I was pleased to appear on a panel on openness with Michael Chasen of Blackboard, Michael Morrison of Syracuse University, and Serge Goldstein of Princeton and moderated by Scott Jaschik, Editor, Inside Higher Ed. I think that this kind of debate is a very interesting way to get ideas out on the table. It is far better than some dry 70-slide PowerPoint presentation narrated in hushed intellectual tones.
In our panel discussion – there were several threads (a) open is not as simple as releasing source – and open software is not anti-commercial – open is more of a philosophy – releasing source code is part of the nature of open, (b) interoperability standards are the path to freedom for end users and faculty, and (c) BlackBoard’s connector is a good step in the right direction but there is more BlackBoard could do to be “open”.
In our talk we just did not have enough time – so I did not get to get all my ideas out. Hence this blog post.
I apologize in advance as this goes in and out of rant-mode. Sometimes I am reasonable and sometimes I get a little out of hand in this post. But I have had a lot of coffee on the plane ride back from Educause 2008 so that is my excuse.

Props for BlackBoard and the Connector
I feel that the Blackboard Connector effort with Sakai at Syracuse University and the recently announced Moodle Connector at Iowa State are great steps in the right direction.
The connector projects have a number of good aspects:
o Blackboard will now expose a much larger audience of teachers and students to Sakai and Moodle through BlackBoard’s channels – this will be really cool – when I last checked – over 50% of the Sakai partner schools had BlackBoard and wanted to keep it – but loved the idea of Sakai – this makes it a win-win – and the Moodle connector will be REALLY cool because Moodle has so many teacher friendly things and will let a subset of the teachers at a school to be part of an active Moodle community exchanging Modules and content. Let teachers freely associate with what ever community of teachers around the world they like. Freedom for teachers.
o The source to the connectors will be put out in the open for all to see and contribute to and build a community around – when folks can look at the connector – they will see that it is a significant bit of work.
o Going forward instead of Blackboard coming to open source events and listening – they have something to talk about and show and get feedback about – this will cause lots of mixing and interaction and friendships and lead to more collaboration over time.as trust and respect is built up.
o Oscelot and EduGarage are cool – I can (and have) joined the free BlackBoard Development communities – there are lots of open source Building Blocks that I can download, hack , and reverse engineer – I want to write and release my first Building Block – even though my school does not run BlackBoard – IMS Simple tools Interoperability – Oh yeah.
As soon as the Sakai Connector was announced – I immediately contacted the Syracuse team and offered my help. Jim Pease and the Syracuse team are very sharp – skilled both in Sakai and BlackBoard – I am happy to say that I was able to help some in getting the connector in place as quickly as possible – but the real work was done by Jim and his team. I have seen a connector demo and was pleased with the work so far – it is much more than than an iframe/portal implementation – I already have a few more suggestions about how to improve the connector after seeing the demo – I would like to get to the point where I can read the source code and can see other possible places for improvement.
I also am really very proud of how well the Sakai Architecture was prepared to work with the connector – there is a reason that the Sakai connector will be the first (and best) connector delivered – Sakai’s service oriented architecture, use of APIs throughout, event bus, entities and entitybroker, excellent enterprise data provisioning strategy – separation of EID/UID in our data models which can support multi-tenancy at a data model level – all mean Sakai probably has the best internal architecture of any LMS on the planet which it comes to flexibility from a developer perspective (thanks and kudos to folks like Glenn, Ian, and Aaron for guiding us toward the right SOA architecture).
Yes Sakai does have flaws – Hibernate, JSF, iFrames, and non-relational blobs in the wrong place – but the overall SOA nature and pluggability of Sakai holds up well when folks want to use Sakai as technology components instead of an overall product. Yes Sakai’s other flaw is that it takes to long to train a new developer. But other than that Sakai should be rightly proud of an architecture that is industry leading. (And Sakai NG will be even better in this respect – Go Ian!)
Philosophy of Open
I strongly disagree with some people in Open Software that claim that “Open Source is automatically good” and “Not releasing source is bad” or alternatively “Open Source is good” and “Commercial is bad”. This position is such an amazing oversimplification of the issue that it is pretty much absolute crap – and when someone takes this position or states it in public – you should assume that they are not real open source people – but instead just beginners who are trying to be part of the “buzz wave” of open source – it means they have not studied the inherent nature of open source and what makes it work and be successful.
One of the questions in the talk which pained me greatly was a person who stood up and said that she was tired of feeling like she was “wrong” for buying a commercial product even though she felt she was getting good value and she loved the product This is sadly due to overzealous uninformed open-software people and companies that do not get that *real* open software is pro-commercial and pro-choice. These “open source pundits” are so enamored with “beating commercial folks” that they cross the line and substitute loud anti-commercial marketing for actually building good products. They are looking at open source as a win-lose proposition – I try to make every situation into a win-win unless the other party repeatedly insists on losing.
