Tag Archives: course management systems

Questions for the audience about course management systems

I’m pretty busy right now with writing, administering, and grading midterms — so blogging is light for a day or so more. However, given the recent posts and traffic about course management systems, I wonder if you wouldn’t mind answer a few questions down in the comments area. 

  1. Teachers: What do you need a course management system to do? What functionality do you consider essential?
  2. Teachers: What are the best ways for a course management system to help make your job of managing a course easy?  
  3. Students: Same questions as #1 and #2. 
  4. Current CMS software users: What are the three features of your CMS that are the most essential? If you could change three things about the way your CMS works, what would they be and what would you rather have? 


Filed under Course management systems, Educational technology, Teaching

Two possible replacements for course management systems

This afternoon I finally reached the limit of my patience with Angel. The details are unimportant (but revolve around the patently stupid refusal of Angel to automate tasks for multiple sections of the same course). Just suffice to say that I spent a good portion of the last half hour seriously investigating ways to declare independence from Angel and all other proprietary CMS’s.

I came up with two possible options.

Option 1 is to use Wikispaces to make a course wiki, containing pages for different content. Wikispaces allows the posting of files, too, with a pretty generous 2 GB storage limit and no limit on bandwidth. So it would be easy to use the wiki as a glorified file server, which is pretty much all I need from a course web site. Use a basic email client as I discussed at length here to handle communications. Each page has a discussion section attached to it to allow for integrated discussion “boards”.

Pros: I know Wikispaces pretty well, having done three wikis through them already. Pages are easy to manipulate and are fully text-searchable. Everything is in one place and there is a simple URL to access it. No functionality is duplicated as with Angel and its execrable “email” system. Also, Wikispaces handles native LaTeX typesetting. And there’s an RSS feed for every page to help students keep up. Cons: File management on Angel is kind of a pain. And despite the whole digital native hoopla, most students and faculty I know have no clue about RSS, which would mean somebody would have to get them to use it. Finally, wikis do not have a native hierarchical structure — they are pretty nonlinear by nature, and that can be confusing to people used to top-down designed web sites.

Option 2 is to create a Google Group for the course. I had not used Google Groups before today, and I was impressed when I looked around. There’s obviously the nice discussion board feature, along with rudimentary wiki functionality and customizable structure — you can make a “page” for anything and it shows up as a tab in the main view. I’m not sure how well-integrated it is with Google Docs, Spreadsheets, etc. but it seems like those connections ought to be easy and strong. Not a lot of file space at just 100 MB, but perhaps I could keep the “freshest” 100 MB of stuff on the Group page and archive the rest at a Box.net account for the class.

Pros: Nice look and feel, intuitive, well-connected. RSS feeds available as well as the ability to connect/post to the group via email and mobile phone. Cons: No LaTeX; only 100 MB of file space; more structure means fewer options.

There is an option 3, which is to create a WordPress.com blog for the course and construct pages for everything that is static in nature (syllabus page, files, etc.). But WordPress.com only gives 50 MB of file space which is too restrictive for this purpose. It could possibly be done if I wanted to use Box.net for file sharing, which would be easy since WordPress.com blogs have a Box.net widget available for the sidebar. (I’ve got one off to your right, down a ways.)

In all these options, I would keep Angel around only for the online gradebook — which still sucks for reasons I haven’t elaborated on here (yet), but which students understandably appreciate. If I could find a good workaround for a secure online gradebook, I’d ditch Angel entirely.

Anybody have thoughts or experiences in this kind of thing?


Filed under Course management systems, Educational technology, Social software, Technology

How to make email complicated, Angel style

Here’s a little mini-tour through one of the many reasons why Angel, and other course management systems, drive me crazy and basically beg for me not to use them. This has to do with a simple and common course management task: Sending an email to all students in a class.

First of all, if you were using a basic email client to do this task, sending an email would be a matter of creating a distribution list for the students in the class — a one-time startup task — and then the following:

  1. Type the name of the list in the To: blank. (Most email clients have an auto-complete feature that doesn’t even require you complete the full name of the recipient.)
  2. Type in the subject and text of the email.
  3. Hit “Send”.

Three steps, each of which is easy and intuitive.

If you want to do this in Angel, on the other hand, it becomes a seven-step task, which is really nine tasks — each of which, like the tasks required of Hercules or aspiring Zen masters, involves some kind of test of strength and willpower.

Step 1: You have to click on the “Communicate” link at the top of the course web page.angel-email-1.jpg

Step 2: You have to locate and click on the “Read and compose course mail messages” link. Note that this is a text link — not an icon, or something that is easy to click on, which is usually the case for a commonly-used action.


Step 3: Once you are in the course email area, you have to locate the “Compose” link. Quick — find it!


How long did it take you? Did your eyes go right to it? Mine either. Another text link, normal-sized font — buried on the page. Then you click on that. Wherever it is.

Step 4: You have to click on the “Add Recipients” link, which is still a text link but at least it’s conveniently located above the To: field.


Steps 5(a), 5(b), and 5(c): Having finally gotten to the place where you add email addresses, you have to click on the subset of recipients that could possibly receive the email (step 5(a)). Then you have to click “To ->” (Step 5(b)). Then you have to click “OK” (Step 5(c)).


There are no shortcuts here, such as double-clicking on the recipient to have that group automatically appear in the “To:” field.

Step 6: Type in the subject and the text of the email.


However: Notice that, at least on my Firefox browser running on Mac OS X, the text field for the email body extends way off to the right and there is no left-right scroll bar available! You have to resize the browser to take up nearly all the horizontal space of the screen, or else the stuff you type near the right end of the line is invisible.

Step 7: Step 7 is to click “Send”, right? Not so fast. In Angel, if you click Send at this point, the email does not go to the recipient’s actual internet email address — it goes to their Angel course mail account which is not an actual email address at all but rather a proprietary messaging system that can only be checked from within Angel. If you want the email (if we can really call it that, at this point) to go to the students’ actual email accounts, you have to scroll down and select a checkbox that is unselected by default:


Then you click Send.

So let’s review:

  • Standard email client: One-time startup task of setting up the distribution list; then three intuitive steps to compose and send an email.
  • Angel: Nine steps to accomplish the same task, each of which involves some kind of non-intuitive action or madness-inducing design principle.

I’m at a loss as to why the makers of course management systems make their products like this, or why faculty and students are expected to flock to the nine-step non-intuitive way of doing things when there are perfectly good, and free, means of doing the same things with less work.


Filed under Course management systems, Educational technology, Technology