Top 10 Moodle Myths
Brilliant idea Josie.
How about these misconceptions:
- Moodle won't scale
- Moodle is difficult / time consuming to install / administer / use
- Moodle is a security risk
- Moodle isn't standards compliant
- Moodle won't interface with an MIS
Be interested to know what the other ones that you heard on your travels were.
The arguement I keep hearing is "We would rather base our online commitment with a commercial company that has a history and is likely to be around than take our chances on a public shareware type of product."
- a standalone application which functions entirely independently of Moodle
- a Moodle module which interfaces with (1).
A good existing example is the Hotpot module. The existence of the Hotpot module in Moodle does not bring the original Hotpot system under the GPL.
I also recall that someone wrote a Moodle interface to some commercial course administration system and that is also the same story.
Your right. I stand corrected.
But the other part of what I was trying to say, still stands, though. There are already a bunch of modules that people have decided to share, so the idea that Blackboard's building blocks somehow make it a better choice than Moodle can be argued with on that ground.
There is already a huge library of modules that have been created that
Where is it possible to have a watch inside?
I must be in Berlin next month for EOB and I would be delighted to show what moodle contains.
I could write a novel about Moodle myths.
Here are the ones I heard most frequently:
As an admin
- you have to have a degree in information technology.
- you have to be a php programmer.
- your school has to have a sophisticated webserver.
- you have to know all modules and functions perfectly (in addition to excel and power point) before even thinking about Moodle.
- language teachers should stay away from it at the moment. They might get training 5 years from now (maybe - if they are at least willing to learn html).
- it's just a toy of a few crazy teachers - they should get down to teaching again instead of playing around on the Internet.
but too many have been based on misconceptions about open source in general and Moodle in particular - for example, that you need a developer in your team in order to consider using Moodle.
If you are planning on rolling-out Moodle on any significant scale (University LMS to replace something like Blackboard for example), then this isn't a myth. Anyone would be foolish, in my opinion, to do that without an in-house developer(s).
I thought the whole point of having a Moodle Partners program was so that institutions that don't have in-house developers don't need them.
Schools using Blackboard usually don't have a developer on staff. I can't really see why a school using Moodle Partner would need to either.
2) You can change your support partner without changing your LMS
3) You don't need a partner, you can easily run Moodle with the same number of staff that you run Blackboard with following the same precautionary principles you should be using with BB.
The chances are you keep your pointy headed bosses happy with RedHat or SuSe, even if personally you feel Debian might have done the job just as well with zero financial outlay.
If you hit bugs in the latest version of BB, you may have to wait months for fixes.
The same strategy should work fine for Moodle, eg. if I had no development experience or desire to learn, I would download 1.4.5 for now and wait until all of the kinks get worked out of the 1.5 branch (which 1.5.3 is looking like it will take care of).
Why would you need a developer to roll out 1.4.5?
On theother hand, I would say you need a competant LMS Admin to roll out any LMS on a significant scale, if you are rolling out BB or WebCT or Moodle, a 'competant admin' should know some html, jsp/js (for BBCT--you better at least understand Tomcat error messages8-0) or php (for Moodle), but I certainly wouldn't say you need a professional "developer" as in 'programmer/analyst' to run the system.
A competant LMS Admin should be fine with 1.5.2+, I don't see any need for programming skills above those needed for a large scale rollout of Enterprise/Vista for Moodle 1.5.2.
It isn't like BB is entirely stable.
I wouldn't so much be worried about kinks in 1.5. Again, one of the big "selling points" of opensource is that if it doesn't do what you want it to do, then you can change it...which you can't necessairly do with a commercial system.
Just a day or two ago, someone asked about moderating forum posts in Moodle and got the answer frequently given here that that doesn not fit the philosophy of Moodle. You work on a university campus...can you imagine passing that response on to your faculty .
True...they wouldn't get the functionality from Blackboard either, but I don't think it would be very wise to sell a campus on switching to Moodle and then depend on the community to meet your campus needs. If you do it, you had better be ready to be self-sufficient in support and development...you developed a content management feature for Moodle (and a nice email feature)....without programmers you wouldn't have those items that are standard in Blackboard.
If I were to move my university faculty from BB to Moodle today, I had better be ready to do some programming to be able to respond to requests for changing, adding to, modifying, etc. a lot of things in Moodle. There is no way I would travel down that road without a good programmer.
