0% found this document useful (0 votes)
119 views10 pages

Analysis LMS

This document analyzes and compares several learning management systems (LMS). It discusses key features of LMS including learning tools, communication tools, and productivity tools. The analysis compares 36 different LMS platforms based on these criteria. While most LMS support multimedia elements and creating/editing course content, the document finds that communication support is often lacking, leading users to rely on external forums and social networks. The goal is to provide an updated comparative review of modern LMS software and inform future LMS design.

Uploaded by

mochamad n akbar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
119 views10 pages

Analysis LMS

This document analyzes and compares several learning management systems (LMS). It discusses key features of LMS including learning tools, communication tools, and productivity tools. The analysis compares 36 different LMS platforms based on these criteria. While most LMS support multimedia elements and creating/editing course content, the document finds that communication support is often lacking, leading users to rely on external forums and social networks. The goal is to provide an updated comparative review of modern LMS software and inform future LMS design.

Uploaded by

mochamad n akbar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 10

Accelerat ing t he world's research.

An Analysis of Some Learning


Management Systems
Radoslava Kraleva, VELIN KRALEV, Mehrudin Sabani

International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering and Information Technology (IJASEIT)

Cite this paper Downloaded from Academia.edu 

Get the citation in MLA, APA, or Chicago styles

Related papers Download a PDF Pack of t he best relat ed papers 

Choosing t he Right Learning Management Syst em (LMS) for t he Higher Educat ion Inst it ut ion …
Fariza Khalid

Current t rends in e-t raining and m-t raining and prospect s for maint enance vocat ional t raining
Christ os Emmanouilidis

Current t rends in e-t raining and prospect s for maint enance vocat ional t raining
Nick Papat hanasiou
Vol.9 (2019) No. 4
ISSN: 2088-5334

An Analysis of Some Learning Management Systems


Radoslava Kraleva#1, Mehrudin Sabani#2, Velin Kralev#3
#
Department of Informatics, South-West University "Neofit Rilski," 66 Ivan Michailov Str., Blagoevgrad, 2700, Bulgaria
E-mail: 1rady_kraleva@swu.bg; 2 sabanimehrudin@outlook.com; 3velin_kralev@swu.bg

Abstract— The use of modern information and communication technology as a means of training pupils and students has become a
popular trend. For this purpose, a special type of web-based content management systems, called Learning Management Systems
(LMSs), has been used. Due to their wide implemented, lots of LMSs have been developed in recent years. All those platforms often
provide similar features and users can hardly choose the most appropriate for them. There is a variety of methodologies for the
quality evaluations of e-learning in the scientific literature. However, there are no good explanations and detailed studies of most of
the modern LMS platforms. This article proposes an analysis of the usability and software functionality of the LMS frameworks.
Based on the survey of the state-of-art science research, the criteria for analysis of the LMS platforms in this paper are summarized
in three categories: Learning skills tools, Communication tools, and Productivity tools. The main goal is to present a wide-range
comparative analysis of 36 electronic learning management systems. All of them support the use of multimedia elements, creating and
editing the lectures, exercises and course assignments. The lack of communication support leads to using web forums and social
networks out of the LMS. The contribution of this paper presents an enriched modern trend of the software methodologies of the
web-based oriented learning management systems from the perspective of design and development.

Keywords— e-learning; learning management system (LMS); LMS analysis and evaluation; human-computer interaction; software
engineering; mobile learning.

For example, in a traditional classroom, educators try to


I. INTRODUCTION keep the attention of the learners throughout the learning
The standard classroom, paper textbooks and paper process. Nevertheless, students do not always respond to the
handouts are no longer the only way to teach and educate questions, and they are not often focused. Sometimes simply
students. The development of information and information because they distract, but sometimes because they do not
technologies has provided an opportunity for their direct use understand the taught material. This lack of engagement is a
in the training process. New types of training such as e- challenge for both the teacher and the student. The speed of
learning, distance learning and mobile learning have assimilating new knowledge is an individual process.
emerged [1]. All of them use the internet to provide the Students often want to ask their teachers to stop and re-
necessary training materials and are often named only web- explain what they have not understood, but they do not do
based e-learning. According to [2], e-learning provides that. This leads to significant deficiencies in the students'
asynchronous interaction, at any time, in every place, assists knowledge, and hence to their inability to learn the
in teamwork and contributes to the use of new technologies subsequent material.
in education. What is necessary for interesting and useful learning is to
Moreover, this type of learning is a model of the modern develop proper teaching materials that can be easily updated
education system which aims to cope with the rapid and maintained. They should allow the use of different types
development of information technology and to motivate of multimedia and access from different devices. The main
young people to learn. The increasing motivation of the function of the software application named web-based
student to learn new knowledge and to get new skills Learning Management Systems (LMS) is to provide a safe,
through LMS has been noted in several scientific reliable, and flexible e-learning environment. This
publications [3]–[5]. Using LMS platforms on every phone, specialized software is primarily aimed at training and
tablet or laptop in every place and anytime, supports to the allows the creation and maintenance of learning content and
students to learn more easily, to be more interested and freer organizes it in a standard way as a course divided into
in the learning process. modules containing lessons, automatically generated tests
with questions from pre-created urns, and support for the
track progress of the learners [6]. The supports for chats,

