Talk:Learning management system

message: I notice in the Characteristics section of the article that eight items are listed re “characteristics more specific to corporate learning.” No problem with the listed items but I notice the items are then repeated in the same listing but done so in Bahasa Indonesia. Why introduce Indonesian into the article? Nothing in the topic would indicate the need for Indonesian and Indonesian is not used elsewhere in the article.
Should the items be repeated in Indonesian?
Rpcarroll (talk) 17:15, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No, they should not. Whenever you find non english content like that on the english Wikipedia, please remove it. - MrOllie (talk) 17:22, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  CHARACTERISTICS 

message: SCORMTM stands for Shareable Content Object Reference Model. There is a standard for web-based E-learning. It defines how the individual instruction elements are combined on a technical level and sets conditions for the software needed for using the content. The standard uses XML and it is based on the results of work done by AICC, IMS, IEEE, and Ariadne.
E-learning most often means an approach to facilitate and enhance learning by means of personal computers, CDROMs, Digital Television, Mobile Devices and the Internet. This may include email, discussion forums, and collaborative software.
Can anyone see any reason why this page shouldn't be merged into Managed learning environment, which says all this and much more?  seglea 17:49, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  SCORMTM 

message: I work in the eLearning field and have never heard the term 'MLE'.
It may be common in Britan (?) but the international colleagues I've spoken with regarding eLearning have also used the term LMS. 
I wonder where the term MLE comes from in any 'official' capacity. Anyone have a reference?
In my *strong* opinion, the MLE should redirect to LMS - it is by far the more dominant term in my experience.
'''
''
I agree that LMS is better. It's commonly called CMS also, Course Management System, but that's often confused with Content Management System for websites. Sue Maberry 23:48, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  MLE term not standard (in US?) 

message: I was hoping for an actual explanation of what an LMS "looks" like, and did not find one. Could someone who has worked with a representative example add something which would give a better idea to an outsider? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.10.25.40 (talk) 01:33, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not very clear 

message: All the bersin links I tried cost $$$, should be removed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.253.167.13 (talk) 14:09, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it the only reason? Just the executive summary bring interesting information. (Note: I have absolutly not relationship with Bersin, but I use it professionally, and without buying reports, to get information about e-learning) --Nabeth (talk) 15:22, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: A good source of information on different systems is http://www.bersin.com/ 

message: That is not useful in this context. How can we change it? does that mean there isnt a page on LCMS.--Kaveri 18:44, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  LCMS redirect to Lutheran Church of Missouri

message: Continuous Learning Management is a systematised approach to measuring the application of learning on-the-job.   
CLM differs from traditional LMS in that it seeks to assess the more challenging question of what happens before and after the formal learning (e.g. classroom, workshop, e-learning). As such it  may feed data into an existing LMS, which typically focus on the learner course registration and completion. 
These systems directly associate the incremental value achieved for both individual and organisation – against agreed performance criteria, as a result of personal and team application and refinement of knowledge (typically through on-the-job coaching, mentoring and self-assessment).
 
The ultimate goal of CLM is to directly associate the tangible benefits achieved as a result of the learner(s) improving their performance.  As such CLM systems are most successful with performance-driven activities such as sales, process or quality improvement. 
Quantifying of results – the return on the training investment – may well also aid the business case for new learning activities, using the data to evidence the potential for further individual and company improvement.
John Brennan (Red Edge UK) (talk) 09:32, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Continuous Learning Management 

message: The blatant commercial self promotion which was part of this page has been toned down and eliminated by many contributors since June 2008.  Now it reads more like a white paper:) Still a little stiff for my liking but definitely not a news release.--Rcollman (talk) 12:34, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed newsrelease tag, still needs work

message: Please add a list of learning management systems like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_word_processors  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.190.197.227 (talk) 15:26, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I find the idea of creating the list of LMSes as a separate page very interesting - that would be a good solution instead of the LMS list on this page...Interkrok (talk) 13:59, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

text: List has been added at List of learning management systems, should consider removing the list on this page Brian.whitmer (talk) 18:27, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Learning Management Systems 

message: this part is very useful. The only reason I come to this page is that. There are lots of page in wikipedia contain list of commercial products. Why people come to wikipedia? they come to find solutions not just waste their times.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Behnam Ghiaseddin (talk • contribs) 14:43, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest at least noting what are commercial and what are opensource (free).Odestiny (talk) 22:57, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable LMS 

message: Best known LMS comparing like Comparison of word processors would be also very valuable information for those who study and work with such systems. I personally would be glad to help and provide features list to compare LMSes.Interkrok (talk) 13:59, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Compare LMS 

