learning management, content management and learning
TRANSCRIPT
Learning Management, Content Management and
Learning Content Management Systems
March 2004 1
Table of Contents
Glossary of Terms 2
List of Figures and Charts 4
Introduction 5
Describing the Applications 6
Learning Management Systems 6
Content Management Systems 7
Learning Content Management Systems 9
Comparing the Categories of Applications 12
Managing eLearning 18
Managing Reusable Learning Objects 20
Conclusion 21
References 23
March 2004 2
Glossary of Terms
Term
Definition
Asynchronous Learning
Not all learners are learning simultaneously. Interaction with other learners or with information may have a time delay.
CMS Content Management System: an application that manages and delivers small pieces of information called content components.
Collaborative Tools
Tools that allow learners to work simultaneously with other learners via internet technology.
Content Repository A database that stores and manages pieces of information or learning that has been created using XML and labeled with a set of metatags.
eLearning
Learning delivered via internet technology.
Extranet
“A private network that uses the Internet protocols and the public telecommunication system to share a business’s information, data or operations with external suppliers, vendors or customers. An extranet can be viewed as the external part of a company’s Intranet”. (GetNetWise, 2004)
Firewall
Hardware or software that provides security to a company’s internal systems by blocking unauthorized access.
Interface
The software through which a user interacts with an application.
Internet
“The vast collection of inter-connected networks that all use the TCP/IP protocols and that evolved from the ARPANET of the late 60's and early 70's” (GetNetWise, 2004)
Intranet “A private network inside a company or organization, which uses software like that used on the Internet, but is for internal use only, and is not accessible to the public” (Web Dictionary 2004).
LCMS Learning Content Management System: an application that supports content authoring, storage, assembly, personalization, and delivery to the learner. LCMSs control workflow and resources related to learning delivery.
LMS Learning Management System: an application that manages registration through course participation and tracks learner progress and assessment.
Metadata tag
A set of descriptors of a learning object’s content and use.
March 2004 3
Reusable Learning Object (RLO)
Context independent, transportable and reusable pieces of instruction that are digitally managed and delivered.
Sharable Content Object (SCO)
The smallest piece of instruction that makes sense on its own. Sharable content objects make up learning objects.
Synchronous Learning
Communication occurs at the same time between individuals. Information is accesses instantly.
XML Extensible Markup Language. A programming language that separates content from the presentation layer and that allows content to be transportable across platforms and into different delivery vehicles.
March 2004 4
List of Figures and Charts
Figure 1 Content Management Systems 8
Figure 2 LCMS Components 11
Figure 3 Learning Content Management Systems 12
Chart 1 Differences Between LCMS and LMS 14
Chart 2 When to use a LCMS or a LMS 16
Chart 3 Comparing LMS, CMS, and LCMS 17
Chart 4 eLearning Requirements 19
Chart 5 Reusable Learning Object Requirements 20
March 2004 5
Introduction
Learning costs companies money both in terms of direct costs and employee
time. Decision makers require information on what training is happening, the results of
the training, employee qualifications and certifications, and on what training is required
to support business goals. Companies need applications to manage their learning
administration, tracking, and reporting functions. At the same time, employees need
easy access to the information they need to plan, and manage their professional
development. Enter three categories of enterprise applications each of which is focused
on addressing particular aspects of the challenge.
This paper describes the three categories of applications detailing the core
functionality of each. It then compares the applications and discusses which is better to
manage eLearning in a company and which is better to manage reusable learning
objects.
March 2004 6
Describing the Applications
The three categories of enterprise applications being considered in this paper
are: learning management systems, content management systems, and learning
content management systems. Each category is described below.
Learning Management System (LMS)
Learning management systems are applications that launch and display content
and that manage the interaction between the performer and the learning resources.