1190
forums, wikis and e-book libraries are also part of the development. The obtained results should be helpful for the
current LMS specification. future design and development of the e-learning software.
Using the e-learning platforms provides the teachers and
learners with a flexible tool that is accessible at any time and II. MATERIAL AND METHOD
from anywhere. E-learning materials can be easily re-written Investigating the quality of education after using e-
or/and upgraded, and the student can quickly and easily get learning systems has been the subject of many studies. A
in touch with their teacher and get the help they need significant part of the researchers proposes different
without being worried by their peers. More and more approaches and criteria for evaluations of LMS platforms
education ministries encourage teachers to use e-learning based on their applying and use in the learning process.
platforms to motivate their students [7]. Moreover, many of One of the first studies related to evaluating the e-learning
the universities and schools use LMS platforms to platforms quality was provided by Ehlers in [16]. He defines
complement face-to-face learning. All this determines the "that a learning environment can be conceptualized by four
widespread distribution of such software. different components that each embedded different
Over the last years, various LMS platforms have appeared. perspective on quality": (i) Learner, (ii) Learning
They have different functionalities and give users a variety Environment, (iii) Goal and Intention, (iv) Topic and
of options. Some of the modern LMS systems are based on Content.
cloud computing and do not require a system administrator The advantages of using e-learning are undeniable and
with experience in software installation and support. But have been the subject of extensive discussion and research
there are also systems where in-depth knowledge of web by various scientists and educators over the past decade. In a
programming languages such as PHP, JavaScript, knowledge study among 424 students, Liaw [17] found that using
of management and administration of databases, such as interactive multimedia education has contributed to
MySQL, Microsoft SQL Server, is strictly necessary. improving the effectiveness of learning. The importance and
Over the last few years, the most interesting approach to advantages of multimedia elements are presented in [18].
software development has been the one based on the users' That is why many of the modern e-learning systems provide
preferences and experiences, called user-centred design [8], the opportunity to create interactive multimedia resources,
[9]. This method gains increasing popularity among software and this opportunity should be considered when creating
developers and has a direct impact on end-to-end software, criteria for evaluation and analysis of LMS frameworks.
including those designed for learning [10]. The advantages of Moodle LMS used at the Gokaraju
The centre attention of designers and developers of LMS Rangaraju Institute of Engineering and Technology (GRIET),
platforms adapted to users' capabilities and preferences is Hyderabad, India, was extensively studied in [19]. Madhavi
reviewed in [11]. Chang and Guetl discuss the challenge of et al. are noted that 100% of the students used this e-learning
life-long learning and the shortcomings of modern e-learning system in classrooms, and they continued to learn actively
systems. The focus of their study is the use of different outside the institution. This further reinforces the close
pedagogical approaches and learning tools. relationship of the information technologies in the area of
A new kind of e-learning system based on automatic education and raises interest in the education of young
recognition and prediction of user preferences and self- people.
adapting to the user requirements has emerged recently. This The effect of LMS platforms as a pupil-to-pupil and
type of system is called the Adapting Learning Management student-to-student communication and as a place to share
System [12], and its development and improvement are information and knowledge in a closed group has been dealt
forthcoming. Other researchers are directing their efforts with in [18].
towards e-learning based on social networks and enhancing The trend towards a steady increase in the scientists'
communication between learners (students) and trainees interest in e-learning and all its variants based on the
(lecturers) [13], [14]. The use of social networks as an e- analysis of available documents from Scopus database until
learning platform is also studied in [15]. 2019 is reported in [20]. An analogous study of E-learning,
One should not ignore that the LMS systems are like M-learning, D-learning related to their definitions and
black boxes for end-users which people choose only because analysis of their importance in 260 scientific papers is
of their price and personal preference. In most cases, they presented in [21].
choose the software that they have already used, or it has Other studies are discussing the negative impacts of e-
good reviews, and they would hardly replace it with a learning environment such as diminishing the interest of
different LMS framework, regardless of its qualities and learners, reduction of the communication between the
capabilities. In most studied articles, scientists have lecturer and students, the need for good self-discipline, and
proposed evaluation models for LMS platforms, but they responsibility to the learning process [22], [23]. Interestingly,
have analysed with them only to 3 applications. The present these publications are much fewer. It has led to a change in
study shows that there is a lot of e-learning software, and many educational systems around the world, including in
most of them have similar characteristics. Bulgaria. Currently, blending learning is applied to lots of
This article reveals the conducted comparative and Bulgarian schools. LMS platforms are used to support
analytic empirical study of web-based Learning classical learning. In lots of Bulgarian universities, distance
Management Systems platforms based on our approach of learning is widely used.
evaluating the e-learning platforms quality in terms of their
software specifications and functionalities. The main goal of
the study is to present the current trends in the LMS platform

