Open Source and Community Source Software
Jul. 25, 2006 by ravishan
I am writing this after a recent email exchange between a few of us about whether we should look at an open source course management system called the Moodle as a replacement for Blackboard. I will spare you the details of the email exchange because there was a fair amount of confusion surrounding this topic. We have two different Blackboard applications on campus – one is the course management system and the other is the “onecard transaction system” which is used to manage the Wesleyan onecard- and this contributed to the confusion.
What should be our position regarding open source and community source software? In many cases, this is a more philosophical question than anything else. Many people feel that the commercial software is overpriced, over controlled and badly supported that open and community software is the right approach – it is free, it is fully open and therefore lends itself to more customizations and extensions and that the user community support is almost always better (though it may not be timely!).
We have always welcomed the use of open source software where appropriate – almost all our web servers are Apache, our webmail software is SquirrelMail, we use Perl and PHP for programming, and we use dokuwiki and MySQL database. In addition, we have successfully migrated to Linux, one of the most well known open source initiative (though we pay a small fee for it because we purchase it through RedHat). I am sure others can come up with many such open source software that we currently use. So, in principle, we are NOT opposed to looking at open source software and adapting them where appropriate.
The keyword here is the appropriateness of the open source software. I am not going list all of the criteria that may be in play when assessing the appropriateness, but here are a few that are most important:
- Usability – is the software that we are looking at going to impact the end users? If so, we have been very careful to get a representative group of users to test the software and give us a feedback before we proceed further. If I remember correctly, we did this with SquirrelMail.
- Transition from existing systems – how would any new open source software affect the current habits of users? This is extremely important and we need to pay special attention to this. Eudora is a very good example where the comfort level of users is so high that replacing it with any software is not going to be easy, unless Qualcomm who supports this software declares that Eudora is no longer supported. So, when we talk about Moodle replacing Blackboard as a course management tool, we need to think about this seriously.
- Timing – It takes a lot of time to evaluate a software. How does one manage this? When do we start looking at an open source software in detail? Take the Moodle and Blackboard example. One suggestion is that we start looking at Moodle right away because we are undergoing some serious budget cuts and may be we can save some money. It is a sound argument, but it is not so simple – we need to assess the savings against many other issues – are the users complaining about Bb? How traumatic the transition from Bb is going to be? What is the cost implementation and how does it compare to the Bb support cost? etc. etc. The decision to look at an open software is a collective one that should take into consideration all of these and more and prioritize it. However, it is extremely important that we continue to follow the open and community source software closely and bring to everyone’s attention the software that we should be looking at!
- The total cost of implementing and maintaining an open source software vs a purchased product. In some cases, the open source software may require more work from our staff (therefore taking away their valuable time). In general, we tend to wait until these software mature before we begin using them. Apache is a good example – we used Netscape servers until Apache became stable enough for us to move to it.
Just to reiterate… We are NOT opposed to using open software or community software. There is a process that we need to follow to assess the appropriateness and the timing. The technology Planning Group that we have formed will play an important role in this process, many of the ITS staff will be involved and the users themselves when appropriate. The end result may in some cases be that we are not ready for a software, but at least we would have collectively taken that decision…
Finally, we will soon be planning a long transition away from our current financial system FRS for various reasons. I am sure that Kuali, a community source software, will be looked at seriously to replace FRS along with other commercial options.
Nice writeup. i’m happy to see some feedback on this important issue. At all levels, i think we want what is best for both our users, and us (ITS).
Don’t forget we’ll be having three Blackboard systems on campus soon – the Community System will soon be joining our ranks. Of course it’s not really *new* I suppose, since according to Blackboard it is nothing more than a differently licensed version of the course management system that we already pay for (in various ways, support, hardware, etc).
I’d give Blackboard credit for managing to sell us the same product twice, but if memory serves they managed this by taking away an essential feature from the transacation system. Then, they revealed that this could feature only be replaced by this new Community System (which they would give us at a reduced price, as long as we used it EXACTLY the way they wanted it) While I suppose this act is impressive in terms of being quite underhanded it’s not particularly clever.
The (possible) efficacy of BlackBoard’s Course Management system aside, it would seem valuable to keep an eye on alternatives since the company clearly sees extortion and coercion as a valid business strategy. What, praytell, is preventing them from spinning off the quiz portion of Blackboard Course Management into a separate product?
Addendum (and yes, I do do work, too):
Re-reading the comment, I realized I forgot to say that I agree that it comes down to finding the best tool for the task, be it proprietary or open and.. that yes, with any decision, many factors have to be taken into account carefully. While I admittedly have a bias towards the “philosophy” of the open source movement in the end, practicality will (and arguably should) trump philosophy.
The only thing I would emphasize (based on my admittedly limited experience) while looking at various solutions is to not mistake “common wisdom” for truth. Often it is the case that commercial software is superior in usability and support; but sometimes the support is nothing more than lip service (*cough*Blackboard*cough*) and the UI is just as strange as what the open source world digs up. Often open source documentation is arcane and confusing(*cough*Cyrus*cough*), but sometimes it is clear and concise.
So yeah, basically this is a long winded way of saying “What Steve said” and “common wisdom is not alwas true” which amounts to a statement as meaningful as: “Hey, did you know the sun is hot?”