Presentation made by Peter Van den Broeck (SO STJ Hamme) in the context of the first Chamilo Users day that took place in Belgium in 2011.

1. Implementing
LMS
a case study
Peter Van den Broeck
SO STJ Hamme

2. Peter Van den Broeck
 English/ Dutch Teacher
 Masters Degree Languages
 No IT-qualifications
 Platform manager of Kajakaja
 Kajakaja.be – Chamilo 1.8.7.1 with
campus Plugin

3. STJ Hamme
 Secondary school – years 3 to 6
(vocational 7)
 ASO – technical – vocational
 364 students
 61 teachers
 Using LMS since 2006

4. First steps…
 Introduction
in April 2006
 Stephen Hargreaves – Working with
Webquests
 Making a choice: Dokeos or Moodle
 Why D0ke0s?
 Expertise (trainee from HoWest – AUGent)
 Simple and clear layout
 (Partly) Belgian based – language support
100%

5. Jura – Project D0ke0s
 Subdomain schoolwebsite
 40 students
 1 teacher
 Positive experience
 Student motivation
 Participation community (wiki-tool pcool)

6. Level 1 – Sep 2006
 Separate domain – hosted environment
(kajakaja)
 Account for every student / teacher
 Choice of use was with teacher (no-
obligation)
 5 teachers in 8 classes
 LIMITED SUCCESS

7. First push – Jan 2007
 Introduction of ‘Mededelingen’ for
teachers
 Weekly update
 All school related forms for download
 announcements
 Result:
+30 passive users (teachers)
 PRACTICAL USE

8. Second push – Mar 2007
 Update to 1.8.x
 Series of hands-on sessions for interested
teachers
 Results:
 5 -> 20 teachers who use courses for students
 60% of students have a login
 Math dpt starts its own cross curricular course
 DOWNSIDE: Flashy Fileserver

9. Some setbacks – Sep 2007
 AUGent partnership project
 Free dokeos platform
 Centralized management
 Helpdesk
 Left the program after 14 days
 Failurein update to 1.8.4 -> reinstall from
scratch
 Relaunch 3rd week of September
 Bad practice: teachers hand out account
details
 Problems -> less teachers rely on platform
hence less students get their account details

10. Revenge at hand – Jan 2008
 Introduction ‘ leerlingenmededelingen’
 All students get login through administation
 Initiation by IT-teachers
 End Jan 95% have logged in at least once
 Stable active teacher usage 40%
 BUT: Flashy Fileserver, only 2 teachers use
other modules
 Motivational setback: no real progress in 1,5
years

11. Land ahoi – Mar 2008
 Campus Plugin – Ludwig Theunis
 Amazing Tool
 Installation of 2nd testing Platform
 Test with selected group
 May: decision to implement -> total
cleanup
 June: mandatory sessions to introduce
new platform

12. Kajakaja 2.0 – Sep 2008
 Dokeos 1.8.5 + Campus Plugin
 New features:
 Timetable
 Journal based on timetable
 Students listings
 Reservations tool

13. A better way?
 Personalised letters 1st day of school +
mini-manual
 Voluntary school journal
 Mandatory for reservations
 Timetable changes: consult the platform
 AMAZING: by half Sep
 96% of students
 99% of teachers

14. STS – Jan 2009
 Student Tracking System
 Mandatory
 Learning disorders – Results – Behaviour
 RESULT
 More teachers become ‘active users’
 Links – documents – announcements
 Most popular: Journal - Listings

15. Open evaluation
 Positive perception
 More up than down
 Split in IT and LMS
 STS is sole source information
 DOWN: first student hack

16. Year 2 2.0 – Sep 2009
 Same procedures
 Active Day 3 of school year
 Massive course growth (DEPT courses)
 DOWN: 1 course -> several courses
 CLB Login

17. Jan – May 2010
 New headmaster:
 Former Dokeos Platform Admin
 New blood
 Go Chamilo decision
 Limit course creation
 Cleanup

18. On hold – Sep 2010
 Start schoolyear: Dokeos 186 + Campus
1.4
 Mandatory school journal
 Precreated courses
 DB stability problems in webhosting (21.000
tables)
 Oct 2010:
 decision migrate to VPS
 Decision upgrade to Chamilo

19. The move – Dec 2010
 Move Dokeos 186 to VPS
 Problem: DB of 21.000 tables
 Rights management (webhosting sucks)
 Upgrade to Chamilo
 Stable!
 Database bugs:
 Course list
 Within courses

20. Chamilo – Jan 2011
 Introduction Jan 3rd
 Positive response to overall system
 Negative response
 Social network (exclusion)
 Currently unused again

21. IT admin – Mar 2011
 Added new function
 Single tracking system for IT errors
 Positive response

22. Back to the future
 Downside in usage:
 Fileserver
 Administrative platform
 Plans
 Hands on session for different modules
 Online testing experiments
 Learning paths

23. Future for Chamilo
 Hopeful developments 2.0
 Plugin Code: integrated in full project
 More config options for Social network
 Mobile version

24. Question Time