1191
TABLE I
FACTORS AND EVALUATION CRITERIA OF THE LMSS ACCORDING TO SOME STUDIES PUBLISHED DURING 2004-2019.

Author(s) and
Factors and evaluation criteria of the LMSs according to the cited references
references
U. D. Ehlers, 2004 [16] Tutor support: Interaction centerednessModeration of learning processes; Learner vs. content centeredness;
Individualized learner support; Goal vs. development centeredness; Traditional communication media;
Synchronous communication media; Asynchronous communication media
Cooperation and communication in the course: Social cooperation; Discursive cooperation
Technology: Adaptivity and personalization; Synchronous communication possibilities; Availability of contents.
Costs - Expectations - Value: Expectation of individualization and need orientation; Individual non-economic
costs; Economic costs; Practical benefits; Interest to the course and media usage.
Information transparency: Counselling, Advice; Organizational information; Information about course / contents.
Course structure: Personal support of learning processes; Introduction to technical aspects and to the content;
Tests and exams.
Didactics: Background material; Multimedia enriched presentation material; Structured and goal-oriented course
material; Support of learning; Feedback on learning progress; Individualized tasks
F. B. García and Content: Content authoring; Eternal sources; Multimedia contents; Multiple organizations.
A. H. Jorge, 2006 [32]. Communications: Forums; Messages; E-mail; Chat.
Management: User/groups; Assessment; Grades; Tracking.
Å. Grönlund and Learning and communication tools: Self-assessment quiz; Questions during class; Participatory cards;
Y. M. Islam, 2010 [36] Homework; Learning partner; Meaning; Reading
Administrative tools: Registration; Attendance; Course information & rules; Results
Teacher support: Live lesson; Dashboard for the teacher; Analysis of student responses
P. Poulova, I. Simonova Tools intended for generating contents: Page; URL; File; Folder; Legend; Book; Lecture; Dictionary (index);
and M. Manenova, 2015 Syllabus; Lesson plan; Video; Integration (integration with study contents of other LMS).
[26] Communication tools: Discussion panel; Chat; Reports; Inquiry; Comments; Blogs; Survey (question-form).
Tools for collecting and evaluating activities: Task; Test; Workshop (Self and Peer Assessment); Safe
Assignment.
Tools for co-operation and other possibilities of the system: Group mode; Wiki; Virtual classroom; Calendar;
Internal mail; Tracking; Statistics; Database; Language adjustment; Certificates.
Price.
N. N. M. Kasim and Based on the Cloud; Flexible; Easy to use; Able to integrate with other systems; Accessible; User-friendly;
F. Khalid, 2016 [24] Synchronous and asynchronous interaction; Able to see who is online; Personal space for draft writing and
journals, as well as managing personal and private information; Able to send and receive personal messages with
other users; Lecturers and students able to adapt and manage the courses in the software; Each user has file
storing utility and the storage can be shared with other users; The entire content and course structure can be
stored and backed up in the software; An administrator can restrict user access or give multiple roles to multiple
users; Provides contextual learning, able to identify talent, improve the efficiency and effectiveness of workforce
management
A. Janson, M. Söllner, IT support; Interactivity; Task-technology fit; Faithful LMS appropriation; Learning process satisfaction;
and J. M. Leimeister, Perceived learning success
2017 [28]
M. Ouadoud, Learner support: Pedagogical activities: problems, simulations, tests self-correcting; Interactive resources: text,
M. Y. Chkouri, and image, audio, video, PDF, Flash; Assessment; Collaborating learning with sheared documents
A. Nejjari, 2018 [29] Teacher support: Creating the teacher recourse interfaces; Sharing educational resources; Planning of
pedagogical resources.
Tutor support: Creating and management of the forums, chat and videoconference; Monitoring of the students’
activities; Monitoring the groups’ management.
Administrative tools: Establishing the groups; Monitoring the activities of teachers; Managing the courses;
Customizing the platform; Managing the roles.
R. Kraleva and Age; Price; Mobile platform; Related to science research; Work offline (asynchronous work); Accessibility;
V. Kralev, 2018 [31] Communication; Social skills; Math skills; Functional skills; Languages; Organizer; Entertainment; Educational;
Medical care; Use media like video, audio, images.
W. T. Nakamura, Type of Technology: Written Reporting; Oral Reporting; Observation/Monitoring
L. C. Marques, Information Source: Users; The Development Team; UX Experts
L. Rivero, Location: Controlled environment; Field
E. H. de Oliveira, and Type of Assessed Application: Generic; Web Application; Mobile Application; Others
T. Conte, 2019 [27] Type of Assessed Artifact: Conceptual Ideas; Design Models; Functional Prototype or Finished App.
Assessed Period of Experience: Before Usage, During Usage; After Usage
Collected Data: Qualitative; Quantitative; Both
Supports Correction of Identified Problems: Availability; Available for Free / Under a License; Not Available
A. Aldiab, Page; URL; File; Folder; Legend; Book; Lecture; Syllabus; Dictionary; Lesson plan; Video; Integration;
H. Chowdhury, Discussion; Chat; Reports; Inquiry; Comments; Blogs; Survey; Quick mail; Task; Tests; Workshop; Safe
A. Kootsookos, F. Alam Assignment; Group mode; Wiki; Virtual classroom; Internal mail; Calendar; Tracking; Statistics; Database;
and H. Allhibi, 2019, Language adjustment; Certificates
[25]