I am not sitting here saying that Blackboard gets a 10 / 10 on the Dr. Chuck Open Software Scale – but there are open source projects and open source companies that frustrate me because they espouse anti-choice rhetoric to gain competitive advantage – which to me is hypocrisy – at least BlackBoard admits that they are doing marketing and honestly trying to compete and convince folks to buy BlackBoard based on its merit and cost benefit. Others are simply selling their product because it is “open” – and since the product may not be “better” – they have to go with the “open is good” as their marketing mantra.
There are sometimes where you want software that provides source code – whether or not it is the “best”. For many of the Sakai schools – an LMS system like Sakai that is Open Source and easily expanded/changed – is essential because those schools do not want to let a commercial vendor hold us hostage in the area of innovation in that most basic task – teaching. The choice to “Go Open” is often quite expensive – but for certain top-200 schools – it is the only choice – at least for their LMS.
There are some times when “free software” is more important than the “best” software. For many Moodle Schools there is just so little technical resource available – that a free and easy to install/maintain system like Moodle is their only real choice.
I am *not* saying Moodle is “bad” here – I am just saying in some situations – cost is the overriding factor – just like in other situations open source and an open community is an overriding factor. But folks must recognize the difference between an “overriding factor” in a particular situation – and “good”.
The fact that something is Open Source is lost on the customers of MoodleRooms or Etudes (Sakai). The fact that the underlying software these companies are using is free – so it reduces the overall cost structure – but source code availability has little impact on the end-user experience.
So in Chuck’s book – many companies and projects have a ways to go before they get the “Chuck Seal of Openness Approval” – even when those organizations release source.
Richard Stallman says, “Free Software is about Freedom – not price.” I say, “Open Software is a philosophy – not a zip file with source code in it”.
My BlackBoard Openness Agenda for the Next Year
I was able to share a few of my “hit list” tasks for Blackboard to move up on the “Dr. Chuck Open Software Scale” – I hope to revisit the debate with Michael Chasen this time next year and see how far things go.
Here is the full hit list with explanation.
o Issue a statement that Blackboard will not pursue faculty or other LMS systems for reverse engineering the Blackboard proprietary extensions to IMS Content Packaging which make up the BlackBoard export format. Quit dancing on this one! This is a yes/no question. This is not a patent or copyright issue – this is DMCA – reverse engineering. If Bb only wants to give immunity to the Open Source folks only – like in the patent – this is a decent half-way step which I would applaud – even if I would prefer universal permission. I absolutely feel that BlackBoard loses *nothing* by such a statement – they tacitly allow it to happen all the time. I am *not* asking for reverse engineering permission to anything but their export format – I feel BlackBoard has every right and even responsibility to keep folks from reverse engineering things like BlackBoard data models and internal APIs without permission. While some may think that this a right they should have – it is a support nightmare if folks start writing to tables directly – the software breaks and no one knows why. I don’t like it in Sakai when folks hack the tables – In Sakai if folks do this – they *know* that no one will feel sorry for them when stuff starts breaking if they hack into tables instead of using the published APIs.
o Support the IMS Common Cartridge – Support it for Import and then support it for Export – do this before us open source guys do it – show us that you can beat us at our own game! Show that BlackBoard is more committed to interoperability than Sakai! If you beat me to it – I will give you mad props in the press release about Bb doing it faster than Sakai. The spec is out there – the cartridges are there – you have smart developers. It could be a hot fix. I challenge you to a programming sprint! I will even give you a head start – I am not starting on CC import in Sakai until December 1 when my classes end at Michigan. If IMS CC Export in Bb happens quickly enough – then Bb can ignore request #1 above – this actually works out well for Bb because IMS CC has less data than the BB export format – so folks moving between systems will lose some fidelity – but then Bb can blame it on the standard :) The market wins because the more folks use CC as an export format – the more we free the content as a bearer instrument for the Faculty. And as we improve Common Cartridge – all boats get raised together.
o You need to give away free BB Developer Editions – like Yesterday! Through my IMS Learning tools Interoperability work – I have access to a Blackboard developer environment. I had never seen the Admin or Developer Interface until last month – I had seen Building Blocks documentation a long time ago – but I never read it – I prefer to read code. I was able to grab an open source Building Block and hack it up a bit and test it in my Bb dev environment. Here is a little bit of feedback: “Building Blocks are very cool!” – it is a fun place for developers to just fiddle around in. Why have you been hiding this so long? I would have been writing building blocks years ago if you gave me a free edition – I would have made building blocks to give to other schools – even if my school did not run Bb – then maybe I would pester my school to install BlackBoard so I could run my blocks. Or of course alternatively I might have tried to make Building Blocks work inside Sakai – but really that would be silly and painful – too many APIs to implement – it is easier to buy BlackBoard. All in all – you have got to realize (like Oracle did a long time ago) – giving free developer-only versions to developers is the smartest possible for sales and marketing in higher ed.
o I know you won’t do this one – but it does not hurt to ask :) When I finally see the Bb-Sakai connector source code and Moodle connector source, You know I am going to reverse engineer the Bb side of the APIs and hack it up so Sakai can use Moodle via the Moodle connector. Because a lot of Sakai schools would *LOVE* to have Moodle available nicely integrated into Sakai. I would ask that you promise not to send Matt Small to visit me when I start this skunkworks project. I know this is too much to ask to get permission in advance – and since I am a teacher – I really don’t have time to seriously make it work – but it is fun stuff. And part of “Open” is understand that losing control is not a bad thing – trust the market to explore alternatives and come back to your alternative because of its features and quality – not because you send Matt around to stamp out little explorations before they start. You are in a much better marketing position if I try and fail on my own – rather than having you stamp me out in advance – because if you force me to stop – I actually don’t have to do the work – and I have a great “Mean BlackBoard” story to tell my CIO and anyone else who will listen.