Ture...BB has problems. I'm on a Blackboard campus and provide BB support to college of education professors, so I'm well aware of the problems. I choose to use Moodle for my own courses for several reasons...one of them being that, overall, I do like it better than BB.
I'm not defending BB, I'm just not inclined jump into the "groupthink" mode that is prevalent in these discussion forums. Many here talk about Moodle as if it were their "first born child"...prettier than all other children and perfect in everyway . It's great to be committed to something, but it's easy to become blinded by your own passion.
Blackboard has flaws...Moodle has just as many if not more. I've used both platforms extensively. Do an honest feature-by-feature comparison between BB and Moodle and you may be surprised...Moodle will win some, but will lose just as many....Look and feel--Moodle wins; Discussion forums--BB wins; chat features--Moodle wins; Assignment features--BB wins....etc...
On our campus we have one BB administrator...thinking that we could move this campus from BB to Moodle and only need a Moodle administrator is naive to say the least. If we were a campus with no existing LMS, then incorporating Moodle would be a lot easier, but when people are comfortable with one system and you remove it and introduce a new one, then you open a whole new "can of worms" that you had better be ready to deal with.
I was talking about the staff needed to run an Enterprise LMS, not transition from one LMS to another.
Sorry if I was unclear.
"Many here talk about Moodle as if it were their "first born child"...prettier than all other children and perfect in everyway . It's great to be committed to something, but it's easy to become blinded by your own passion."
Now, this is interesting. AFAICT you don't get the same level of commitment, no, passion, with most VLEs, certainly not in the UK BB community at least, nor with the platforms provided by our regional broadband consortia. Why is this? OK, for the developers, fair enough, but for the rest of us? Perhaps it's the moodle.org community - we feel part of a movement, and even though we've not contributed a single line of code, still feel that it is, in part, 'our baby'.
Anyhow, I see this as a big plus for Moodle: that such a proportion of its users care as passionately as we do about a bit of software. At St Ives, this extends down to the pupils too - I posted in my school blog about DfES plans to provide 'learning platforms' at LEA/RBC level, provoking this response from one of my 10 year olds:
"Will we have to change moodle to the new thing because I like it the way it is."
I'm responsible for the technological side of the Moodle set-up for an institution just starting with Moodle. I'm not really qualified to do the job but the assumption has been made that "Moodle is dead easy" (a myth?).
The computer programmer who works with me on our other projects, note, says he can't help because he doesn't know any php.
I couldn't possibly have got even as far as we have without expert help (a) from other colleagues and (b) from postings on the Moodle forums.
Thank goodness for both of those (and I also certainly agree that it's a myth to say you can't get help with Moodle)!
I'm intrigued to know what you would have the computer programmer do if he did know PHP.
Because if you had BB or WebCT instead then there's not much he could do as a programmer with them. (Building Blocks etc. being mostly nibbling around the edges).
Are we not getting mixed up between what you can do with Moodle (get access to the code, contribute changes to the community, fix bugs according to your own priorities and schedules), and what you need to do to install and run Moodle.
For a large institution, I would think that any software that is going to be used by the entire staff and student base (e.g. email) would need some administration, but not programming.
Maybe this is just a case of educationalists being a bit free and easy with IT terminology that I, as an IT guy, see clear demarcations between.
I'm not an IT expert, but I'm still one of the most expert in the institution I work for. And I can't fix some of the problems Moodle inevitably gives.
So I turn to someone a lot more expert than me, a computer programmer. He says, "I can't help you, I don't know nuffink about php". Hell, who am I to argue? I don't even know what php is!
The myth (?) is that just anyone can install and set up and run and fix and debug Moodle.
Yeah, yeah! Moodle is great, amazing, fantastic, hugely superior to BB etc! But -- like anything else in technology -- it's going to produce its problems.
If you've not got someone expert in the technology, or at the very least expert at troubleshooting technology, Moodle is not going to be as easy as it would be nice to make out.
By their nature, web-based virtual learning environments are complex things, nevertheless my feeling is that Moodle is far easier to install and maintain than most of these, and if something does go wrong, you or a competent admin can probably fix it most of the time, without having to endure the purgatory of technical support.
OK, I know our installation is down the low end of the scale, but I have far more problems maintaining our Windows XP network than the Linux servers, including Moodle. I don't think anyone's claiming that a novice user can set up a site wide Moodle themselves (although, thinking about it...), merely that it's a lot easier to do than a lot of people make out, and I'd say a lot easier than many of the things which IT support folks get called on to do.