They are “software that automates the administration of training events” (ASTD, 2002,
249). This automation of administrative functions can lead to significant time, personnel,
and resource savings. In addition, the robust administrative functions enable
corporations to easily track completion of government mandated training (e.g. safety,
hazardous materials), currency of professional certifications, and mandatory human
resource related programs (e.g. sexual harassment, diversity). (Hall, 2002, p. 5)
Learning management systems integrate tools and processes to support the
delivery and management of learning and the tracking of results. They “enable
companies to plan and track the learning needs and accomplishments of employees,
customers, and partners…” (Robbins, 2002, p. 1). Every LMS should have the ability to
display a catalogue, register learners, track learner progress, and provide reports. LMSs
must “be capable of handling various delivery modes – online, instructor-led, self-paced,
collaborative, facilitated, nonfacilitated, and the like” (Singh, 2000, p. 3).
March 2004 7
These applications are either installed on a corporate intranet or housed off-site
at service provider. They are accessed through either an extranet or the internet. “A
learning management system uses Internet technologies to manage the interaction
between users and learning resources” (Rosenberg, 2001, p. 161).
It is important to note that while some LMSs may have a degree of content
management ability this is not their main focus. According to Rosenberg (2001),
although learning management systems differ from vendor to vendor in their focus on
one or more feature they all have some core capabilities: online course catalogue;
online registration system; competency assessment; ability to launch and track
eLearning; learning assessment; learning material management; customizable
reporting; collaborative and synchronous learning tools; and, ability to integrate with
other enterprise applications. (pp. 162-164)
Content Management System (CMS)
Before describing content management systems it is important to understand
content management. Content management is “the collection of policies and
technologies that guide and enable corporations to contribute, manage, and share their
structured and/or unstructured information” (Barnes in Falla, 2001, p.1). Content
management systems are data repositories that may also contain authoring,
sequencing, and content aggregation tools. There objective is to “simplify the creation
and administration of online content” (Nichani, 2001, p.2). Originally developed and
used by newspapers then adapted in the mid-1990s to manage the large volumes of
March 2004 8
content required for robust web-sites, CMSs incorporate a workflow process and
manage information based on search and retrieval criteria. (Jones, 2001, pp. 22-25)
Like learning content management systems, content management systems can support
content being created once (content components) and used many times, for example,
the same chart might be used in several different articles targeted at different
audiences.
Figure 1: Content Management Systems
(Nichani, 2001, p. 3)
March 2004 9
Robertson (April 2003) says that content management systems manage small,
interconnected units of information where each unit is defined by its location on a site.
They are focused primarily on web-page creation and editing with cross-linkages
between pages. The system provides tight integration between authoring and the
repository along with a powerful publishing engine. (p. 1) While ASTD (2002) maintains
that a CMS “stores and distributes the right content to the right learner at the right time”
(p. 248), Duncan Lennox from WBT Systems believes that
CMSs do not work well for learning because they are designed for basic
information transfer. They simply identify the user and deliver pieces of content
associated with that user. E-learning, on the other hand, requires systems that
account for such complexities as a course’s level of difficulty, whether a learner
has completed the necessary prerequisites and whether that person learns best
by reading, listening, or doing. (Jones, 2001, pp. 24)
Another use content management systems sometimes considered for is
knowledge management. “While a CMS itself is not the source of knowledge, it can be
a very valuable enabler in knowledge-capture processes” (Robertson, May 2003, p. 1).
The content management system will only store and manage the content: it will not
analyze, organize, or distil content into knowledge.
Learning Content Management System (LCMS)
Learning content management systems allow online content to be stored,
managed, and reused through integrated database functionality. Each LCMS is a
March 2004 10
“complex piece of software that labels learning objects … then organizes and delivers
them in infinite combinations” (Jones, 2001, p. 21). The core components of a LCMS
are: an authoring tool suitable for non-programmers; a dynamic delivery interface that
delivers content; an administrative component that manages learner records, launches
courses, and tracks progress; and, a learning object repository that is a central
database that houses and manages content. (Donelto, 2002, p. 1) The repository either
delivers learning objects to learners individually or combines objects into learning
modules. These objects and modules are presented to learners through the interface
which also “provides user tracking, links to related sources of information, and supports
multiple assessment types with user feedback” (Brennan, Funke & Anderson, 2001,
p.4). The administrative application manages learner information, launches courses
from a catalogue, and tracks and reports on learner progress. The authoring application
automates authoring by providing authors with templates and storyboarding
capabilities that incorporate instructional design principles. Using these templates
authors may develop an entire course by using existing learning objects in the
repository, creating new learning objects, or suing a combination of old and new
objects. (p.5)
Although 81% of the LCMSs reviewed in a recent Brandon Hall report (Hall, 2003, p.1)
incorporate some LMS functionality, this is not their main focus. The same study also
found that 100% of the LCMSs reviewed described themselves as “interoperable with
third-party learning management systems” (p.1) In other words they can seamlessly
operate hand-in-hand with LMSs created by other companies.
