DCU and Moodle: The story so far …

1. DCU and Moodle: The story so far … Denis Cahalane Barry McMullin Morag Munro UCD, 21 July 2005

2. Outline • Background:VLEs/e-learning at DCU • Why DCU decided to choose a new VLE • What we wanted from a VLE platform • How we went about selecting a platform • Why we chose the platform we did (Moodle) • Current Moodle use at DCU • Demo • Technical implications • What we have learned

3. VLEs/e-learning at DCU Pilot initiatives prior to Moodle deployment in 2003 : • 1999 - 2001: TopClass VLE • 2001 - 2003: WebCT VLE • Custom VLE-like systems: RACeE • Portal pages, mailing lists, web pages: static, interactive

4. Options • Commitment to a commercial, closed source VLE (WebCT) • Customise in-house tools to provide VLE functionality • Open source VLE

5. Closed vs. Open Source • Commercial software is “closed source”: the source code is generally unavailable to the users of the product. • Open source software is developed as a public collaboration: the source code is freely available for users to modify and improve (Under the terms of the GNU General Public License). http://www.opensource.org/

6. What did we want from a VLE? • Aligned with strategic aspirations • Technically viable, scalable • Support various pedagogical models • Intuitive • Functionality • Accessible

7. Customise in-house tools? Advantages of a VLE over in-house solutions: • Avoid reinventing the wheel • Wider functionality • Integrated, secure access • Collaboration

8. Open or closed source? • Strategic aspirations: development platform • Avoid vendor “lock-in” • Integration with other systems • Open source not a cost saving device (but perhaps would allow us to apply limited resources in more strategic ways)

9. Evaluation: Open source candidates

10. ?

11. Evaluation process (1) Evaluated candidates according to: • Functionality • Usability • Pedagogy • Accessibility • Technical viability and scalability • Existing user community • Projected longevity

12. Evaluation process (1) Evaluated candidates according to: • Functionality • Usability • Pedagogy • Accessibility • Technical viability and scalability • Existing user community • Projected longevity

13. Evaluation process (2) • VLE users group: • WebCT users • Staff using custom solutions • Those interested in using a VLE • Forum • Individual consultations • Demo installations

14. Why Moodle? • Intuitive and user-friendly • Feature rich • Social constructivist underpinning • Supports various delivery models • Large user community • Technically robust • Technical development framework

15. Risks • Some functional limitations • Scalability: No large-scale deployments • Only room for 1-2 real open source contenders: would Moodle survive? • Migration of existing users • Limited technical support

16. Moodle use in DCU: 2004/5 • 14000 users • 3400 courses • 560 active modular courses • 50 active non-modular courses • 4000 logged in each week • 800 - 1200 discussion posts per week

17. Moodle use in DCU • Programme/module delivery and support: • Distance courses: Oscail, Physics, Mechanical Engineering, SALIS • Blended learning • Supplementary materials • Thesis support, group projects • Support units: Careers service, Library etc.

18. Moodle use in DCU • Staff: • School/Unit discussions/resource sharing • Committees • Working groups • External collaborations

19. Moodle use in DCU • Second-level students: • CTYI • Science Olympiad • ComputeTY

20. Moodle use in DCU • Some developmental projects: • European Language Portfolio (ELP) • Student study planner • Giving a voice to Moodle • Groups extension • Gaeilge translation

21. Usage by activity type

22. Training and support • Face-to-face: • Introductory workshops • Advanced workshops • Specialist workshops: Groups, quizzes, Wiki etc • Online training: • Self-paced online course • Four week online tutoring course • Telephone/email/face-to-face support

23. Demo http://moodle.dcu.ie

24. Platform • Dell Poweredge 2650, 2*2.8GHz CPU, 2GB ram, 350 GB disk • Redhat Linux AS 3.0, Mysql, Php • Raid 5 disk • Second identical server

25. Backup • Nightly zip of all courses • Nightly Mysql dump of database • Nightly tape dump to Veritas NetBackup • Nightly copy to second server

26. Instances on server two • Copy of last night’s database • Testsite – e.g. groups • Latest version – nightly download • 2004/2005 Modules

27. Support • www.moodle.org • Bug Tracker • Paid support - $2000 per annum

28. Integration with DCU systems (1) • Ldap authentication to Novell eDirectory • Single sign-on?

29. Integration with DCU systems (2) • Autocreated 3000 courses • Auto-assign teachers

30. Integration with DCU systems (3) • Nightly registration of students • Nightly enrolment of students in modules

31. Risks revisited • Some functional limitations • Scalability: No large-scale deployments • Only room for 1-2 real open source contenders: would Moodle survive? • Migration of existing users • Limited technical support

32. What have we learned? • Select the VLE that suits your institution • Engage end users in the decision-making process • Flexibility of open source has advantages and disadvantages • Employing an open source VLE as a development platform requires a support framework

33. Questions? ?