Michael What you say is essentially right, but is certainly on the basis of an existing training paradigm that we seem to not be able to move ourselves away from.
The paradigm is one where we are trying to replace training with web based content (what most people seem to call 'e-Learning') where interactivity is to engage people and try to make sure that they learn and complete the modules. But lets face it, any trainer worth his salt is a lot more interactive and probably more engaging than a piece of web based content. e-Learning in this paradigm continues to exist as a one-off training event very often detached from the realities of peoples real needs. The web brings us more easily to a different paradigm where learning is a continuous process and where by people learn by a variety of means, certainly not only by going to a classroom or taking a web based online learning module but in a variety of ways. Collaborating with colleagues (across geographic or time boundaries), accessing experiences and existing information produced and available somewhere (on the corporate intranet..?) or accessing a well structured knowledge base. etc. etc. etc. etc. Information, knowledge and learning at peoples fingertips, when and where it is needed. Let people choose what they want and what is appropriate to their needs. The need to have structured 'training', whether face to face or via eLearning will still be there. There are complience and plenty of other reasons to try to make sure that folk have the required training. I would suggest that this is changing as well. My contention is that the current positioning of the LCMS/LMS and CMS offers in the market place is missing part of the plot. Regards. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Bronder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Charles Reitzel'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'David O'Dwyer'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 9:56 PM Subject: RE: [cms-list] LCMS, LMS's & CMS's > This is an inetersting thread for me as I used to be the Director of Content > Management FOR an LMS company... > > There is no doubt significant marketing blather that confuses the way we > think about LMS, LCMS, CMS and WCMS... It is possible, however, to > distinguish between them based on the needs they fill rather then on their > functionality (if you catch my drift). > > This list is well aware of the various flavors of CMS/WCM and the > distinctions between the two. CMSes span complete content management > processes within and organization, that may include web content and > publishing but generally have significant functionality beyond the WCMSes > that essentially allow an organization to present their business online > witout (hopefully) pulling their hair out. > > LCMS, in general, deals with the ability to create wbt/cbt content that's > compliant to certain standards (generally SCORM). They often include > authoring applications as well as ways to suck in existing content and > structure it all into a piece of "e-larnin"... the e-larnin is > generally/often web based, but not necissarily so... hence the conception > that a WCMS or CMS makes sense to manage it. > > On a very limited scale, it might... espcially to act as a repository for > the larnin content. > > So there's some overlap there... When you start talking about LMSes, it's a > whole different beast, albeit one that MAY deal with web content. > > The reason e-learning is worth anything more then traditional learning > material (a book, for instance) is because it's <hype>"interactive"</hype>. > There are whole pedogical theories about why and when "interactive" is good, > but the BUSINESS REASON it's good is that it makes a learners progress > automatically "TRACKABLE." > > An LMS is about training and learning, not content... they were around > before online content... essentially they're just databases that HR and > Training Depts use to manage training programs, track employees skills and > keep track of certifications and training budgets. A Trainer might use an > LMS to reserve training maerials for a classroom, students could register > for the classroom training, Trainers then enter students scores into the > LMS, HR could track who's eligible for a promotion based on who's taken what > training and how well they did. Great. > > Now e-learning and LMS work together to by-pass the human trainer's role... > LMS has a list of all the WBT available, student accesses one course, > interactive tests inside the WBT assess the students performance and send > that back to the LMS where it's stored in their "permanent file" (yes... > they do exist). Similar workflow to the classroom model. BTW, the WBT > could be stored and accessed from within a CMS. > > SCORM comes in to make sure that the e-learning and the LMS communicate back > and forth in a standard way. That's all it does. Says "write javascript > like this" to e-learning authors, and says "read the input like this" to the > LMS. simple... it's only taken 25 years to get to this point. > > Gosh, this is long... good thing I'm not in front of a class... they'd all > be asleep by now. :) > > later, > > Michael > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- http://cms-list.org/ more signal, less noise.