This summer I met with the head of IT, the Superintendent of Secondary education and our curricullum lead and discussed installing a dedicated server on the Board network. I strongly recommended linux, and definitely recommended not using MSSql. The head of IT had some appropriate reservations:
- They were a MS SQL department.
- No one knew linux for sure (although there were some OS X people).
The install was up and running in appropriate time frame (and appears to be running extremely well). I have since heard through the grapevine that it was, in fact, one of the most seamless installs the department has had.
We've been running our Moodle site with 2,400+ users for a year, and we haven't written one line of php code. The installer script wrote the config.php, and everything else in our installation is 100% out of the box. (Nearly a million page views.)
It sounds like your IT are making excuses. Are they overworked and underpaid like the rest of us?
Nevertheless, I wish we had PHP programmers Then we could do some really cool stuff
My IT people aren't making excuses...this topic isn't being discussed on my campus.
Your last line pretty much sums it up when discussing the want/need for a programmer.
The LMS market will likely further consolidate, there are bigger players in education than Blackboard, and still bigger ones who might like to sell a single ERP/LMS solution.
Further dramatic change in the LMS market is likely in the next decade, I'd advise folks in any institution where the LMS is mission critical to be investigating alternatives and planning how to manage changes in the event of major changes in the LMS climate.
IMO, a mininum it's an earthquake/firedrill, it's best to at least have discussed the issue and scoped out escape routes out of what is becoming the most populated building (albeit virtual) on campus.
The more I think about this, the more metadata tagging seems so web 1.0: it relies on some Authority saying once and for all what a particular learning object does, who it's for, and how it should be used. Being able to find the learning object then relies on hitting just the right combination of tags that were attached to it in the first place. What's more, almost nobody actually likes doing this work.
I'd like to see someone take the whole folksonomy/social tagging idea and apply it to learning objects - I'm sure this could work really well, and would give an important voice to LO users in place of their producers. The social construction of LO metadata fits pretty closely with the Moodle world view as well.
Now, extend this down to the learner's level, and you have the basis of a system for providing personalized learning resources, which is built around people and networks rather than the merely automatic suggestion of further LOs which is what Ruth Kelly seemed to have in mind in the DfES E-Strategy:
"I am particularly excited by the idea of giving every student and learner a personal online learning space [...] And in the future it will be more than simply a storage place - a digital space that is personalised, that remembers what the learner is interested in and suggests relevant web sites, or alerts them to courses and learning opportunities that fit their needs."
Now, this is a way off, but I wonder if those folks who're working on repositories and the mymoodle interface could see their way through to building in some of this.
Well, I'll agree with that, but I'll leave the university talks to someone else.
I'm a 9-month faculty member with a half-time release to provide tech support for our college. I would prefer to spend my energy actually providing Moodle training and classrooms to my graduate students--practicing teachers--as part of their ed-tech course, and developing a more user-friendly ePortfolio using Moodle for our undergrad students--future teachers.
We are in the process of developing a web-enhanced doctoral program in ed admin...if I have my way, the web-enhanced part will be done with Moodle, but whether or not I get my way remains to be seen ...and, I already have one of the best programmers on the planet working for me in the college tech department (wouldn't do it without him or someone like him), so we're set to provide the support and customization needed.
Not needing a PHP programmer is exactly what has angered the powers that be on many campuses. Many of us have seen LMS proposals where Moodle was assigned 3 FTE compared to 2 for Bb and/or WebCT. It's the myth that Moodle requires more support and/or a PHP programmer.
I repeat: our year-old 2,400+ user Moodle deployment with 10,000+ page views a day has no PHP programmer.
Did you move a large faculty from an existing system to Moodle or is Moodle the first LMS they have had? If you moved them from an existing LMS and you haven't had to change anything, then you have a very, I emphasize Very, understanding and easy to please faculty.
If we were to move our faculty from Bb to Moodle, there would be a long list of changes from faculty in order for them to feel like they were not losing some functionality. Discussion forums are still the heart of asynchronous online course facilitation....we would need to do some major work in that area to provide the functionality they would be losing. High on their list would be a feature like "Safe Assignments" in Bb. I don't know everything that would be on the list, but there would be a long one and if we were not able to respond with changes and customization, we would have a lot of unhappy campers. It doesn't matter that they would gain functionality in other areas...you had better be able to provide everything they currently had and more if you are going to make this kind of move. You can't do that without some programming....and you had better have a few extra support people as well.