March 2004 11
Figure 2: LCMS Components
(Brennan, Funke & Anderson, 2001, p.4)
It is important to understand that learning content management systems are
based on a reusable learning object model allowing content to be reused within or
across courses or programs. (Hall, 2003, p.2) In order to do this, LCMSs manage
content separate from the media in which the content will be delivered. Figure 3 shows
how content is authored and stored in the LCMS as RLOs. These are then assembled
into learning chunks or accessed as individual pieces of information or instruction and
delivered to the learner.
March 2004 12
Figure 3: Learning Content Management Systems
(Nichani, 2001, p. 5)
Comparing the Categories of Applications
Each of the three categories of applications considered in this paper
increase the amount of information available to decision makers. Applications in all
three categories have individual capabilities that make them appropriate for specific
situations. In addition, all of the applications should meet certain criteria. They should
all be: authoring tool neutral meaning that content can be authored using any tool;
vendor neutral meaning that the application can manage content authored by any
vendor; browser neutral meaning that the application must appear and function the
March 2004 13
same no matter what browser is being used; platform neutral meaning that the
application can run on any platform (PC, MAC, etc.) with any operating system
(Windows, Linux, etc.); scalable meaning that the application can scale larger or smaller
to meet the organization’s needs; includes a firewall; and, includes an intuitive interface.
(Rosenberg, 2001, p. 166)
If we begin by comparing a LMS with a LCMS we see although there is some
overlap in the functionality, they have quite a different focus.
LMSs make the process of scheduling classes, creating catalogs and registering
learners more efficient. LCMSs on the other hand, focus only on delivery. In the
broadest terms, the LMS helps get you to the classroom door and the LCMS
manages the experience inside the classroom. (Jones, 2001, p. 23)
Or, to put it another way, “the primary objective of a learning management system
(LMS) is to manage learners… By contrast a learning content management system
(LCMS) manages content or learning objects” (Hall, 2003, p.1).
As mentioned earlier, a learning management system can save money by
reducing learning administration costs. “The value proposition of a LMS is cost-efficient
training administration” (Brennan, Funke & Anderson, 2001, p.9). A LMS cannot,
however, support content sharing and the attendant savings realized through the use of
learning objects nor can it provide the same level of learning control or personalization
of learning. As Schelin (2001) explains, “the initial benefits of a LMS are cost-
March 2004 14
displacement issues, whereas the LCMS space is all about focusing on the notion of
what we call reducing time to performance” (p.1).
Chart 1: Differences Between LCMS and LMS
Learning Content Management Systems
Learning Management Systems
• Used by content developers, designers and project managers.
• To author learning content as learning objects, practice and assessment items, simulations and other learner interactions.
• Store content in a learning object repository.
• Offer content management tools (egs. search for learning objects, access rights and version control).
• Used to deliver learning content in multiple format (e.g. eLearning, CD-ROM, paper-based materials and performance support).
• Offer learning features (e.g. adaptive learning paths, skill gap analysis, asynchronous collaboration via email and discussion groups, assessment).
• Used by training managers, instructors and administrators.
• To manage course catalog, schedule, student registration, and to capture learner profile data.
• Stores data on courses and students. • Provides reports for training results and
competency mapping/skill gap analysis. • Supports the launch to eLearning courses. • Shares learner data with ERP system. • Offers ability to create and administer
tests.
