The Learning Management System Evaluation Task Force, a committee comprised of students, faculty and staff is examining alternatives to Sakai for the University of Rhode Island.
According to the General Timeline published in Oct. 2018 by the Office of Online Education, URI has been partnered with Sakai for approximately 10 years. The task force, chaired by Dr. Kathleen M. Torrens, a professor of communications in the Harrington School of Communications and Media, is dedicated to reviewing other Learning Management Systems and evaluating their utility for URI students.
“[10 years] is a long time to be with a Learning Management System, especially in this day and age with so much of our stuff, both administrative and academic, is done in an online format,” Torrens said. “The Provost’s office just felt that it was time for us to take a look at how we use
On Thursday, Feb. 7, all platforms interested in becoming URI’s official Learning Management System will put in a bid for their service. From there, the committee will review their proposals and score them to how well they see them benefitting the University.
URI will host the platform with the highest score on campus, with forums for students, faculty and staff to attend. It is unclear if Sakai, developed by host-company Longsight, is amongst those submitting a bid.
Sakai has drawn mixed reviews from students for a while now.
“I think that some professors don’t really know how to work Sakai and then the students suffer from that,” freshman Katie Siegle said.
Freshman Jillian Battye supported using Sakai, saying, “I think it is user-friendly. Is that just me? I don’t find it difficult to navigate at all.”
Professor Scott Kushner, an assistant professor of communication studies in the Harrington School, was recruited to join the
“Our committee was constituted to review Sakai, to review how it’s being used and how it’s being appreciated or not,” Kushner said. “Then explore some other options, and present some other options, and potentially encourage the University to make a change.”
According to the committee’s general plan for this task, the final decision will be made in spring 2019.
“I think the most important thing to me, and this is personal, is the ability to make all of our course sites, project sites, and whatever the students see, accessible,” Torrens said. “Sakai has gotten a lot better. They have a lot of features that allows us to make accessible content, but there are other products out there that might make it even easier. We’ll see.”
Sakai is sometimes difficult to use, which can make the jobs of both students and professors more complicated.
“Speaking not as a committee member but as a faculty member, I do find [Sakai] a little hard to parce,” Kushner said. “And I have some evidence to suggest that students have a difficult time understanding what’s important and where things are. I don’t know if Sakai is able to satisfy the call. If they are we’ll have to see how they compete with other options, if there are even other options.”