[Moodle] ultranet: moodle doesn't fit department's requirements

Sun Nov 30 15:39:23 EST 2008

Here are some of my reflections on the department response to Donna's post
about Ultranet and Moodle.

"The market sounding exercise subjectively assessed existing software
solutions"

Can the results of this market sounding exercise be publicly accessed? Did
it fairly consider the road map for these products? Moodle 2.0 due in April
2009 has some rip-roaring good features such as a dynamic XML database
integration feature. Hard to describe but you already notice this feature
with other web2.0 systems. Not only can Flickr photographs and Google Docs
be readily imported into a class, it can be integrated with compatible
timetable systems such as FirstClass as Kevork has done.

"..enterprise approach to intranet development .."

I wonder who considered that an enterprise approach is the only way to get
things done in education? Most schools got a web page up and running their
own way without a heavy handed, one shoe fits all approach. We did the same
for school file servers, specialist technicians and local e-mail solutions
several years before the department thought to step in and lend assistance.
Local solutions quickly meet local needs and provide scope for local
innovation. There is room for both approaches.

"Moodle was assessed and was not a close enough fit against the Department's
requirements for the Ultranet project."

Who assessed Moodle and what were their educational qualifications? What do
they mean by a close enough fit. Did anybody question the scope of the
requirements for Ultranet? Perhaps the requirements are too broad and ill
considered. Unless I am wrong and please correct me folks, none of the
schools currently running Moodle at an 'school-wide or enterprise level'
were approached.

"The market has already had the opportunity to respond to an open Request
for Tender."

The world of Intranets and eLearning changes quickly in two years. It is
foolish to limit consideration to responses for the original tender
submission. The failure to not select a successful tenderer the first time
around should not spoil the reconsideration of an entire proposal or the
merits of different Ultranet interpretations or considerations. It smacks of
arrogance when doors are slammed closed in our face.

Good intentions, vision or dollars do not make a good network or Intranet.

A centralist approach to the running and use of a school intranet could only
work by crushing innovation and creativity as it stamps its imposed template
on our practice of teaching and learning. Rather than taking well considered
baby steps or sharing our current best practice, we could end up watching
the department build an Ultranet laboratory for a new Frankenstein to stalk
the bloated educational landscape of state-control. Perhaps it will not be
alone, joining other well intentioned creations such as Recruitment Online
and the CASES finance system.

I quite agree with Ros. Lets work together to build an open education model
that is more about freedom (libre) than state-mandated control.  One that
reduces blind government interference in our classrooms and maximises
opportunities individual initiative.

Regards Roland

2008/11/29 Ros Meadows <ros.meadows at gmail.com>

>  In other words - they would prefer to give educational dollars to big
> business (the enterprise solution), rather than help to promote and improve
> an Australian made, freely available, open source solution, and in the
> process perhaps be able to give some dollars back to schools.
> Let's throw some good money after the bad!!
> There is no doubt that moodle could be adapted (modules added etc) to suit
> their needs, if they would embrace the ideology of Open Source (software AND
> learning) everyone would be better off.
> Considering the ultranet was originally supposed to be rolled out to
> schools from term 2 2008 they will only be 2 years (and how many millions??)
> overdue
> I believe it is also because they want TOTAL CONTROL of schools, if moodle
> was chosen the source would be open and, omigod, teachers might be able to
> get into the workings of the program and perhaps hide certain things eg
> parent surveys, from BIG BROTHER.
> Let's promote libre knowledge and learning
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libre_knowledge
>
> Long live DEECeaseD! yeh right!
>
> PS thanks Donna for coming on board in my VITTA session on FOSS. I am sure
> it improved the session no end!
>
> Cheers
> Ros Meadows
> Bentleigh SC
>
> [Comment From Jo McLeay]
> "I love teaching but I hate my job" Many have said this.
> http://www.smsn.vic.edu.au/ictguy/index.php/live/
>
> Donna Benjamin wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
> Moodle.com.au didn't submit to the original tender process, because they
> couldn't meet all the requirements, and it wasn't clear whether the
> department would accept a consortium response.
>
> Here's the response I got from the ultranet team...
>
> cheers
> Donna
>
> Ms Benjamin
>
> Thank you for your e-mail concerning the release of the selective tender
> for the Ultranet and your suggestions about the Moodle software
> solution.
>
> The Department is committed to delivering the Ultranet project to all
> Victorian government schools by Quarter 3, 2010.
>
> The Department decided to release a Request for Tender to five software
> vendors through a selective tender process following an independent
> market sounding of the local and global market.
>
> The market sounding exercise subjectively assessed existing software
> solutions that could potentially meet the Department's requirements for
> the Ultranet project and the key Government priorities of teaching and
> learning management and a parent portal.  Five software vendors were
> identified as being able to achieve an acceptable solution
> implementation outcome.
>
> The Ultranet will be implemented as an enterprise solution and the
> successful vendor will adopt an enterprise approach to intranet
> development.
>
> Moodle was assessed and was not a close enough fit against the
> Department's requirements for the Ultranet project.  Therefore Moodle
> was not suitable for this selective tender.
>
> The market has already had the opportunity to respond to an open Request
> for Tender.  The Department released an Ultranet Request for Tender in
> August 2007 and completed the tender evaluation process without being
> able to select a successful tenderer.
>
> Thanks
>
> <name removed>
> Project Manager
> Ultranet Project
>
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  http://www.edulists.com.au - FAQ, resources, subscribe, unsubscribe
> Moodle Mailing List kindly supported by
>  http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au - Victorian Curriculum and Assessment
> Authority and
>  http://www.vitta.org.au - VITTA Victorian Information Technology Teachers
> Association Inc
>
> Spam detection software, running on the system "gateway.edulists.com.au",
> has
> identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original message
> has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
> similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
> the administrator of that system for details.
>
> Content preview:  In other words - they would prefer to give educational
>  dollars to big business (the enterprise solution), rather than help to
>  promote and improve an Australian made, freely available, open source
>  solution, and in the process perhaps be able to give some dollars back
>  to schools. Let's throw some good money after the bad!! There is no
>  doubt that moodle could be adapted (modules added etc) to suit their
>  needs, if they would embrace the ideology of Open Source (software AND
>  learning) everyone would be better off. Considering the ultranet was
>  originally supposed to be rolled out to schools from term 2 2008 they
>  will only be 2 years (and how many millions??) overdue I believe it is
>  also because they want TOTAL CONTROL of schools, if moodle was chosen
>  the source would be open and, omigod, teachers might be able to get
>  into the workings of the program and perhaps hide certain things eg
>  parent surveys, from BIG BROTHER. Let's promote libre knowledge and
>  learning http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libre_knowledge [...]
>
> Content analysis details:   (5.1 points, 5.0 required)
>
>  pts rule name              description
> ---- ----------------------
> --------------------------------------------------
>  0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
>  1.1 HTML_10_20             BODY: Message is 10% to 20% HTML
>  1.2 MIME_HTML_ONLY         BODY: Message only has text/html MIME parts
>  0.0 HTML_TITLE_EMPTY       BODY: HTML title contains no text
>  2.8 LONGWORDS              Long string of long words
>
>
>
>

-- 
Roland Gesthuizen - ICT Coordinator - Westall Secondary College
http://www.westallsc.vic.edu.au

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change
the world; indeed it is the only thing that ever has." --Margaret Mead
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/moodle/attachments/20081130/e6feba46/attachment.html