What I’d like, is a course format that borrowed a little from the Chrome nav to make it easier for students to move to the next topic once they’ve finished with what is on the page.  I’m not talking tabs, but rather a more Book-like navigation where each Topic is a page and they are arranged linearly (as many courses usually are).

I think it could easily be done using existing screen real estate in a Moodle course.  Here’s a mockup course shown with the grey margins on either side of the topic.  As you can see, the course summary is maintained on all pages and the topics are collapsed in order to display only 1 at a time.

Here’s a mockup with Arrows added:

And clicking on the arrow would return the next Topic area (see below):

Anyone else want something like this?  I realize you can hack this in by using static links to the individual course pages, but I would rather it be created dynamically and easily across a site.  I’d even be willing to donate to the cause/work order for its development (hint hint developers).  It’d also be nice to nix the #s placed to the left of each topic in that grey area.

Until now, course creation and content management processes for Blackboard and Moodle were similar: click intensive, minimal drag and drop, prone to page loads, etc.  Themes for Blackboard were far behind the flexibility that Moodle has offered historically (not counting the numerous non-standard themes available).  With SP8 the course creation and course aesthetic for Blackboard has been turned on its head,

• pervasive drag and drop
• obvious editing features
• rollover editing
• simplified tabs
• customize-able CSS (links, font change with themes)
• most features, menus are just 1 click away

The emphasis on fewer clicks, easier editing and improved aesthetics is obvious from the first glance.  Other Learning Management Systems should take note that Blackboard will not go quietly.  If you’re interested in checking out some of the Blackboard features (either as comparison or for ideas in a Moodle course) check out CourseSites.com which has some of Blackboard’s course innovations available already (themes and course layouts/types to name two).

My personal opinion about any specific Learning Management Systems is driven by two things: 1 the ability to control/customize the system to do what is necessary and 2 the availability of content and resources that can be integrated into said LMS.  Those two driving forces really open the door to utilize any learning management system (and deep down if you really look they all provide the same basic tool set and could each be customized to mimic one another, Blackboard included).

The most recently released LMSs have embraced a few distinct usability features.  Specifically, they each showcase activity streams, updates, email and text notifications, social network integration.  These are all great ways to make a learning management system sticky, but the real value I think comes from the community and here’s why:

• A community of developers provides additional LMS capacity and capability (and/or the wherewithal to contract your own customizations)
• A community of practitioners have a depth and wealth of knowledge on how to take X and delivery Y
• A community of users equates to a worldwide repository of content for all levels, subjects and uses

I’m certain that each new learning management system offers something novel and great to its growing user-base.  I’ve had a chance to try each one or at least get an in-depth view through a webinar or online tutorials and each works to put the learner central to the experience.  While social is the buzzword, learning-centered is still the most important feature and I think that Moodle is the leader by miles.  As it goes with LMSs though, it only achieves this with the right configuration.

Is your Moodle learner centered? How do you ensure that students have a simple and easy interface? What’s your opinion of the other “Social” learning management systems?

The Rubric is available at http://jaredstein.org/cheat/ and you can check out Jared Stein’s Cheatability Factor Presentation at http://jaredstein.org/pres/cheatability/. Mr Stein works for UVU as Director of Instructional Design Services.

What the tool is getting at is the randomness of questions posed to students and what type of opportunities, if any, students have to cheat or collaborate on independent work. While most questions are straightforward there was the occasional curveball like this, “Could students find a paper on the topic just through Google? Or does the paper require individualized selection of topic, interpretation, analysis, and reflection?”  Not quite a yes/no question (but those are exactly the answer choices you have).

I checked out an English Composition course I’ve just finished developing and scored a 64% of 100 (I think higher means less cheatable).  The feedback provided suggested that I focus on the following:

• Don’t keep your gradebook online only; keep a separate copy of student scores is on paper or on your local computer.
• Maintain a high level of instructor presence. Don’t appear to be absent from the course or uninvolved in activities.
• Discourage cheating through your attitude. Carry through with ethical scholarship.
• Use open-ended or “essay” questions in quizzes and exams.
• Always ensure instructor generated load is appropriate for efficient learning at the course level and credit hours.
• Analyze student log and performance stats to look for curiosities and irregularities which may point to cheating or course design flaws.

Which are some solid considerations for an online course.  Is your course cheatable?

The findings were interesting, but I believe say a lot about both the project’s intended scope and the usability of Moodle (which is what specifically they were seeking to shed light on).  The main goal of the research was measuring Perceived usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use (PUEU).

Overall the students found Moodle to be especially useful as a flexible communication tool.  They were undecided on its value to enhance effectiveness and agreed slightly that it helped made design easier.  The majority agreed or strongly agreed that it allowed them to work more quickly.  As a tool students mostly agreed (Agree and Strongly Agree) that Moodle was easy to use, controllable, easy to learn and clear and understandable.  The authors specifically noted that Moodle was chosen because of its help documents, helpful mouse-over text prompts and visual cues (via consistent icons).

METU JFA 2011/2 page 235

To be clear, the goal of the assignment was to allow students to communicate, specifically using the file sharing and commenting tools available in group forums. The design had a limited scope which perhaps influenced the overall Agree/Disagree survey since students were not using the Peer Evaluation tool, were not assessed in any way through Moodle and did not engage any of the many other activities and resources (core or 3rd party) which are available.  That said, it does show that Moodle, even at its basic levels of usage and implementation can be used/leveraged as an effective communications tool and to increase efficiency.

An additional insight was provided which was more qualitative near the end of the article which was the student’s perception of Moodle vs. their in class experience,

A close inspection of the answers to the open questions revealed that MOODLE was regarded as an advantageous tool in collaborative design. The advantages of MOODLE that were perceived by the students focused on the well-established characteristics of web-based education tools such as being free of limitations of physical boundaries and of strict time schedules, sharing projects and ideas easily, and saving time. On the other hand, the main criticism of MOODLE was based on its comparison to face-to-face design communication: some students complained that the design comments that they received through MOODLE might not be as expressive as those that they got through face-to-face communication.

Read the full article here: http://jfa.arch.metu.edu.tr/archive/0258-5316/2011/cilt28/sayi_2/227-241.pdf or find it in the Moodle Buzz article repository: http://moodle.org/mod/data/view.php?d=19&rid=5241.

Moodle AAARRGH! survey for 2012

My wish for 2012?  Better usability through fewer clicks and fields.

Vote for Gavin here: http://edublogawards.com/2011-3/best-ed-tech-resource-sharing-blog-2011/

Vote for Moodle: http://edublogawards.com/2011-3/best-free-web-tool-2011/

Cast your ballot early and often (you can vote for each category once a day per IP address!).

Soon it might be possible to ward off the digital dog eating your homework excuse.

You can checkout the forum discussion here regarding Autosave (and the possibility of working it into Moodle 2.2): http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=191050.

A couple of places I’d like to see it:

• Forums
• when editing resources/activities
• Online text assignments
• Course settings
• Gradebook/Feedback

Always informative and well written, help us put him in the winner’s circle this year to rep’ the Orange M.

Nominations:

• Best ed tech / resource sharing blog: Gavin Henrick’s http://www.somerandomthoughts.com