message: I have changed the first line of the deifnition of LMS that I have taken from an article from ASTD.
The delivery of training is not included in this later definition.
However in the article it is indicated that
"LMS should be able to do the following: * assemble and deliver learning content rapidly".
Please feel free to reformulate the definition (and maybe reintroduce more explicitly the delivery of training).
However, I would suggest not to have something too broad, and in particular not to have LMS including every e-learning system.
--Nabeth (talk) 14:57, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition of LMS 

message: I am a new wikipedian and am just starting. I have read the whole article and come across some bad data I had like to point out. First of all The section on new generation learning management systems is a personal interpretation of personal blogs as listed in references. I guess nobody bothered to check the references. Everybody is entitled to personal views but I believe not on wikipedia.I had like to further point out that the person who created that section has only made that change in wikipedia till now. 
Another point I had like to make is that LMS and LCMS are completely different things.In fact LCMS can be a sub part of LMS. It is like trying to compare a computer and a hard drive. I think devoting a whole section on it does not make sense. 
:I hope I get some responses on this front as I feel I can make some good changes on this article. But as I am new and have no credibility I had like to get permission from the other editors. (Priyankgupta86 (talk) 15:22, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: comment I actually think it's worth having a section on new LMS's.  There's a lot of energy going on right now in higher ed in this space, mostly because of the frustration everyone has with the Blackboard LMS.  The edupunk movement is a good example of this.  A lot of educational technologists have completely dismissed the viability of the LMS and are moving to blogs and wikis for their course material.  There are a lot of new entrants, though, that are trying to bridge the gap.  Where Blackboard hasn't listened, they're trying to.  You can look at edu2.0, Scholar360, Eduset, Edmodo, Instructure, haikue learning, nixty, Agilix... it seems silly not to have some mention of all this energy in an article on LMS's.  The blogs mentioned are not just anybody blogs, either, these are influential members of the ed-tech community.  DISCLAIMER: I originally wrote the section, and am a co-founder of Instructure.  That said, I think the arguments here stand for themselves.  Maybe just need some better sources? Brian.whitmer (talk) 20:35, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  This articles requires some changes 

message: This term is used twice, with no definition or description, which would be helpful for a general audience.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.61.39.41 (talk) 14:29, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Channel learning 

message: Note that there is another entry under 'Virtual Learning Environment' I think that these two entries should be merged. From the research I have done so far and am continuing to do, Computer Based Learning Environments by whatever name or acronym they go by are still new and emerging technologies with few standards (SCORM being one exception) and so there will be many acronyms floating around for a while. Also, UK/EURO and US developers and organisations are understandably using different terms which confuses the process more.
Essentially Computer Based Learning seems to have two distinct categories - Educational Institutions and Corporate organisations and there should be some differentiation. Course can be delivered within the organisation, or remotely and can be free or paid for this may also have a bearing. The VLE article suggests that VLEs are primarily educational, and MLEs corporate but that may well be region specific. There seems also to be a difference beweeen the terminology used in schools and that used in universities.
There is another issue - that of hierarchy. In the UK, JISC (www.jisc.ac.uk) which advices UK government on technology in education and runs JANET the academic backbone network in the UK has defined a hierarchy, it says that an MLE - Managed Learning Environment refers to the whole range of information systems used for and in support of learning and that a VLE can be one of those systems. I also agree with the statement of LMS and LCMS.
"the term ‘managed learning environment’ (MLE) refers to the whole range of information systems and processes of a college or university (including its VLE if it has one) that contribute directly, or indirectly, to learning and the management of that learning." http://www.ukcle.ac.uk/resources/enhancing-learning-through-technology/vles-faq/two/
Suggested hierarchy:
Top level: Managed Learning Environment
Which then includes: Learning management System, Learner Support System, Managed Information Systems, Content Management Systems and so on.
Some of these then could have further sub levels for instance LMS would include LCMS, CMS (Course Management System) VLE, VLP, Learning Platform etc. These in turn then include such things as Wikis, SCORM compliant tests, forums etc (which could also be separate of course)
Confusion - We also need to consider confusion, CMS could also be Content Management System (which could be used within an MLE under JISCS definition) 
LMS is also used to refer to Library Management Systems (which could also form part of an MLE!)
Anything with the word virtual in its title could be confused with a virtual reality world such as second life. Learning platforms are incorporating these and there is a crossover so this could become a separate category eventually and should be watched for.
According to what I have researched so far, the following terms are in use:
Acronym	Description                              	Notes
VLE    	Virtual Learning Environment             	Possible confusion with Virtual Reality
VLP    	Virtual Learning Platform                	Possible confusion with Virtual Reality
MLE    	Managed Learning Environment             	Possible reference to a larger system of ICT resources
CMS    	Course Management System                 	Possible confusion with Content Management System
LMS    	Learning Management System               	Possible reference to a larger system of ICT resources
LCMS   	Learning Course Management System        	Possible sub system of LMS / MLE
LP     	Learning Platform                        	Possible confusion with reference to an operating system or technology that enables learning through ICT
LSS    	Learning (or learner) Supporr System     	Possible confusion with supporting Special Needs Students, Possible Sub system
OCW    	Open Courseware                          	Reference to a technology
CMC    	Computer-mediated Communication          	Reference to a technology that enables learning through ICT
CBLE   	Computer Based Learning Environment      	
CBL    	Computer Based Learning                  	
TEL    	Technology Enhanced Learning             	Could include technologies other than ICT and the use of technology in the classroom and is a much wider field
IBL    	Internet Based learning                  	
WBL    	Web Based Learning                       	
CSCL   	Computer Supported Collaborative Learning	Possible sub element / feature / system
What do people think? I would like to work on both articles to create something that is more coherent and streamlined but this is my first ever wiki edit so your advice would be greatly received.
Gillor (talk) 22:19, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Virtual Learning Environment