This doesn't even consider all the implications of tying Moodle to our student management system (Banner) and establisnig other systems like student enrollment, course creation, grade reporting, etc....
A lot of people are misled by a "sample of one", thinking what works in one situation will work in all situations. I have implemented Moodle in a couple of public schools without changing much of the code, but I don't just assume this would apply at my university...I know it wouldn't.
Is this conversation going round in circles now, or is it just my imagination?
I'll try to sum it up as otherwise I fear we will all continue to talk past each other:
- introducing an LMS (such as Moodle or Blackboard) is hard work, the larger the institution, the harder the work
- running a large University scale LMS, hosted on your own server requires IT staff familiar with the platform (i.e. LAMP for Moodle, Oracle, J2EE, .Net etc. for Blackboard/WebCT)
- changing from one LMS to another is even harder than introducing a new one as people have expectations, habits and skills gained from the previous system. Extra resources and staff time may be necessary to convert content, train staff and generally hold people's hands and make them feel comfortable during the transition period.
- using Moodle does not, at any stage, require a PHP (or any other kind of) programmer
- Moodle allows you (to a much greater degree than Blackboard's Building Block program) to modify it's functionality by hiring a programmer
- a cost/benefit analysis for implementing Moodle at a large university will almost certainly find that there is a net benefit to hiring/contracting/applying the time of current employees towards customisation and enhancement of Moodle.
To editorialize a bit: it seems we are still confusing what is possible and what is needed. If people were moving from Blackboard to WebCT (more likely the opposite direction actually) then if things were different then you would just have to deal with it. I have seen this with my own eyes in various software 'upgrades' where vital, and sometimes not so vital, features were sacrificed, to general dismay, as part of the move. The ability to optionally change the code and replicate or integrate current functionality is an extra benefit of Open Source solutions, not a boogey man to scare potential users with.
This is a good summary of one sub-thread David, but seems to cover the situation once decision to move to Moodle is made. The Top 10 myths de-bunking is (presumably) aimed at decison-makers or those who influence them, and they will be looking for case studies and hard evidence on total cost of ownership and user satisfaction in transitions similar to their own.
The next thread in this forum is coming up with some interesting suggestions for changes to Moodle (many already in progress apparently). It is a strength of Moodle that it is in continuous evolution but this moving target effect does make evaluation more difficult.
Yes, sorry, I should have been more clear that I was summarising just the part of the thread on the topic of:
- Myth: you need a PHP programmer to run Moodle
which is kind of a subset of
- Myth: Open Source is always more difficult to install/use/administer
These are just two of the misleading things people might have heard when they first consider Moodle.
Now, if I can do that, don't tell me no university can find the money to get a real PHP expert. If any university simply monitored its internet usage and identified all the employees who were spending university time visiting pornographic web sites (let alone other non-work related sites) instead of working, and then restructured their positions to account for the actual time they spent working, those universities would probably be able to create several Moodle related positions. I've been in universities the last 16 years, and I've seen so much money wasted on staff that weren't doing anything at all that I am certain any university if it cared about efficiency could find the money.
And the same thing goes for BlackCT: your Blackboard admin better at least know what tomcat is and have an idea what the error code means, and/or be able to write shell scripts that detect runaway processes and reboot the machine. They should know enough html/js to debug display errors when someone dumps a complex word file into html, they need to know what to do when a Mac user uploads a file with no extention, etc. Most of the user problems we have here, with either BB (other than the occasional odd tomcat error or runaway java process) or Moodle, have to do with how content creation software (Office, A/V, imaging) and web browsers/computers work rather than with sql/java/jsp or sql/js/php
You could of course go hosted with Blackboard and let someone else admin it for you, and you could do the same thing with Moodle (moodle.com).
So I would say the myth here is that you can effectively run an enterprise grade LMS at a large institution without trained technical staff or offsite support, regardless of the type of license the LMS is released under.
Perhaps someone could define 'Developer' for me as I seem to have a view in my mind that Developer equates to programmer / technical expert / technology security expert / ideas extrodinaire and so forth. The sort of person that any regular UK FE college could probably not afford in a month of Sundays. Is this the sort of person other people mean when they say developer or have I got an extreme view and the wrong end of the stick?
What exactly is a developer ?
I think most people seemed to have missed the bit about coming back with snazzy replies . My replies aren't snazzy so feel free to amend
It can't be any good because it's free
What about air, water and love
Moodle is difficult to set up
The installation process is automatic and can be complete within 5 mins - the main thing you will need is a database username and password from your webhost.