(Donelto, 2002, p. 2)
In considering the functionality that overlaps between the two applications,
learning content management system authoring and content management tools are far
more robust than those found in learning management systems and learning
management systems have many more course administration and management
features than learning content management systems would offer. “Together, the LMS
and LCMS provide a way for organizations to inexpensively and efficiently create and
March 2004 15
reuse content, deliver that content, assess and track users, and gather important user
data” (Jacobsen, 2002, p. 2)
Both learning management systems and learning content management systems
track content delivery and student progress. However, each tracks to a different level of
granularity.
A LMS concentrates on course-level tracking, particularly completion status and
rolled-up scores. In contrast, a LCMS employs detailed tracking at the learning-
object level not only to trace user performance and interactions at a finer
granularity, but also to provide the metrics that help authors analyze the learning
object’s clarity, relevance, and effectiveness. (Rengarajan, 2001, p.3)
If we now consider a CMS we see that the focus of the CMS is on neither getting to the
classroom door nor managing experiences inside the classroom: a CMS focuses on
information transfer. In a corporate setting, a content management system “supports
the creation, management, distribution, publishing and discovery of corporate
information” (Robertson, June 2003, p.1). Like a LCMS, a CMS can streamline the
authoring process, provide consistency, support decentralized authoring, and reduce
duplication of information. The difference is that a LCMS is managing learning through
a robust set of tools while the CMS is managing discrete pieces of information.
March 2004 16
Chart 2: When to use a LCMS or a LMS
If you are primarily concerned with…
Then you …
Managing student access and records for courseware that has already been developed.
Probably need a LMS only.
Managing student records for courses developed within your LCMS.
May be able to use the LMS functions of your LCMS and may not need to purchase a separate LMS.
Need to develop multiple courses using learning objects and need to manage both online and offline learning events.
May need both a LMS and LCMS in order to get the best system for both content authoring and course/student management.
(Donelto, 2002, p. 2)
Content management systems create and manage content components defined
as “the smallest self-contained piece of information” (Nichani, 2001, p.3). In the
learning world, the smallest piece of instruction that makes sense on its own is often
called a sharable content object. These are managed as reusable learning content
through a LCMS.
Both content management and learning content management systems can
support knowledge management by capturing tacit and explicit knowledge in the form of
examples, best practices, procedures, etc. also sometimes called knowledge artefacts.
These artefacts “are the currency for both knowledge management and learning/training
work” (Hall, 2001, p. 1) Knowledge artefacts (content components or sharable content
objects) can be employed to ensure consistency of communication, information, and
learning across national or global corporations. Using a single content repository
“ensures that organizations are consistent in spreading their learning messages to
March 2004 17
disparate audiences. Moreover, metagging accounts for different languages when the
audience is global” (Brennan, Funke & Anderson, 2001, p.8). With the content
separated from the presentation layer, localization of presentation is far more cost
effective.
Chart 3: Comparing LMS, CMS and LCMS
Feature LMS CMS LCMS
Manage Learners R L
Manage Content R R
Create Content L R
Manages Instructor-led Sessions R
Course Catalogue R L
Registration System R L
Competency Management R L
Launch and Track eLearning R L
Assessment Creation, Evaluation, and Feedback R R
Searchable Library of Reusable Content R R
Collaboration / Synchronous Learning Tools
L R
Integration with Human Resources Applications R
Locate and Deliver Specific Content to a Learner
R R
R = Robust Functionality L = Limited Functionality
(Adapted from Donelto, 2002 and Hall, 2003)
March 2004 18
From a technical point of view, both CMSs and LCMSs have a similar
architecture and use a programming language called extensible mark-up language
(XML) to store content. XML stores content separate from the presentation layer,
simplifying the updating of content. So how is a CMS different from a LCMS? As
Brennan, Funke and Anderson (2001) explain:
The primary difference between a CMS and a LCMS is that the former is a
horizontal software application and the latter is a vertical market software
application. The two are architecturally similar in that they take content through
the entire process of organization, maintenance, security and protection.