message: The Cleanup tag at the top of this article is from 2008, and does not specify reasons for this being in place. Whilst not perfect, I think the article is now of a quality where this can be removed - there are far worse on Wikipedia that don't have this tag! Mike1901 (talk) 17:51, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup tag - out of date? 

message: Would this article be improved by listing common criticisms lodged against LMS's by both students and teachers. My students complain to me a great deal. They dislike all the systems they have been required to use. I have had great difficulty trying to discover just what the common complaints are by various professors, teachers and students who dislike some or all learning management systems. 67.252.112.19 (talk) 16:18, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticisms 

message: I have been in this business for twenty years, and I almost don't recognize the content. This article is a pedantic sermon.  I hope someone re-writes this term paper into a Wikipedia article.  Tomking505 (talk) 17:42, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Concur. Took three years, but I made a start at pruning long, partial and inconclusive lists in favor of the basics. Still desperately needed: a list of characteristic platforms. I will try to make progress on that later. cshirky (talk) 15:29, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite, please 

message: Two editors - including me - have recently removed one or more external links from this article.  Another editor has repeatedly contested the removal of one of those links, a link that he or she originally added to the article about a month ago.  The link in question with the descriptive text that our colleague has insisted remain in the article: Top Learning Management System Software.
I see little evidence that this link is a high quality one that provides substantial information to readers beyond what is or should be included in this article.  The scant information I have found on the website in its "About" section simply says that their website has "buying guides, blog posts, and user reviews [that] help you evaluate all options from an unbiased, third-party source" and that the information is written by "software experts."  The specific listing to which the contested external link goes is poorly written and it's not at all clear to me what criteria were used to select the included items and order them.  Although I appreciate the company being honest about how they make money ("software vendors pay us when we help you find the best match") I see little evidence that this is a link to which we should send readers for additional information.
Am I missing something or overlooking some things?  ElKevbo (talk) 16:24, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capterra link 

message: Why is Kannu, a single, new fledgling LMS platform identified by name in the learning management industry section, out of the hundreds of learning management systems in the world? The citation given (with no link) is actually this http://www.educationdive.com/news/kadenze-follows-up-arts-focused-mooc-platform-with-lms/409526/ - a second tier blog that simply rewrote the vendor's announcement press release. This LMS doesn't seem to be significant enough in terms of technological innovation or market share to merit inclusion here by name and I suggest its removal. EcoFuror (talk) 23:08, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kannu vendor not significant 

message: Some work is needed to improve the accuracy and details of information on this page. Some of the existing content makes assumptions that are not accurate. Some already made changes have been reverted due to cited sources. I will reinstate the changes with better citations. I disagree with assumption that the Acorn blog is a spam link given it's information is more accurate and up to date with current industry details than what is displayed here--Profillic (talk) 05:23, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: , We do not use marketing materials such as vendor blogs as sources, they are hopelessly biased and unreliable. - MrOllie (talk) 11:15, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleaning up information 

message: — Assignment last updated by Rhiheat (talk) 20:18, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - FA23 - Sect 202 - Thu

message: Since TMS's appear to be a subset of LMS's and the Training Management System article is short and marked as possibly non-notable, it should be merged into this article. TheHiddenWind (talk) 08:22, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: On further consideration I'm no longer sure that a TMS's are a subset of LMS's, so I'm just going to get rid of the templates. TheHiddenWind (talk) 04:01, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal: Merge [[Training Management System]] into this article 

message: Since this has been proposed before and there hasn't seemed to be any objections, I'm planning to merge the two articles. The terms are synonymous with only subtle connotational differences. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 01:47, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging [[Virtual learning environment]] into this article