1192
In the studied literature, besides the advantages and pedagogical view. In this kind of science articles, the quality
disadvantages, some strategies for comparison of different and implementation of the LMS platform (in terms of
LMS platforms are presented. Some of these references we software design and development) are irrelevant. An
will discuss here. We should note that the most widely example is [16], in which the important factors determining
considered and investigated platforms are Moodle and the quality of LMS systems are aimed at the learners, and the
Blackboard. They are at the top of almost all rankings for LMS evaluation is focused on the effect of the learning
LMS platforms. process.
A comparative analysis of six LMS platforms (Moodle, Using the existing social networks (Facebook) and mobile
Sakai, ATutor, Blackboard, SuccessFactor, SumTotal) is applications for video chat and voice calls (Skype) as tools
presented by Kasim et al. in [24]. for teaching and learning is a new trend in the modern
A study of commercial LMS platforms - Moodle, classroom. Increased interest in social networks, as well as
Blackboard, Canvas, and D2L (Desire to Learn) is presented the influence they have on the modern way of teaching and
in [25]. The criteria used in the cited article by Aldiab et al. teaching, they are presented in [37], [38].
are based on another study presented in [26]. But only four Based on the presented analysis of the state-of-art science
LMS platforms - Claroline, Moodle, Blackboard, and research presented in this section and Table 1, the following
Enterprise Knowledge PlatformTM were evaluated with a criteria for analysis of the LMS platforms were summarized:
method proposed by Poulova et al [26]. The main drawback • Learning Skills Tools: Creating activities and learning
of these articles is that they do not explain the choice of the tools
e-learning platforms. o SCORM Compliant (code L1)
A study devoted to the practical using and the quality of o Lectures as web pages, documents, presentations,
some LMS systems can be read in [27]. Nakamura et al. video etc. (code L2)
have defined the User eXperience (UX) as the main factor o Examples and tasks, as web pages, documents,
determining the success of software. The criteria proposed presentations, video etc. (code L3)
by the authors (Table 1), taking only the users' skills and the o Assignments and exercises as web pages,
features of the e-learning platforms are used to evaluate only documents, quizzes (code L4)
the Edmodo LMS software. o Gamification (code L5)
A theoretical model based on adaptive structuration o Evaluation (code L6)
theory evaluating, according to which the appropriate LMS • Communication Tools: Allows interaction between
was determined and its effect on the learning process, was lecturers and students
proposed in [28]. They define that good IT support is one of o Chat (code C1)
the factors that help and facilitate the user. o Forums (code C2)
A model of an LMS system in which "both teachers and o Email messages (code C3)
learners have the same possibilities of control and action in • Productivity Tools: The software functionalities
the platform ", is presented in [29]. provided by LMS systems
The use of e-learning systems for learners with special o Uploading/downloading various documents types
education needs also makes progress. Various scientific (code T1)
publications discuss education methodologies or describe o Add, edit, delete data for students (code T2)
only one LMS platform [30]. An exception appears to be a o Analysis of students' achievements and outcomes
paper [31] in which an attempt to present a generic model (code T3)
for evaluating the software for the learning of the children o Multiplatform support (code T4)
with special educational needs is made. o Security and protection of users’ data (code T5)
What is important for quality software development is the o Creating a data backup (code T6)
making of an unambiguously defined software specification. o Need for a system administrator that can manage all
The features and functions of the software are based on this the user roles in the LMS (code T7)
specification. That is why the analytic study of the main o Web-based technology of software development
features of the LMS platforms will allow the creation of a (code T8)
well-formulated specification, and in turn, to support the o Need for installation (code T9)
creation of quality software applications. For adequate o Self-Registration (code T10)
communication between different Learning Management We used these evaluation criteria to analyses several
Systems (LMS), SCORM standard for a "Sharable Content learning management systems. The abbreviation codes in
Object Reference Model" was created. This standard brackets are for the sake of space saving when presenting the
required the unified support of content packaged a results.
transferable ZIP file in all LMS systems. Its practical
applicability and importance in the modern e-learning III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
environments is discussed in [32]–[35]. This study base on an empirical approach divided into two
The factors and criteria for evaluating of LMS platforms stages. In the first stage, the criteria for analysis of e-learning
taken from some of the references discussed in this section software are selected. These criteria are based on the study
are presented in Table 1. Based on these results, we selected of the scientific works, published during 2004-2019 and
the criteria for analysis of LMS platforms in this article. presented in the previous section. The second stage consists
Many of the analysed articles discuss the problem of of the selection of LMS systems to be analysed. After
qualities evaluating of the e-learning systems only from a conducting search with keywords "e-learning system",

