On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 10:40 PM, Juliano Bittencourt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think both > don't have what is necessary to support change in education on primary > schools around the world.
I'm *very* interested in following up on what the current crop of LMSs are missing, could do different, etc. Apologies -- I didn't know you used moodle -- I had asked David Cavallo and Carla and neither had knowledge of Moodle, which to me was a surprise, so my assumptions of the edu team knowing moodle well were shattered. Fantastic to hear some people know it :-) > I agree with you about all the qualities that moddle has (functionality, > inter-operation, community, etc). But that isn't my point. Yet, I think > these decision criterias are important, changing education isn't about doing > the same things in the same ways we did before. Otherwise, Sugar would never > exists, as an example. Agreed. OTOH, Moodle has been built with the same focus on social constructionism that we have. Most people do _not_ use it in a social constructionist style, but the lesser known modules (workshop for instance) are heavily focused on the kind of thing I understand you are after. (Now here I'm making ome assumptions about what kind of social constructionism tools and strategies you are using. I'm at 1CC next week, and I'm hoping to work a bit with the edu team to learn more about how you think about these things.) I've also been talking quite a bit with educators that _are_ using moodle in what I think are interesting ways. In my to-do list is to talk with the edu team about this, and see if it's of interest. My first stage with the XS has been one of technical focus -- lots of under-the-hood things needed sorting out. That is now in better shape, and I can now shift my attention to educational tools. > students, was much more like SourceForge (site which I believe is one of the > best virtual web environments) than a CMS. Interesting perspective -- Eduforge.org is my baby and is based on the original SF code (known as GForge) and we found its usability was horrible. We probably need to discuss this further, I suspect it's not the tool but the mental model of "we're here for a project" vs "we're here for a course". > I also believe that the number of tools isn't the most important judgment > criteria. Much more important than the number of tools is the way you > structure them inside your user interface. Completely agreed when discussing the educational perspective. However, the number of tools is a good measure of the health of the project and long term viability. In geekspeak, when we pick a codebase and API to base ourefforts on, we want something that is long-term viable. So I'd like to learn more from your Amadis research work and how we want things to work. Might turn out that we can twist and turn moodle to match the model you want users to see / use. Moodle is good at being extremely configurable and also allowing us to plug-in things like course-formats that change completely how stuff is presented and used. And I think I know a thing or two on how to make the most of that :-) Of course, we may find that moodle is completely the wrong base. I think it's unlikely but I've changed my tools before, and will do it again if need be. I'm a pragmatic (and lazy!) bastard at heart, so my moodle fanticism will vanish in a wink if something else is a better/faster/shorter road to where I'm going. cheers, m -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- School Server Architect - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
