Don't copy any of those former systems do. As a student, I have a great disdain for webct, moodle, and the ilk.
These are the key features from a students perspective. 1. Time spent on it. I want to spend as little time as possible on the site so I can get back to being lazy. All I care about is A) What assignments have I not done, and B) what is the last possible moment I could finish them. 2. Cross-platform. I actually had to purchase and install windows just so I could use IE 5 to check my assignments and turn them in. The horror! 3. Messages to email box (assignment alerts would be nice too). I don't want to have to communicate with my professor through a poorly implemented email messaging system. Allow me to use my actual email to communicate with my professor. I am thinking of something similar to Disqus that allows you to reply to threads as a email reply. -- Thadeus On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Jason Brower <encomp...@gmail.com> wrote: > Now that I think of it, your right, these are things that my teachers have > complained about too. :D > > On 09/28/2010 06:26 PM, mdipierro wrote: >> >> I am the chair of a a university committee in charge of evaluating >> LMS. We looked at many. >> >> The major players are: >> >> - Blackbard (BB) >> - Desire2Learn (D2L) >> - Moodle (free) >> >> BB acquired webct (and killed it), Angel (excellent system, will kill >> it too), Wimba (video chat, thus cutting D2L out) and sued D2L (lost). >> Moodle is very poor in comparison to BB and D2L but free. It is >> written in PHP and people hacked into it during the demo. >> >> BB and D2L cost $100,000+ year in license (not including hosting) to a >> medium size university in their base configuration. >> The base configuration DOES NOT include: >> - CMS >> - Wiki/Blogging system >> - Video confrencing >> - Storage for large files and media streaming capability >> >> All the existing LMS have a basic desin flaw. The content belongs to a >> course not the author. That means that if the author is an instructor >> who uses the same content in multiple courses, the content has to be >> replicated. At best they offer tools to replicate content and charge >> an arm and a leg for this. >> >> Content (files, assignments, wikis, blogs, videos, etc.) should belong >> to whoever created it. Courses should just contain people (not stuff). >> Stuff is made available to courses. the course opening page itself >> should be a wiki page made available to the members (the students). >> Groups should have a hierarchy. >> Massimo >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sep 28, 9:39 am, Richard Vézina<ml.richard.vez...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> It is a big project and most university are already involved with vendor >>> like WebCT or other open source project... >>> >>> I think the inertia force will be really big... >>> >>> But, it have been demonstrated that the projects already available are >>> difficult to make evolved... So, web2py could offer an easily evolving >>> environnement of learning management system. >>> >>> With a lite learning management system you could targetted the market of >>> business. >>> >>> Richard >>> >>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 10:01 AM, mdipierro<mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Once again... who here is interested in a web2py based Learning >>>> Management system? >>>> What features would you like to see? >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Massimo >>>> >>> >>> > >