1193
"mobile learning" and "learning management system" in comply with the criteria set out in this article. This
Google and Bing search engines, 36 LMS frameworks were information was collected from the websites of the LMS
selected. For the sake of completeness, the collected data systems whose addresses have been presented in the first
have been presented in two tables (Table 2 and Table 3) that column of Table 2.
TABLE III
TECHNICAL INFORMATION OF THE LMS ANALYZED.

Users according Supported


Learning management systems Price/ License to the website of interface
the LMS languages (sum)
Adobe Captivate Prime (https://www.adobe.com/products/captivateprime.html) 4$ per month/1299$ full license 1,000,000 + 10
Atutor (https://atutor.github.io/) Open Source N/A 62
BizLibrary (https://www.bizlibrary.com) N/A 100,000 + 1
BlackBoard (https://www.blackboard.com) N/A 25,000,000 25
Brightspace (https://www.d2l.com/) N/A 15,000,000+ 12
Chamilo (https://chamilo.org/en/) Open source (GNU License) 1,200,000 3
Cornerstone OnDemand (https://www.cornerstoneondemand.com/learning) 8$-20$ per user 80+ companies 45
Docebo (https://www.docebo.com) N/A 6,000,000 40
Edmodo (https://www.edmodo.com/) Free or 2,500$/school/year 58,000,000 16
Edsby (http://www.edsby.com/) N/A N/A 46
Educadium (https://www.educadium.com/) 99$ per month N/A 100+
eFront (https://www.efrontlearning.com/) 750$ per month N/A 40
Instructure (https://www.instructure.com/) N/A 20,000,000 34
iSpringLearn (https://www.ispringsolutions.com) 970$ per year 160,000 1
Latitude Learning (https://www.ispringsolutions.com) 1$ per month 4,200,000 4
LearnLinq (https://www.learnlinq.com) 200€ per month 750,000 14
LearnUpon (https://www.learnupon.com) 499€ per month 4,000,000 11
Lessonly (https://www.lessonly.com/) N/A N/A 12
Litmos (https://www.litmos.com/) 6$ per month 4,000,000 28
Mindflash (https://www.mindflash.com/) N/A N/A 24
Moodle (https://moodle.com/) Free / Premium 142,106,528 100+
NEO LMS (https://www.neolms.com) Free / 0.05 per user 1,125,219 40+
Open edX (https://open.edx.org/) Open Source (GNU License) 14,000,000 5
Saba Software (www.saba.com) N/A 33,000,000 40+
Sakai (https://www.sakailms.org/) Open Source (GNU License) N/A 18
SAP SuccessFactors (www.successfactors.com) N/A 48,750,000 96
Schoology (http://www.schoology.com/) Free/Enterprise License 10,000,000+ 6
SkillSoft (http://www.skillsoft.com/) Free/Paid 23,000,000 29
SkyPrep (http://skyprep.com/) 349$ per month 250,000+ 5+
ProProfs (https://www.proprofs.com) Free / 59$ per month 1,000,000 100+
SumTotal (https://www.sumtotalsystems.com/) N/A 500+ companies 29
TalentLMS (www.talentlms.com) Free/29$ per month 2,600,000 13
Tortal Training LMS (https://www.tortal.com/learning-management-system-lms) Free/Paid 493,000 1
Thinkific (www.thinkific.com) Free/49$ per month 11,400,000 31
WizIQ (www.wiziq.com) 20$ per month 500,000 21
WorkWize (https://www.workwize.com) 5900$ annually N/A 8

