Considering implementation and use in the adoption of an LMS in online and blended learning environments

There are more similarities than differences among learning management system (LMS) software products. One side of the LMS represents its face validity, that is, the raw functionality of the system. Most LMSs consist of fairly generic tools such as quiz/test options, forums, a scheduling tool, collaborative work space and grading mechanisms. In fact, the Edutools Web site lists 26 LMSs that have all of these features (2006). Many LMSs also have the means to hold synchronous meetings and some ability to use various templates for instruction. Beyond these standardized features, LMSs tend to distinguish themselves from one another with micro-detailed features such as the ability to record synchronous meetings or the ability to download forum postings to read offline. These capabilities may be helpful, but they only represent improvements to basic functions that are part of every LMS. In a recent study, Carriere, Challborn, and Moore (2005) compared a variety of LMSs and went as far as to suggest that the only real differences between systems lie in marketing approaches. Feldstein (2006) asserts that despite the fact that learning management systems are getting better at performing basic functions, they are still pretty much one-sizefits-all (Feldstein, 2006). McConachie, Danaher, Luck, and Jones (2005) propose that the selection of an LMS brand is the central deciding factor in a university’s online success. Though a factor of a university’s online success, the LMS hardly qualifies as the crucial element. When the importance of the decision to choose the right LMS is magnified, the discomfort of making that choice is also exaggerated. In reality, market standardization has alleviated much of the institutional discomfort involved in this decision. Because LMSs have almost become akin to Eli Whitney’s interchangeable parts, those wishing to introduce and integrate LMSs to their educational institution must focus less on which LMS to use and more on LMS adoption and implementation or what we refer to as the “other side of the LMS.” In this paper we 1) briefly differentiate between LMSs and content management systems (CMSs), 2) define the “other side of the LMS” in terms of adoption and implementation considerations, 3) discuss several factors that promote adoption and implementation of an LMS, and 4) suggest ways The other side of the LMS: