Comments on The iPad and the LMS

• Thank for Thoughts of Next
• Posted by David Wright , Provost at Indiana Wesleyan University on March 19, 2010 at 7:15am EDT

• Thank you for a concise and informative article. We've been considering whether and how to use the IPad for our 15,000 or so students (adults and traditional). We currently distribute laptop computers to a large number of our business students, and we have about 5000 online degree seeking students using Blackboard. It seems clear to us that both of these systems still work but are becoming antiquated. Perhaps the IPad-based LMS you describe will be part of our answer. It certainly will be part of our exploration in the coming months. I'm not as sanguine as you are about the proprietary ecosystem. That is a serious issue once an institution makes a wholesale commitment to an enterprise solution. But I think you are right on target in locating the more intractable issues within our own higher education practices, and our "uneasy dance" with copyright law.

• A simpler (and cheaper) solution
• Posted by J.P. Craig , Lecturer at University of Tennessee on March 19, 2010 at 9:15am EDT

• A simpler and cheaper solution would be to use an LMS that delivers W3C standards-compliant content. After all, there are many, many online businesses with business models entirely dependent on delivering a consistent user interface. A big problem is that Blackboard, the industry "leader" LMS, is a horrid kludge of outdated code, updated code, different types of code, and so on. Replacing it with something like Moodle would not only reduce a lot of the trouble described here, it would also reduce a lot of the downtime associated with using Blackboard.

  That said, I've never experienced any sort of trouble with movie files or other media being able to play in different browsers. That brings me to another cheap solution: clear and simple instructions for users to follow. And somehow convincing faculty users that they need to follow instructions and guidelines when using an LMS. The problem with nonplaying or differently-playing media in different browsers might well be solved by a list of acceptable media types or a list of unacceptable media types.

  I certainly think it's very unwise to move to an iPad-based system. Vendor lock-in isn't a good thing. Replacing the ubiquitous browser with one more thing the school or the student has to purchase isn't a good idea. I've stood before a display case containing all the predecessors of the Kindle and the iPad. Those things get dated quick. In my opinion, it's always better to learn to effectively use the (right) software before even considering replacing the hardware.

• Posted by TechieLibrarian on March 19, 2010 at 11:30am EDT

• I think that the iPad model is could be more likely to meet the approval of copyright holders, since it's much much easier to control the copying or modification of material inside tightly locked down App/iPhone OS versus a traditional browser. There are copyright issues with copying versus streaming certainly, but an app offers more security for content.

  I will admit I am an open standards, open source person. With that bit of bias noted I agree with J.P. Craig that a locked system is very worrying. It poses limits when moving between devices or even generations of some devices. Open standards like browsers have their downsides, such as required network connection versus the local content, but I don't want to force students to use one of a small number of devices to access their course content. While the iPad might offer a good experience, although things like the lack of multi-tasking make me wonder how good it will be for students, I would never want to make it a required device. Is the work involved in getting two apps (iPhone and Android) so much simpler than designing a web CMS to work across browsers well?

  How much do we want to limit people to two operating systems, if we move from browsers to apps entirely, what about people with Palm Pres, Symbian phones, or the rest? I suppose we could have smartphone/tablet labs like we have computer labs today though. It's more limited then computers, but not really beyond a university's ability to provide some access.

• Posted by KBHC , Assistant Professor at University of Illinois on March 20, 2010 at 11:30am EDT

• I've been using Moodle for a year now and agree that, in general, open source is just a better place from which to start. I also have a lot of problems with the iPad (that include its rather sexist marketing and, let's face it, name that indicates there must be no women on Apple's staff). I don't know that I need to buy another piece of hardware. At the same time I am excited by the App model, provided we can find ways to bring it to laptops and desktops, not just mobile devices. I appreciate the thoughts of J. Craig and TechieLibrarian on this.

• Browser-based Client Model still the way to go
• Posted by sukimon , researcher at dartmouth college medical school on March 20, 2010 at 11:30am EDT

• I agree with that more educational materials be accessible by mobile apps, but there a couple of other issues to consider as well. J.P. Craig's comment on focusing on more W3C compliant code is right on; a browser-based client model will still reach the most number of users on the widest array of platforms. The current selection of web browsers are more W3C compliant than before, even Internet Explorer (slowly). Going with a closed system such as Apple's will also widen the "Digital Divide." Isn't the goal to teach the most number of people? How is this possible if you have to require the user to get a specific piece of hardware?

  There's also the issue of HTML5 and the potential to create Rich Internet Applications that complies with an agreed upon standard (Lifehacker's Kevin Purdy wrote a nice post on the potential uses of HTML5, http://lifehacker.com/5416100/how-html5-will-change-the-way-you-use-the-web). The huge question mark is how the major browser will adopt HTML5, i.e., will the major browsers be mostly compliant, or will it be more piecemeal like with what happened with CSS2 adoption. We're already seeing bits and pieces of HTML5 implementation from most of the major browsers now.

  With all this said, I agree that the rate determining step will be content and what's the policy related to distributing content.

• both/and?
• Posted by @nateevans , Educational Media Designer - Office of Academic Technology at Spring Arbor University on March 23, 2010 at 12:15pm EDT

• One of the things I liked about this article was the student-centric approach to online learning. I tend to think that browser based LMS's will always be a part of the landscape. However, one point the author reiterated was that there is a fundamental shift happening in how we consume content. The average person chooses to consume the same content in lots of places (i.e. browser, App and print). But at the end of the day it's really about the content, right? We all agree that we want to get this content into as many hands as possible, still I think we have to be willing to consider a both/and approach as we think about the future of online learning.

  While the App store (and iPad) is a frontrunner in this shift, it won't be the end all. As mentioned in the article, Android has made significant strides in mobile phones and provides a good opportunity for open source App-based learning. Again, you know as well as I do how fast the technology changes. However, the one constant that we understand is that we have a desire to consume content in many different places to fit our lifestyle, and that's a shift we should be working towards.

• Timeline of Development
• Posted by Muso , President at Amazing People Club on April 4, 2010 at 6:30am EDT

• Beware the rush to judgement on the Ipad as Gutenberg's original idea took a while to get going as I found at http://myamazingpeople.com/en/832/gutenberg-and-the-ipad-an-amazing-journey/