We analysed the selected LMS platforms with the criteria Object Reference Model” (SCORM) standard [39] except
proposed in the previous section. The part of their technical for Cornerstone OnDemand, Edmodo SkillSoft, Thinkific,
specification, taken from LMS' websites, is presented in WorkWize.
Table 2. The "N/A" is written in the place where information Most of the modern LMS systems provide multilingual
was not found. interface support, making it easier for users to use their
An interesting observation is that very few of the studied native language. As an example, only 28% of the studied
LMS systems have an open source, such as Atutor, Chamilo, LMS platforms supported up to 10 different interface
Sakai, Open edX. But other e-learning systems provide free languages, and the remaining 72% of them support more
versions of their limited-edition software, and multiple of than 10 interface languages.
them have paid versions. Almost all studied LMS platforms Only 3 of the platforms, namely, Tortal Training LMS,
meet the requirements described in the “Sharable Content iSpringLearn, and BizLibrary, support only English as

1194
interface language. This variety of languages can be defined leads to an increase in the reach of users, which is also
as a good practice for software developers, which inevitably apparent from Table 2.

TABLE IIIII
THE LMS ANALYZE.
Communica
Learning Management Learning Skills Tools Productivity Tools
tion tools
Systems (LMS) Platforms
L1 L2 L3 L4 L5 L6 C1 C2 C3 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10
Adobe Captivate Prime                  
Atutor                  
BizLibrary                
BlackBoard                 
Brightspace                 
Chamilo                   
Cornerstone OnDemand                
Docebo                 
Edmodo                 
Edsby             
Educadium                 
eFront               
Instructure                 
iSpringLearn                
Latitude Learning               
LearnLinq              
LearnUpon                  
Lessonly                
Litmos               
Mindflash            
Moodle                  
NEO LMS                   
Open edX                  
ProProfs                 
Saba Software                  
Sakai                 
SAP SuccessFactors                 
Schoology                 
SkillSoft               
SkyPrep                 
SumTotal                 
TalentLMS                  
Thinkific                
Tortal Training LMS                 
WizIQ               
WorkWize               
Count of true () 32 36 36 32 25 35 17 25 36 36 36 36 36 36 28 34 36 8 34
Count of false 4 0 0 4 11 1 19 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 2 0 28 2

1195
The more interface languages are supported by one and 69% of all of them support a forum. If this does not
software, the greater the number of its users. The change in the future LMS systems, it is quite possible that
abbreviation codes used in the second-row have been the impact of the social networks will increase in the field of
described in the previous section. If the LMC has some of education, and soon we will start talking about social
the requested features, the "" sign is set on the respective network learning management systems.
place. Another problem observed in this study is a feature of
All the features that the LMS systems have and which are creating data backup. As an example, the users of cloud-
the subject of this study are presented in Table 3. based LMS are hardly able to automate the process of
The obtained results are illustrated in Figure 1. The creating data backup.
general functionalities that most of the studied LMS In modern systems, the ubiquitous use of web-based
platforms possess are clearly shown. technologies for developing the new platforms appropriated
The analysis confirms that 89% of the platforms meet the for every computing device is observed. Some studied
SCORM standard. Solving tasks and assignments and adding systems have proposed the support for self-register and
solutions to the e-learning environment is possible only in creating new user profiles (T10 criteria). Hence, more people
89% (L4 criteria). Although there are varieties of social can have an equal access to education.
networks and instant messaging software applications, only
47% of the analysed systems have provided chat capability,

Fig. 1 Graphical presentation of the obtained results after the analysis of the investigation of 36 LMS platforms

Based on our survey, the main trends in modern LMS bringing the modern LMS systems closer to the
platforms can be summarised as follows: concept of social networks.
• Providing cross-platform support • Using cloud technology to create LMS platforms,
• Asynchronous work reducing the need for specialized computer
• Multilingual interface support equipment such as web servers, web addresses, and
• Support of the user self-registration - the user can network administrators to support them.
create an account without a pre-request to an • Capability to easily create and manage lectures,
administrator. exercises and tasks by teachers and facilitated
• Improving gamification solution to these tasks by pupils/students, using
• Improving the communication between users, such as interactive management models.
sharing text and multimedia information, and

1196
IV. CONCLUSIONS Children,” Journal of Computing Science and Engineering, vol.
13(1), pp. 1-10, 2019
This article presents an empirical study of the qualities of [8] T. Y. Wang and C. H. Wang, “E-Learning Platform of STEAM
36 modern LMS platforms. The study was carried out in two Aesthetic Course Materials Based on User Experience,” In Proc. of
stages. In the first step, the state-of-art literature was the 1st International Cognitive Cities Conference (IC3), IEEE, pp.
123-128, August 2018.
discussed, and the criteria for analysis of e-learning systems [9] P. Zaharias and C. Pappas, “Quality management of learning
were selected. In the second step, we focused on the choice management systems: A user experience perspective,” Current Issues
of LMS platforms for investigation. We used specific in Emerging eLearning, vol. 3(1), p. 5, 2016.
keywords in Google and Bing search engines for the [10] R. Kraleva, “Designing an Interface for a Mobile Application Based
on Children's Opinion,” International Journal of Interactive Mobile
selection of such software. Technologies, vol. 11(1), pp. 53-70, 2017.
As a result of this study, we can conclude that most LMS [11] V. Chang and C. Guetl, “E-learning ecosystem (eles)-a holistic
systems have similar features. All of them support the use of approach for the development of more effective learning
multimedia elements, creating and editing the lectures, environment for small-and-medium sized enterprises (smes),” In
Proc. of the Inaugural IEEE-IES Digital EcoSystems and
exercises and course assignments. Only 86% of the studied Technologies Conference, pp. 420-425, February 2007.
systems meet the SCORM standard, and no evaluating [12] T. Sheeba and R. Krishnan, “Automatic Detection of Students
systems of the learners' knowledge are possible in 5% of Learning Style in Learning Management System,” In Proc. of the
them. An interesting result that only 46% of all the systems Smart Technologies and Innovation for a Sustainable Future,
Springer, pp. 45-53, 2019.
provide chat support and only 68% of them have forum [13] J. W. Lin and H. C. K. Lin, “User acceptance in a computer-
support. This result confirms the trend that the LMS supported collaborative learning (CSCL) environment with social
platforms without any communication support for users are network awareness (SNA) support,” Australasian Journal of
more suitable for a blending learning tool. The lack of Educational Technology, vol. 35(1), pp. 100-115, 2019.
[14] V. Narayan, J. Herrington, and T. Cochrane, “Design principles for
communication support leads to using web forums and social heutagogical learning: Implementing student-determined learning
networks out of the LMS, which contradicts to the concept with mobile and social media tools,” Australasian Journal of
of a unified learning environment system. Educational Technology, vol. 35(3), pp. 86-101, 2019.
Despite the significant advances in software development [15] I. Valova and M. Marinov, “Facebook as a Tool Aiding University
Education-Whether it is Possible and Useful,” TEM Journal, vol.
and the relatively long period of use of e-learning systems, 8(2), pp. 670-676, 2019.
they still do not meet all the criteria for an LMS, although [16] U. D. Ehlers, “Quality in e-learning from a learner's perspective,”
their authors defined them as e-learning systems. This can European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning, vol. 7(1), 2004.
further confuse the end-users, e.g., teachers, pupils/students [17] S. S. Liaw, “Investigating students’ perceived satisfaction, behavioral
intention, and effectiveness of e-learning: A case study of the
and parents. As a future trend of LMS systems, we can point Blackboard system,” Computers & education, vol. 51(2), pp. 864-
to the enhancement of real-time communication between 873, 2008.
individual users, the use of these systems as cloud services [18] Y. C. Chen, R. H. Hwang, and C. Y. Wang, “Development and
and the inclusion of added and virtual reality to their evaluation of a Web 2.0 annotation system as a learning tool in an e-
learning environment,” Computers & Education, vol. 58(4), pp.
capabilities. 1094-1105, 2012.
[19] K. Madhavi, J. N. Murthy, N. V. Raju, G. S. Kumar, J. Praveen, and
ACKNOWLEDGMENT K. V. S. Raju, “Facilitating and Adapting Learning Management
System: A Novel Experimental Study,” In Proc. of International
We would like to express our sincere gratitude to Assoc. Conference on Digital Pedagogies (ICDP), 2019.
Prof. Dafina Kostadinova, Ph.D. from the South-West [20] G. Durak and S. Çankaya, “Seamless Learning: A Scoping
University in Bulgaria, for her suggestions regarding this Systematic Review Study,” Journal of Education and e-Learning
Research, vol. 5(4), pp. 225-234, 2018
paper. [21] S. K. Basak, M. Wotto and P. Bélanger, ”E-learning, M-learning and
D-learning: Conceptual definition and comparative analysis,” E-
REFERENCES Learning and Digital Media, vol. 15(4), pp. 191-216, 2018.
[22] J. Dutton, M. Dutton, and J. Perry, “How do online students differ
[1] I. Han and W. S. Shin, “The use of a mobile learning management from lecture students,” Journal of asynchronous learning networks,
system and academic achievement of online students,” Computers & vol. 6(1), pp. 1-20, 2012.
Education, vol. 102, pp. 79-89, 2016. [23] T. Anderson (Ed.), “The theory and practice of online learning,”
[2] J. Capper, “E-learning growth and promise for the developing Athabasca University Press, 2008.
world,” TechKnowLogia, vol. 2(2), pp. 7-10, 2001. [24] N. N. M. Kasim and F. Khalid, “Choosing the right learning
[3] S. R. Harandi,” Effects of e-learning on Students’ Motivation,” management system (LMS) for the higher education institution
Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 181, pp. 423-430, context: a systematic review,” International Journal of Emerging
2015. Technologies in Learning, vol. 11 (06), pp. 55-61, 2016.
[4] M. Huda, A. Maseleno, K. S. M. Teh, A. G. Don, B. Basiron, K. A., [25] A. Aldiab, H. Chowdhury, A. Kootsookos, F. Alam and H. Allhibi,
Jasmi, B. Basiron, and R. Ahmad, “Understanding Modern Learning “Utilization of Learning Management Systems (LMSs) in higher
Environment (MLE) in Big Data Era,” International Journal of education system: A case review for Saudi Arabia,” Energy Procedia,
Emerging Technologies in Learning, vol. 13(05), pp. 71-85, 2018. vol. 160, pp. 731-737, 2019.
[5] T. Q. Le and T. T. A. Do, “Active Teaching Techniques for [26] P. Poulova, I. Simonova and M. Manenova, “Which one, or another?
Engineering Students to Ensure the Learning Outcomes of Training Comparative analysis of selected LMS,” Procedia-Social and
Programs by CDIO Approach,” International Journal on Advanced Behavioral Sciences, vol. 186, pp. 1302-1308, 2015.
Science, Engineering and Information Technology, vol. 9(1), pp. [27] W. T. Nakamura, L. C. Marques, L. Rivero, E. H. de Oliveira, and T.
266-273, 2019. Conte, “Are scale-based techniques enough for learners to convey
[6] Å. Grönlund and Y. M. Islam, “A mobile e-learning environment for their UX when using a Learning Management System?,” Brazilian
developing countries: The Bangladesh virtual interactive classroom,” Journal of Computers in Education, vol. 27(01), pp. 104-131, 2019.
Information Technology for Development, vol. 16(4), pp. 244-259, [28] A. Janson, M. Söllner, and J. M. Leimeister, “Individual
2010. appropriation of learning management systems—antecedents and
[7] R. Kraleva, V. Kralev and D. Kostadinova, “A Methodology for the consequences,” AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction,
Analysis of Block-Based Programming Languages Appropriate for vol. 9(3), pp. 173-201, 2017.