However a LCMS, as a vertical market application, requires development and
deployment layers that cannot be addressed by the generalized content
management features found in a CMS. (p.11)
As one can see in chart 3 a LCMS “combines the administrative and
management dimensions of a traditional LMS with the content creation and
personalized assembly dimensions of a CMS” (Nichani, 2001, p.4)
Managing eLearning
Of the three applications discussed in this paper which is the most appropriate to
manage eLearning? The research department at Thinq (2003) believes that “Learning
Management Systems (LMS) are critical to facilitating the widespread adoption of e-
learning” (p.1). To effectively manage eLearning enterprise-wide an application would
March 2004 19
need to be able to store, launch, track, manage embedded learner assessments, and
report on progress through eLearning topics, lessons, and modules.
Chart 4: eLearning Requirements
eLearning Requirements LMS CMS LCMS
Manage Learners R L
Course Catalogue R L
Registration System R L
Competency Management R L
Launch and Track eLearning R L
Assessment Creation, Evaluation, and Feedback R R
Collaboration / Synchronous Learning Tools
L R
Integration with Human Resources Applications R
R = Robust Functionality L = Limited Functionality
(Adapted from Donelto, 2002 and Hall, 2003)
As can be seen in Chart 4, learning management systems have all the elements
required to effectively manage eLearning. Learning content management systems have
most of the functionality but it is less robust. Content management systems do not have
the functionality required to manage eLearning.
March 2004 20
Managing Reusable Learning Objects
When one considers the appropriateness of each of the categories to manage
learning objects it quickly becomes apparent that a learning management system does
not meet the most basic requirement: LMSs do not contain a content repository.
Without a repository there is no where to store the objects and no way to manage them.
Chart 5: Reusable Learning Object Requirements
eLearning Requirements LMS CMS LCMS
Manage Content R R
Create Content L R
Launch and Track eLearning R L
Assessment Creation, Evaluation, and Feedback R R
Searchable Library of Reusable Content R R
Locate and Deliver Specific Content to a Learner R R
Manage Sharable Content Objects from Multiple Sources Created in XML
R R
Store, Search, and Retrieve Content based on Tags R R
Display Content in Multiple User Interfaces L R
R = Robust Functionality L = Limited Functionality
(Adapted from Donelto, 2002 and Hall, 2003)
Content management systems may appear, on the surface, to meet many of the
requirements for managing reusable learning objects. However, as mentioned earlier,
CMSs are horizontal applications managing information in discrete chunks along a
linear publishing path. They do not have the layers of functionality required to manage
March 2004 21
learning objects. Learning content management systems, on the other hand, are robust
vertical applications that include authoring tools, dynamic user interfaces, learning
object repositories, and administrative, tracking, and reporting functions. This structure
makes learning content management systems the appropriate choice for managing
learning objects.
Conclusion
Each of the three categories of application discussed in this paper has a distinct
focus that makes them appropriate for specific functions. In some situations one type of
application might compliment another to provide meet a corporation’s requirements. In
other cases, combining two or more of the applications would be redundant. For
example, a content management system could be quite effective combined with a
learning management system if the goal was to reduce the cost and increase the
efficiency of classroom and eLearning delivery while capturing and tracking knowledge
artefacts that will be used as information or transformed into learning. A learning
content management system would be quite effective when teamed with a learning
management system should a company require strong learning administration and
tracking while at the same time wanting to garner the benefits of delivering learning
using sharable content objects. However there would be little or no benefit in combining
a content management system with a learning content management system since the
learning content management system can manage content components as well as
sharable content objects in a more robust manner while also providing other key
functionality.
March 2004 22
Although the return from implementing one or more of these applications can be
high, so is the cost. When considering whether to invest and in which category of
application to invest corporations must first clearly define the corporate strategies
driving the implementation, how the strategies would be operationalized into business
goals, what functionality is required to achieve the goals, and then identify the
application or applications that will provide the identified functionality.
March 2004 23
References
Barron, Tom. (2001). An e-learning industry update. [on-line]. Available: http://www.learningcircuits.org/2001/jul2001/barron.html.
Brennan, Michael, Funke, Susan, and Anderson, Cushing. (2001). The learning content management system [on-line]. Available: http://www.mindbranch.com/listing/product/R104-6256.html.