You need to know about linux
You can install it on your windows laptop if you want!
Migration to moodle is difficult
Commercial systems don't want loose your money so they have a vested interest in you not being able to change system. Moodle is free so has nothing to loose.
It can't be any good because it's free
What about air, water and love?
My favorite myth is the opposite of this and they work well as a one-two combination:
We don't want a commercial system, we'll get an Open Source one instead, because companies and making money are evil!
Moodle is both Open Source and commercial, and there is absolutely no conflict between these two goals. In fact it has an entire ecosystem of individuals and companies that are making a living by providing valuable services to Moodle users, just as the average Moodle user is being paid to provide education.
In both cases you wouldn't want end users being taken advantage of for purely monetary reasons nor people and companies rushing into the field because it's an easy way to make money, but neither do you want talented individuals to switch to other careers, or for exciting projects to fail, purely due to lack of funds. By being both Open Source and commercial, Moodle offers the best of both worlds.
Moodle is difficult to administer
Moodle is difficult to install
It will be difficult to learn a new/different VLE from the one I already use
I won't be able to use my existing content on Moodle (it's usually Powerpoint or Word files anyway)
Although Moodle is free, the total cost of ownership will be way too high for me to absorb
erm...and by 2008 in the UK you'll need some kind of learning platform anyway. Just go for Moodle; you'll not be tied in to a learning platform that you'll come to hate, and even if you do you'll be able to move elsewhere without penalty clauses. If you have any problems, you can ask the Moodle community for help FOR FREE! Try that one again...FREE SUPPORT (potentially - there might not be an answer to your problem, but you could always get some paid-for consulting).
This is a very important issue to address, and whilst Moodle enthusiasts can give personal testament to the "cost" (in time) of ownership of small, personally supported Moodle installation, and Moodle partners can give costs for hosting, what published evidence do we have of total cost of ownership in larger implementations? Has anything been published from New Zealand project?
I know that you could ask the same of Blackboard/Web CT.
My gut feeling is that Moodle has a chance of gaining a foothold in schools but in universities, who have already been through (at least) one expensive procurement round, IT services and management will want some hard evidence before moving to any Open Source product. I think some of them will do pilot projects in Moodle, but it is hard for these to be taken seriously if they are seen as the province of enthusiasts. The passion that Moodle generates is a double -edged sword (I can feel one edge coming my way soon ) - it's an important part of Moodle's development and community but may be off-putting to hard-headed decision-makers.
On our CABWEb project, we are very pleased with the service offered by Mediatouch, our Moodle partner, but when I try to imagine Moodle being implemented at my University, I can see that this would involve interfacing with a number of systems, staff training, political will, etc. All this on top of users who have a different set of expectations, and reduced goodwill compared with the pre-VLE environment.
Anyway, enough! I think these Top Ten Myths are a great idea and can have some "passion" in them , but we also need some "cooler" analyses of implementing Moodle. These should be critical in the positive sense of the word so that they can influence large businesses like Universities. Businesses are adopting Opensource and expect this to increase.
I was actually surprised by how accurate that report was. Perhaps my expectations were just exceedingly low.
Apart from the standard passing on out-of-date 'conventional wisdom' as if it was insightful fact (e.g. Oracle == stable, PHP == low end) it gives WebCT, BlackBoard and Sakai fairly thorough goings over with only the occasional burst of analyst-babble, e.g. "As far as scalability, both Blackboard and WebCT had a pretty clear vision."(?)
I think the paragraph on Moodle can accurately be translated as "we don't know much about this, therefore it can't be important, or else we'd look silly for not knowing much about it." Though to be fair they are there to tell people who don't know what the safe 'nobody ever got fired for buying IBM' option is, with an additional CYA paper trail that shows they did everything they possibly could to choose the 'best' option.
And that stuff is important when you follow their recommendations and six months later your choice gets bought by one of the also rans. Whoops.
I am completely gobsmacked. It is never easy to sum up any app in a paragraph, but:
Moodle is NOT scaleable NOW. It is designed for smaller institutions. It is written in PHP as a low-end solution for now. It has a large international support community, but not in the USA yet. There are commercial support options.
First of all, "Not Scalable"? You gotta be kidding me. With known installations from 10- 10,000+ in size. Modules constantly being added and the ability to expand to demand. I thought this was great example of scalability. Sure it may be resource heavy at higher loads, but no worse than WebCT.
