Have being quiet for a few days, busy busy busy........ but in relation to my original post on this subject and some of the replies, I have put together a quick diagram (attached PPS) aimed to show how services related to 'learning', 'skills and competency development' and 'content' might be better inter-related.....
Again love to hear comments. David ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- Part of my original posting I'm seeing some vendor driven confusion in the market place. We have a profusion of Learning Management System suppliers and now Learning Content Management Systems (following SCORM standards see http://www.adlnet.org) out in the market place. My perspective on this is (and I don't call myself an expert) i) Functionality of LMS's (online learning usage and performance tracking, training management etc.) is necessary in many medium to large organisations. ii) CMS's (imperative for any organisation with an internal or external web strategy) iii) LCMS's at one level seem to be doing i) and doing part of ii) (mainly focusing on 'structured/planned learning') Seems to me that we are missing the point somehow (or maybe I am?) Surely what we need is: i) Full blown corporate content management capabilities that allows for a variety of user interface development tools with ii) Tracking and usage functionality and iii) Interoperability with other corporate systems (e.g. HR Management) ----- 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. --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/mixed text/plain (text body -- kept) application/vnd.ms-powerpoint --- -- http://cms-list.org/ more signal, less noise.