Donello Jill. (2002). Theory & practice: Learning content management systems
[on-line]. Available: http://www.elearningmag.com. Falla, Jane, Ed. (2001). Content management: coping with the content challenge:
definitions [on-line]. Available: http://www.advisor.com/Articles.nsf/aid/FALLJ145. Gartner Inc. (2002) E-learning / collaboration scenario: leverage your
infrastructure [on-line]. Available: http://symposium.gartner.com/section.php.id.1037.s.5.html.
GetNewWise. (2004). Glossary [on-line]. Available:
http://www.getnetwise.org/glossary.php. Gole, Sarah Fister. (February, 2001). Assembly required. Online Learning
Magazine, 5 (2).
Gonzel, Rebecca and Kiser, Kim. (February, 2002). Delivering the goods. Online Learning Magazine, 6 (2).
Hall, Brandon. (2001). Learning management and knowledge management. Is the holy grail of integration close at hand? [on-line]. Available: http://www.brandonhall.com.
Hall, Brandon. (2002). Learning management systems 2002 [on-line]. Available:
http://www.brandonhall.com. Hall, Brandon. (2002). Six steps to developing a successful e-learning initiative:
excerpts from the e-learning guidebook. In Allison Rossett (ED.) The ASTD E-Learning Handbook. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hall, Brandon. (2003). Learning management systems and learning content
management systems demystified [on-line]. Available: http://www.brandonhall.com.
Islam, Kaliym. (2002). The good, the bad, and the ugly [on-line]. Available: http://www.elearningmag.com.
March 2004 24
Jackson, Robert. (2003). Web based learning resources library [on-line]. Available: http://www.knowledgeability.biz/weblearning.
Jacobsen, Peder. (2002). LMS vs. LCMS [on-line]. Available:
http://www.elearningmag.com. Jones, Chris. (2001). Learning content management systems promise to change
the way people learn online. Will they deliver? [on-line]. Available: http://www.onlinelearningmag.com/new/jun01/cover.htm.
Jones, Chris. (June, 2001). Rules of the game. Online Learning Magazine, 5 (6).
Mandelkern, Dave. (2003). Docent outliner and CDS: The industry’s first LCMS?
[on-line]. Available: http://www.docent.com/elearning/mandelkern_lcms.html. Mortimer, Lori. (2002). (Learning) objects of desire: promise and practicality [on-
line]. Available: http://www.learningcircuits.org/2002/apr2002/mortimer.htm. Nichani, Maish. (2001). LCMS = LMS + CMS [RLOs] - How does this affect the
learner? The instructional designer? [on-line]. Available: http://www.elearningpost.com/elthemes/lcms.asp.
Rengarajan, Raghaven. (August 2001). LCMS and LMS Taking advantage of
Tight Integration [on-line]. Available: http://home.click2learn.com/en/solutions/white_papers.asp.
Robbins, Shelley R. (2002). The evolution of the learning content management
system [on-line]. Available: http://www.learningcircuits.org/2002/apr2002/robbins.html. Robertson, James. (January, 2002). How to evaluate a content management
system [on-line]. Available: http://www.steptwo.com.au. Robertson, James. (August, 2002). What are the goals of a content management
system? [on-line]. Available: http://www.steptwo.com.au. Robertson, James. (April, 2003). Is it document management or content
management? [on-line]. Available: http://www.steptwo.com.au. Robertson, James. (May, 2003). Where is the knowledge in a content
management system? [on-line]. Available: http://www.steptwo.com.au. Robertson, James. (June, 2003). So, what is a content management system?
[on-line]. Available: http://www.steptwo.com.au. Rosenberg, Marc J. (2001). e-Learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
March 2004 25
Schelin, Elsa. (2001). A look at e-learning content management systems[on-line]. Available: http://www.elearningmag.com/DuncanLennox.asp.
Singh, Harvi. (2001). Learning content management systems [on-line]. Available: http://www.elearningmag.com/issues/feb01/managementsystems.asp. Thinq. (2003). LMS, the backbone of your training system [on-line]. Available: http://www.thinq.com.
Walker, David. (2001). Interview with a content management heretic [on-line]. Available: http://www.shorewalker.com/pages/cms_orthodoxy-1.html.