L21: LMS landscape

October 2012

Market share summary (2011 data)Product Market shareBlackboard 60%

Moodle 19%

Desire2Learn 7%

Sakai 7%

Homegrown 1%

All others ( eCollege, OpenClass, LoudCloud, etc.)

6%

Notable newcomers (since 2011)• Canvas • New MOOC platforms (CourseEra)

Common core functionalities

• All of the major LMSs offer similar core functionality: – file and content sharing– multi-media content tools, web 2.0 mashups– testing and survey tools– grading tools– collaboration tools such as discussion boards, blogs and

wikis• Details and implementation will vary and need to be

examined once functional requirements are defined

Some differentiating factors

• Open-source vs. proprietary software• Externally vs. locally hosted• Cloud-based vs. individual instances• “Look and feel” and user experience• Community of practice• Maturity and product stability

• US company; founded in 1997 at Cornell• Went public in 2004; private buyout by an

investment group in 2011• Acquired many competitors: WebCT,

ANGEL, Elluminate, Wimba• Proprietary software, java-based• Very good standards compliance• Modular architecture and marketing

approach: Bb Learn, Bb Analytics, Bb Collaborate, Bb Mobile

• Also has service offerings: hosting, consulting, support

• Currently dominates the marketplace; large community of practice

• Recently acquired two main hosting providers for Moodle and created a branch providing services for LMS open-source customers

• New CEO coming in December 2012

• Open-source product; code created and unified by Moodle Pty, Ltd., an Australian company supported by fees from Moodle hosting partners

• PHP-based• Major hosting partner (Moodle Rooms)

acquired by Blackboard in March 2012. • Built on a learner-centric

• Good standards compliance• Large user community/community of practice• Some well-known large installations exist (UK’s

Open University)• Many European clients• US adoption as been especially strong for smaller

colleges and community colleges• Allows for a relatively easy “out of the box” open

source solution

• Canadian company, privately held• Proprietary software, relatively standards-compliant• In the licensed software arena, main competitor to

Blackboard• Microsoft.NET code base• Main clients include several state university systems

and community college consortia: Minnesota, Wisconsin, Montana, Colorado, Kentucky, Pennsylvania

• Not much market share outside North America• Recently received an $80 million infusion of new

venture capital• Has a growing client base

• Open-source product• Consortium-based; consortium

members are higher ed institutions, weighted towards North America

• Java-based• Many major clients are institutions

with considerable programming resources; recent trend is towards hosted deployments

• Recently spun off an “open academic environment” (OAE) concept which tries to move beyond the monolithic LMS

• Some major OAE backers (UC Berkley, U Michigan, U Indiana) have withdrawn their support for the project in September 2012, leading to a major scaling down of the OAE project

• Newcomer to the LMS world• Founded in 2008 by two BYU graduates• Privately-held start-up company, Instructure• Code based in Ruby on Rails; available under an

open-source license – though Instructure does not support community contributions to the code

• Cloud-based SAS service: i.e. no individual institutional control of/responsibility for upgrades or changes

• Particular strengths: integration of web 2.0 tools, notably Facebook and Google apps for education

• Clean and modern look and feel

• Growing adoption: Brown University, U of Washington system

LMS marketshare –a parting view

http://mfeldstein.com/state-of-the-higher-education-lms-market-a-graphical-view/