Great...... this is pretty much the point that I was getting to, but you've
said it much more succintly....! However, one point to clarify. eLearning
(training, institutional learning as you call it or by a variety of other
terms) is still a requirement. Companies still need to get involved in
facilitating required skills (e.g. I prefer a pilot to not be left alone
to learn how to fly a plane...!) If nothing else to cover liability issues.
However companies should be moving away from the traditional approach where
possible (whether online or instructor lead) and really using the web...
The question in my mind is about when are the vendors going to provide
solutions that can really work, not create new corporate silos.
regards
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "André Milton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "David O'Dwyer"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 11:26 PM
Subject: RE: [cms-list] LCMS, LMS's & CMS's
We've ventured pretty heavily into this space over the last 18 months, and
must say that I tend to agree with Andre.
We conducted a wide evaluation and eventual pilot of an LMS system for an
extremely large government department. We found that, essentially, current
eLearning solutions lack a flexibility suited to commercial/corporate
learning. This is inpart driven by the necessity for vendors to support the
SCORM standard, which is born from and predominantly focussed on
institutional learning.
Further work in this area, and a study of retention rates, show that
supporting unstructured and nonlinear learning paths is more suited to
on-the-job learning that most commercial organisations require. The typical
"learner" in a commercial organisation is less interested in following
dictated learning paths, and looks for a solution that will support their
own style of learning.
A further problem is the divergence in management systems for this
information. Irrespective of how content is structured, how it is used and
who consumes it, the content is merely information with context. Corporate
organisations are recognising this fact, and our organisation has been
focussing its R&D efforts heavily in this area.
Regards,
Leon O'Brien
IDEAS!
André Milton
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "David O'Dwyer"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: cc:
cms-list-admin@cm Subject: RE: [cms-list]
LCMS, LMS's & CMS's
s-list.org
25/01/2003 02:50
AM
Hi David,
Most of the service work we've had over the past few years has
been in the
eLearning space. In fact, mCubes was an "LCMS" before the term existed and
before LMSs made LCMSs practically useless. I've always tried to make our
system a true CMS and not one that is specific to eLearning (or to the web
for that matter). We've actually branded and packaged templates,
structures
and code modules, and called it our eLearning edition. mCubes however is
used for many types of productions including Extranets, Intranets, Portals,
CDROMs...
An LMS is fundamentally a portal. An LCMS is typically a
layman's CMS and
is often integrated directly into someone's LMS. Companies in the
eLearning
field want to seperate themselves from the rest (as they always have) and
keep producing technologies that are never as good as the technologies we
produce ('we' as in vendors on this list). Worst part is SCORM: An ugly
mesh of 3 standards that has basically imposed so many restrictions on our
courses that the retention rates (the eLearning measure of success) has
considerably dropped. But EVERYONE must be SCORM compliant if they want to
find work in this space because every large entreprise now has a SCORM
compliant LMS. Ever get that feeling back in school that your programming
prof was a few years behind? I get that feeling all the time in this
field.
I'm currently working with a German company's prototype LMS.
Seems every
ERP company is now building an LMS that integrates directly with their HR
systems. Makes sense in theory. The only way to replace a currently
adopted LMS is by upselling from an HR system. The end-client is huge.
Rollout may include several thousand employees and the courseware may take
us another 3 years to complete. mCubes will be used to create the content
but after the meetings I've had over the last two months, we've had to drop
every bell and whistle we've wanted to add. And the client has too. I
have
yet to see a single company use learning paths or impose any type of LMS
driven content flow. To be quite honest, it would take us a few months to
Beta build a fully SCORM compliant LMS with mCubes. We basically were an
LMS/LCMS before SCORM came along. I can't understand why they sell for so
much.
So what's my point? Dunno... guess I'm just venting a bit. We
in the CMS
space should just engulf the eLearning technologies like a big amoeba.
Anyone want to help me define a new eLearning standard? Hehe...
a.
André Milton
www.mlore.com
-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of David O'Dwyer
Anybody got any ideas/thoughts/experience with this?
LOVE to hear thoughts...
--
http://cms-list.org/
more signal, less noise.
--
http://cms-list.org/
more signal, less noise.
