"Finally, a free lunch: The benefits of an open source VLE" - Report on Oxford's Use of Boddington. http://www.oucs.ox.ac.uk/ltg/vle/OpensourceVLE.doc
Worth a read, in part because of it's brevity, this report
synopsizes Oxford University's experiences over the past 4 years in
adopting the open source Bodington
system. The report points out that the system was chosen largely
because it was a nice fit "in terms of [the] joint honours and open
access policy" at Oxford. (Actually, I wished they'd made more of this
point; while the use they are putting their CMS to seems maybe a bit
staid, they chose a CMS that was appropriate for the uses they wanted, instead of a system that could enable the moon but then get used as a glorified filing cabinet.)
But the argument that the system has largely been "free" to
implement is too cute by half. The argument goes that while the system
has cost approximately £180k per year in support staff and other costs,
these have been largely covered by grants and other funds that were
received precisely because of the University's involvement with this
open source project. Some of this effect is valid more widely and
deserves accounting for, but there's also clearly an early- or
first-mover advantage in this regard, and the 100th or 1000th adopter
would not be facing the same situation (but to be fair, nor might they
be facing they same costs, as the product improved). The author
acknowledges as much but seems to feel the situation will endure:
Can this be sustained? We certainly feel we can cover from
internal resources the maintenance of the VLE in its current state but
it could be argued that the development of the product may be in
jeopardy as external funds become more scarce or directed to other
areas. Yet there is no sign of the latter and indeed the need to
develop learning systems in a framework based around open standards is
being emphasised more and more.
If this is the case in the U.K., good for them. It doesn't feel
quite the same in either Canada or the U.S. but perhaps I am just not
in touch with the sentiment of the major funders. In any case, the
document is a good read and their choices I think sound regardless of
the stirring of the pot with the claim of 'free lunches.' - SWL [EdTechPost]
7:25:02 PM  Google It!.
|
|
