Page History

MIT's

platform

for

course

management

and

learning.

Currently,

this

platform

consists

of an MIT-developed Learning Management System (LMS),

Stellar

2.x,

which

has

had

an

admirable

history

of

intensive

usability

and

accessibility

testing

and

high

responsiveness

to

user

feedback.

  However,

Stellar

is

currently

at

a

critical

juncture

in

terms

of

scalability

and

applicability

to

the

existing

landscape

of

teaching

and

learning

at

MIT.

In

simple

terms,

the

Stellar

platform

is

showing

signs

of

age.

Key issues facing the current platform include:

• Technical and usability issues resulting from organic (rather than planned) and simultaneous growth on many fronts
• Integration and functionality issues resulting from the inclusion of disparate third-party solutions and their interfaces
• Code compatibility and stability issues resulting from partial, time-constrained and resource-dependent code updates for selected components
• Architectural issues related to initial design decisions

The current platform's hard-coded architectural limitations and resultant pedagogical shortcomings undercut its core mission as a Learning Management System. The constraints imposed by the architecture - coupled with the fragility of the code  - limit the upgradeability of the current LMS while engendering user dissatisfaction with its limited extensibility. Work-arounds designed to circumvent these service gaps necessitate resource-intensive manual intervention by developers. While they do fulfill use cases not accounted for within the application's main feature set, such work-arounds also generate additional overhead.  All of these issues must be addressed if Stellar as a product is to come into its own as an Institute-wide Learning Management System worthy of MIT faculty and students. In Spring 2009, IS&T evaluated several products and services – Moodle 1.9, MoodleRooms, Drupal 6, Sakai versions 2x and 3, and Blackboard versions 8 and 9 – against functional requirements, data dependencies, and other key criteria for an LMS.

Background and Next Steps

Stellar was re-scoped in the winter of 2008 to align with a new strategy of provisioning an industry-standard, enterprise-class, scalable LMS solution capable of supporting teaching and learning at MIT. Operational stability of the current Stellar platform, along with refinement of user-facing tools in a forward-compatible manner, has remained a top priority throughout the process of investigating alternatives to the current back-end architecture. Simultaneously, IS&T undertook an evaluation of LMS solutions upon which to build the next generation of Stellar. The goal: to find the best combination of features and functionality that could be supported with a reasonable commitment of resources.

After verifying and documenting key Stellar use cases and features, IS&T worked with user and stakeholder groups at MIT to validate requirements for a next-generation LMS for the Institute. In Spring 2009, IS&T evaluated several products and services in use at peer institutions against these requirements, as well as functional specifications, data dependencies, and other key criteria specific to MIT.  In Summer of 2009, IS&T presented its findings to user and stakeholder groups. The initial LMS evaluation was concluded on June 1st 2009, with the recommendation that MIT pursue one of three possible scenarios: build, wait, or buy.

In Fall 2009, the Faculty Advisory Committee on Learning Management Systems, comprised of faculty, students, and staff, was formed to refine and extend the evaluation of stakeholder needs. This committee worked with IS&T to determine relevant criteria, validate data from inside and outside of MIT, re-examine viable platforms, and provide direction for MIT's next-generation LMS.

In Spring 2011, an experimental evaluation of the Blackboard 9x platform was implemented at the recommendation of the Committee.  This recommendation was based on a thorough review of the functional and technical requirements collected from MIT community by IS&T, coupled with the integration requirements imposed by MIT's technical infrastructure.  The results of the evaluation, along with next steps, are outlined in the following report, which was submitted to the MIT Council on Education Technology (MITCET) in August 2011.