And what about support. "A large international support community, but not in the US", I thought part of international support includes US. Ohh, I forgot, America doesn't recognise the outside world. (Sorry, diatribe kicked in). The support community is truly international. I have built and developed sites in the US and Europe. I have had support from the Netherlands, US and local. So what gives?
I have nothing against true and detailed analysis. Moodle does have its flaws. But this post definately deserves to be highlited up there with the top 3 Moodle myths.
One of the things that amuses me about scalability is the myth that Java will always offer greater performance/scalability (note search on the words Java and my name at Google and you will see I am not a Java knocker). The reality is that PHP offers a bigger bang for your CPU buck than Java does. At the low end Java consumes valuable CPU cycles emulating that virtual CPU. At the upper end you need specialist infra structure to support Java scalability, and strangely enough you do as well for PHP.
Gartner are the kind of people in the business you lending them your watch and they tell you the time.
As I said in an earlier posting "what published evidence do we have of total cost of ownership in larger implementations? Has anything been published from New Zealand project?"
Have evaluations of large-scale implementations of Moodle been published?
I know that feelings run high but just because flimsy evaluations are aired at a Gartner meeting, does not mean that Moodle's reputation as a scalable product will be built from Moodle-org community enthusiasm alone.
What can we do as a community to critically evaluate Moodle's scalability?
Moodle 1.4.5 and higher have shown that they can scale to tens of thousands of users on well tuned small to medium range server clusters. We are working towards dealing with over a hundred thousand users (with several thousand actually using the server each day).
It's here, and it's happening Gartner is for gullible people, I doubt anyone with more than 6 months in IT and some common sense would consider them trustworthy. On the other hand, PHBs are PHBs -- but they don't need Gartner to defy common sense and everyday smarts
Oh, and Michael Penney--someone asked about a Blackboard vs. Moodle comparison, so I mentioned your name and the HSU study. So if you get any inquiries about it from someone who says they were at the League conference, you'll know why.
Myth: Moodle is free(open source) software? It must be inferior! What is the catch?
- Free software does not mean poor quality. For example, the majority of the world's Web servers have used open-source software.
- See how it compares to Bb, WebCT, and eCollege here
- See a comparative study of Bb and Moodle here
Response: Can't we expect our faculty to practice what they preach and be life-long learners. This includes learning new technology. Besides, there are built in help functions in Moodle which is not found in Bb and there are many people that believe Moodle is easier to use than Bb.
Myth: Open source is not as secure as a closed system. If everyone has the code, won't they be able to break in more easily?
Response: Open source is not like giving away the keys to your house. It is more like sharing your blueprints with others.
Myth: Moodle is not capable of scaling for a 20,000+ campus.
Response: Yes it is. Check out New Zeland's Polytech campus. (need more info here about scalability)
- Moodle can't handle Flash
Wow. I've really enjoyed this thread, which has turned out to be a powerful resource in its own right! Thank you to everyone for your thoughtful replies several of which I can see have revived painful memories!
After all that, I feel a bit under qualified to come up with the list, but I think that people will respond well to a brief, concise overview which directly addresses some of their concerns. So Ive whittled it down to the following ten. Ive tried to cover a range of considerations, not just technical ones, since we all know that often the people making the decisions arent necessarily interested in knowing about the spec.
Please do feel free to let me know if something is missing or if something is too superfluous. Ill endeavor to get the questions up to scratch with the accompanying snappy-ish answers this weekend.
1. Once Moodle is stable, it will be put under licence. If it was any good, theyd already be charging for it.
2. Theres no point in looking at Moodle unless you have a full time, php developer on your staff. At the very least you need a lot of technical support to run it in house.
3. Moodle wont be compatible with our other systems/software.
4. Moodle just doesnt have the commercial experience were looking for.
5. You cant just use Moodle out of the box the basic Moodle install just isnt that sophisticated.
6. Theres no documentation, training or support available youre on your own.
7. The total Cost of Ownership is actually higher for Moodle than it would be with a wholly commercial platform
8. Moodle is just no good for an institution as large as mine.
9. Moodle is just not designed to cope with my specific group of learners or customers.
10. We have all our stuff on *******, its just not worth the hassle of switching to Moodle
In the future we won't have anymore long discussions in these forums, but we will exchange page numbers like: see the docs, topic Myths, page 3?
All Martin should have done was post 1 April