1197
[29] M. Ouadoud, M. Y. Chkouri, and A. Nejjari, “Learning management International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies
system and the underlying learning theories: towards a new modeling (ICALT'05), IEEE, pp. 778-782, July 2005.
of an LMS,” International Journal of Information Science and [35] Y. Wei, K. Rongrong, and X. Ruonan, X. Design and Development
Technology, vol. 2(1), pp. 25-33, 2018. of SCORM-Based Mobile Learning System,” In Proc. 8th
[30] R. Kraleva, “ChilDiBu–A mobile application for Bulgarian children International Conference on Information Technology in Medicine
with special educational needs,” International Journal on Advanced and Education (ITME), IEEE, pp. 482-485, December 2016.
Science, Engineering and Information Technology, vol. 7(6), pp. [36] Å. Grönlund and Y. M. Islam, “A mobile e-learning environment for
2085-2091, 2017. developing countries: The Bangladesh virtual interactive classroom,”
[31] R. Kraleva and V. Kralev, “An Evaluation of The Mobile Apps for Information Technology for Development, vol. 16(4), pp. 244-259,
Children with Special Education Needs Based on The Utility 2010.
Function Metrics,” International Journal on Advanced Science, [37] P. Vate-U-Lan and P. Masouras, “Thriving social network for
Engineering and Information Technology, vol. 8(6), pp. 2269-2277, communication on eLearning: exploring gender differences in
2018. attitudes,” In Proc. of the First International Conference on Data
[32] F. B. García and A. H. Jorge, “Evaluating e-learning platforms Science, E-learning and Information Systems, ACM, paper 14,
through SCORM specifications,” In Proc. IADIS Virtual Multi October 2018.
Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems (MCCSIS [38] I. Kuznetcova, M. Glassman, T. J. Lin, “Multi-user virtual
2006), IADIS, May 2006. environments as a pathway to distributed social networks in the
[33] J. Yu and H. Guo, “Design and development of the interactive classroom,” Computers & Education, vol. 130, pp. 26-39, 2019
courseware based on SCORM standard,” In Proc. of the World [39] Rustici Software LLC (2019) SCORM solved and explained.
Conference on Management Science and Human Social Development [Online]. Available: https://scorm.com/
(MSHSD 2017), Atlantis Press, December 2017.
[34] J. H. Liu, B. S. Huang, and M. Chao, “The design of learning object
authoring tool based on SCORM,” In Proc. of the Fifth IEEE

1198

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy