links, videos, audio files, and images; completing surveys; customizing wikis;
customising their homepage; peer reviewing assignments, and reflecting through blogs, chats,
and journals. The Lolipop ELP add-on allows students to create an online portfolio to self-assess
their language ability in line with the Common European Framework (Lolipop, 2010).
Social Nature of Learning. Learning is a social process. Moodle modules afford interaction
through chat, discussion forums, and wikis. Students can also collaborate on their writing
through the Activity, Assignment and Workshop modules.
Curricular Integration. Students can engage in project work that links to their other courses.
Hyperlinks and the Wiki module can also connect FEP students to the Bachelor of Engineering,
IT and Business program sites. WebQuest add-ons are also available - a favourite among
language teachers to help students improve their critical evaluation skills.
Focus on Meaning. Moodle simplifies the integration of authentic resources and activities.
“Research from cognitive psychology tells us that we learn best when we connect and store
information in meaningful chunks” (Jacobs & Farrell, 2003, p.15). Moodle gives students more
flexibility in their interactions which provides more opportunities to engage in authentic and
MOODLE SERVER PROPOSAL
meaningful language practice through task-based learning projects, journal writing, chat,
discussions, and e-mailing.
Diversity. All students are diverse in their learning styles, learning needs, commitment to other
courses, jobs, and family. Moodle compliments students’ diversity by enabling independent
study at students’ own pace. Furthermore, students can be grouped according to language levels
and needs. Moodle also allows students to collaboratively and/or individually build a glossary.
Autolinking allows students to look up difficult words from a reading text in the glossary.
Convenient access to the glossary within the course eliminates the need for the external
vocabulary records currently in use. Finally, the Journal module allows students to reflect and
share ideas on how to develop as learners.
Thinking Skills. To develop critical thinking skills, students need access to authentic and
motivating resources and activities that allow them to analyse, synthesize and evaluate problems
and solutions. Moodle affords this through discussions; polls; questionnaires; prediction,
comprehension and extended reading activities; read alouds; RSS feeds; timed reading; Moodle
web pages; WebQuests; and a built-in glossary. With these resources, teachers develop students’
critical thinking by opening the classroom to the outside world to create meaningful connections
to real-world problems and solutions.
Alternative Assessment. Assessing a learner’s language ability ought to include fluency, social
appropriacy and thinking, not accuracy alone (Jacobs & Farrell, 2003). Moodle affords
opportunities to test students’ accuracy yet includes numerous alternative assessment tools. FEP
MOODLE SERVER PROPOSAL
students have been expected to maintain a (paper-based) reading and writing portfolio. Moodle’s
Journal, Online Text Assignment and Portfolio modules can make learning a more open process
where students have input on how they are assessed. This can help promote independent
learning and can make learning more purposeful (Jacobs and Farrell, 2003).
Teachers as Co-learners. In CLT, the teacher is viewed as a facilitator who is learning along
with the students. “Because the world is complex and constantly changing, lifelong learning is
necessary. Teachers must take part in this never-ending quest and, indeed, model this process for
their students” (Jacobs & Farrell, 2003, p.21). Moodle helps facilitate the learning process for
both teachers and students and helps teachers improve future courses with the Workshop and
Questionnaire modules. Teachers can also gain useful data on course effectiveness by tracking
how much time students spend using various features.
Required Resources. The system requirements for a Moodle server can be found on the
Installing Moodle page of Moodle.org. The hardware and software requirements are beyond my
realm of expertise though I am certain HCT’s server has the capacity to host the Moodle
platform alongside the network currently serving the BBVista platform.
Personnel requirements include:

one or more administrators from IT and Ed Tech services to assist the FEP
o oversee the initial installation and migration of BBVista to Moodle
o maintain hardware and software
o supervise two to five IT/Ed Tech support staff (depending on the FEP team)
MOODLE SERVER PROPOSAL
o employ volunteer IT students to assist the IT and Ed Tech departments to reduce
costs
Budget
The budget requirements in Appendix B are based on Bates and Poole (2003)
SECTIONS framework for selecting and using technology.
MOODLE SERVER PROPOSAL
References
Bates, A.W. & Poole, G. (2003). Chapter 4: A Framework for Selecting and Using Technology.
In Effective Teaching with Technology in Higher Education: Foundations for Success.
(pp. 77-105). San Francisco: Jossey Bass Publishers.
Boon, S., Courey, B., Hawkins-Bogle, S., Norris, E.D., & Osborne, S. (2011). Our Group’s
Rubric: Working Group 2 – SIDES Program Learning Platform Evaluation Rubric.
Message posted to
https://www.vista.ubc.ca/webct/urw/lc5620062503281.tp5620062526281/newMessageTh
read.dowebct?discussionaction=viewMessage&messageid=6320303528281&topicid=56
20062901281&refreshPage=false&sourcePage=
DELTA | LMS Services - ReVAMP. DELTA | Distance Education and Learning Technology
Applications. Retrieved from http://delta.ncsu.edu/lms_services/revamp/.
Elias, T. (2010). Universal Instructional Design Principles for Moodle. International Review of
Research in Open and Distance Learning, 11(2), 110-124. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Jacobs, G.M. & Farrell, T. S. C. (2003). Understanding and implementing the Clt
`(communicative language teaching) paradigm. RELC Journal: a Journal of language
teaching and research, 34(1), 5-30. Retrieved from
http://rel.sagepub.com/content/34/1/5.refs.
Installing Moodle. Moodle.org: Open-source Community-based Tools for Learning.
Retrieved from http://docs.moodle.org/20/en/Installing_Moodle
Lolipop. Language On-Line Portfolio Project (LOLIPOP). Lolipop ELP - Online Language
Portfolio. Retrieved from http://www.lolipop-portfolio.eu/.
Moodle.org: About. Moodle.org: Open-source Community-based Tools for Learning. Retrieved
MOODLE SERVER PROPOSAL
from http://moodle.org/about/.
Reinders, H. (2010). Towards a Classroom Pedagogy for Learner Autonomy: A Framework of
Independent Language Learning Skills. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 35(5),
40-55. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
MOODLE SERVER PROPOSAL
Appendix A
Below are the average responses of 20 FEP faculty members at the Al Ain campuses of HCT
(rounded to the nearest whole number).
____________________________________________________________________________
Complete the following LMS Evaluation Rubric using the following scale:
1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neither Agree Nor Disagree
4 = Agree
LEARNING MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
STUDENTS
Accessibility:
 Allows for access via low bandwidth/slow internet connectivity
 MAC/PC compatible/mobile compatible
 Addresses all levels of computer literacy
 User-friendly and caters to different learning styles
Skill Set:

Rate as appropriate for a novice, intermediate or advanced (N, I
or A) online learner. 

Requires a basic level of skills (i.e. clicking, dragging,
internet browsing, word processing)

Requires more advanced skill sets (i.e. html)
EASE OF USE
 Relative ease of use for teachers (i.e. creating new assignments)
 Viability of online tutorials to assist those with limited computer
experience
 User friendliness of features
Intuitiveness:
 Intuitive for students to use
 Intuitive interface / design
 Intuitive use of buttons, tabs, icons, etc. for navigation
 Internal links
 External links open in new windows/tabs
Tech Support:
 Online help available
 Live (synchronous) online help via voice and/or text chat
 FAQs page
 Database of topics commonly needing help
 Reliable
 Positive user reviews
5 = Strongly Agree
Moodle
BBVista
3
5
5
4
3
5
4
3
I
I
5
5
5
Moodle
3
3
BBVista
4
5
3
4
4
4
3
4
5
3
3
4
4
4
3
5
5
4
4
3
3
3
4
4
4
MOODLE SERVER PROPOSAL

Updated versions based on user feedback
COSTS

5
Moodle
n/a
4
BBVista
24,000
Upfront costs (cost for system in UAE Dirhams amount)
(Open
Source)
 Open Source
 Free to download
 Hidden costs (i.e. costs for hosting, IT support, etc.)
TEACHING AND LEARNING
 Supports diversity of learning (i.e. different learning styles,
learner independence)
 Supports a variety of instructional strategies (i.e. Import/embed
videos, jpegs, outside documents be imported)
 Statistics tracking (i.e. # of visits, folders accessed, time spent,
page views, comparisons charts of students)
INTERACTIVITY
Supports Collaboration with:
 Chat rooms
 Shared documents
 Wikis
 Asynchronous tools (i.e. discussion threads, forums)
 Internal mail
 Blogs
 Collaborative & individual glossaries
 Compatible with Wimba (and other commercial LMSs)
 Collaborative & individual journals
Supports Multimedia:
 Audio
 Video
 Text
 Animations
 Graphics
Allows for:
 Splashpage
 Main page with navigation to components, modules,
collaborative software, etc
 Embedding and viewing of learning goals and objectives (AFL)
 Pop-up windows with thinking and/or reflective writing prompts
(AFL)
 Calendar reminders
 Announcement feature (pop-up)
 Calendar (public and private)
 Gradebook
 Assignment dropbox
5
5
5
Moodle
1
1
5
BBVista
5
4
4
3
4
3
Moodle
BBVista
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
5
Moodle
5
5
5
4
4
Moodle
5
5
1
1
5
5
3
1
4
3
BBVista
4
4
5
3
3
BBVista
1
5
4
5
5
5
3
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
(per
campus)
MOODLE SERVER PROPOSAL





Secure assessment feature (i.e. quizzes, exams)
Lockdown browser compatible (i.e. Respondus)
Compatible with citation checker (i.e. Turnitin)
Descriptive feedback (i.e. message tools)
Access to other teacher users (i.e. Forums, repository, blogs,
etc.)
 Student/teacher/admin view of platform
 Customizable view (i.e. colour schemes, attachments,
add/remove features, etc.)
Security Options:
 Security and Secure Administration Features
 Secure login
 Password authentication/password requirements
 Privacy/security for gradebook, student enrolment
 Parent Portal
ORGANIZATIONAL ISSUES
 Barriers exist for the implementation of this technology
 If so, specify (i.e. bandwidth, district support, tech support,
funding, etc.)
 Meets the organizational requirements (e.g., required learning
outcomes, privacy issues, district policies, etc.)
NOVELTY
 Newly available
 Tested
 Reputable company/organization
SPEED
 Large bandwidth required

features, applications, multimedia, etc function properly
with dial up connections
 Courses be mounted quickly (i.e. in real time)
 Resources and applications can be modified quickly (i.e. in real
time)
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
3
5
3
5
5
5
3
Moodle
4
5
5
5
5
Moodle
1
BBVista
4
5
5
5
1
BBVista
2
n/a
n/a
4
4
Moodle
5
5
5
Moodle
3
BBVista
4
5
5
BBVista
3
3
4
5
5
5
5
Boon, Courey, Hawkins-Bogle, Norris & Osborne (2011) based on Bates and Poole (2003)
SECTIONS framework for selecting and using technology.
MOODLE SERVER PROPOSAL
Appendix B
Moodle Budget Requirements for the Higher Colleges of Technology Foundations English
Program.
Requirement
1
2
3
4
Licensing equipment / software
Server equipment
Copyright clearance and permissions (royalty
payments / tracking down copyright holder)
Photocopying / printing (educational materials,
handouts, articles) per year
5
Outside Moodle specialists
Contract instructors/ adjuncts (to assist with
6
delivery of platform)
Administrator (1 per department per year in UAE
7
dirhams)
IT Support (average 3 per department per year in
8
UAE dirhams)
Ed Tech support (1 per department per year in UAE
9
dirhams)
Teacher time:
10
11
 Professional Development (per teacher per
semester in UAE dirhams)
 preparation of technology based materials
 lost research time
 lost public service time
 lost institutional administration time
Cost per student (based on 1:20 teacher/student
15
ratio over 5 year period in UAE dirhams)
12
13
14
n/a
n/a
Institutional
Cost
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Minimal (all
educational
materials online)
n/a (in house)
Minimal (all
educational
materials online)
n/a (in house)
n/a (in house)
n/a (in house)
240,000 dhs
(in-house)
45,000 dhs
(in-house)
240,000 dhs
(in-house)
3,360,000 dhs
(in-house)
630,000 dhs
(in-house)
3,360,000 dhs
(in-house)
750 dhs
n/a
n/a (part of
teachers’ nonteaching hours)
high (initially)
high (initially)
high (initially)
n/a (part of
teachers’ nonteaching hours)
high (initially)
high (initially)
high (initially)
150 dhs
n/a
Campus Cost
Based on Bates and Poole (2003) SECTIONS framework for selecting and using technology.