So this is my “hit” list – this is just the few things that come to my mind right away – I am sure there will be other cool opportunities for BlackBoard to continue to improve its “Dr. Chuck Open Software Score” over the next 12 months.
I will continue to support and engage and cajole BlackBoard to venture farther into “open thinking” about their product and their market – the BlackBoard customers should also make their own lists of how they think BlackBoard should open up – Serge Goldstein of Princeton wants better “user exits” for authorization, authentication, and access control in BlackBoard – I could not agree more. By the way Serge, Sakai *rocks* when it comes to user own code for enterprise information.
Open – From Which Perspective?
My next topic is to talk about Open – but from a user-centered approach. Open Source and Open APIs are all good for geeks in the IT team at a university. But what does it mean to be “Open” from a faculty and student perspective?
What does open mean for the real user of this software? Here are my thoughts:
o As a faculty member – I do *not* want to change learning management systems at the whim of the IT folks. If word came down that my school (University of Michigan) was going to switch to some other open source or commercial LMS – I would totally bust a gasket. I could care less about your TCO or your MIPS or your Service Oriented Architecture or long-term maintenance budget. Here is the deal that I will accept – bring up your “new-fangled idea” – run it for a few years side by side – fully integrated – let me kick the tires once in a while – and see if my teaching works. Only change when >50% of us faculty have voluntarily switched (props to Chuck Powell). After 50% switched voluntarily – you can start to lean on the laggards. I will switch if and only if it is better – so you IT folks need to bring your best game. (By the way that means that if Sakai is better than Bb from an end-user perspective it means that in the next 2 years Bb will lose more customers than it will gain – because Bb now gives its users unprecedented choice in LMS systems – what Moodle school would give their faculty the option of Bb running inside of Moodle for a few years to kick the Bb tires)??
o I hate vendor lock in – I want my data. I refuse to use Either of Sakai’s testing engines – including one written by my close friend Glenn Golden – because it does not have import from QTI. I am not going to type my questions into a silly web-based interface that takes 10 seconds each time I add a question option. I want to edit my test questions in vi (a very user friendly interface) and then write a Python script to transform them to QTI and then upload QTI into the test engine. Oh yeah – I have source code – whoopie – I could write an import and export if I felt like it? I might just get angry enough to do that (I *am* about to write some Melete Import code for Common Cartridge). I want to get something out of the LMS when I am moving to a new school or new LMS. I want an export button that works as well as an import button. Absent that – I want a way to have an online service that transforms a Bb export into a Moodle Import – or a Sakai Export into a Bb Import – maybe this would even be a web service thing and LMSs could use this conversion service live. Hmmm. Google App Engine. Hmmm. Christmas vacation…
OK – So I have now ranted enough – you can see that it is good they did not give me the microphone for the whole hour at Educause – it took three hours to write this blog post on the plane and in my office back at Michigan.
Summary (If you have read this far)
I am happy to see BlackBoard engaging open source in real and tangible ways – I look forward to seeing how Blackboard follows this up – I hope this is not a one-shot marketing thing and instead represents a real sea-change for BlackBoard – only time will tell.
I think that the dialog needs to move away from win-lose thinking between open software and commercial software and look instead where all the technology providers can work together – for the benefit of teachers and learners around the world. I think that BlackBoard has taken a step – I think that Open Software organizations might want to take their own step towards win-win.
BlackBoard has taken a risk in introducing Sakai and Moodle to its existing customers – lets not underestimate that risk to their market. At the same time Bb must be very confident that when customers see all three products – those customers will prefer BlackBoard. If Bb is not superior, BlackBoard will have been the agent of its own undoing – if and when a campus notices that 95% of its teachers voluntarily choose Sakai to teach – it is not much of a step to simply turn off Blackboard.
So lets give BlackBoard some credit for “guts” and some credit for letting the “users decide”. Perhaps BlackBoard has decided that the best way to protect and grow market share is to think more openly – and let the market decide – and perhaps challenge the open source projects to think a bit more openly as well.
Comments
Please send Comments to me via email.
Edward Mansouri at 10:58am November 2
This is an excellent posting that highlights the obvious massive large-scale changes taking place in the for-profit versus open source LMS landscape right now.
On Nov 2, 2008, at 12:01 PM, Stephen Marquard wrote:
As an aside, on the subject of testing engines, Samigo both does QTI import (though QTI 1.x is not very standardized so chances are some QTI export from something else won’t import into it), but more importantly has a very cool “Quick Create” feature. You could edit your questions in vi & just cut & paste them into Samigo. For example you can create a bunch of MCQs (literally in plain text in one long paste). Most of our staff use Quick Create nowadays.