Introduction
The Malta College of Arts, Science, and Technology (MCAST) recently requested a technical report regarding the comparative software relevance, usability, hardware and monetary requirements of Moodle in the global learning management systems (LMS) market. The impetus for this was the desire of this educational organisation to expand its course programs, maintain their universality, and meet the growing needs of its students related to digital tools. MCAST uses Moodle as its central LMS due to its many available tools, high degree of customisation, and impeccable reputation. Despite two decades of existence in the digital market, Moodle remains one of the top LMS globally. However, MCAST notices the unstoppable technical progress and the ongoing digitalisation (Simanullang and Rajagukguk 2020). It is the reason why this educational entity wants to know more about Moodle’s competitors, such as Google Classroom.
Methodology
The research in this technical report was carried out in such a way as online searching for thematically related information and exploring it through reading and analysis. Among competent and qualified researchers, this method of investigating the needed data is called content analysis. It implies that the person conducting the study develops the knowledge they seek by searching, identifying, and manipulating key terms, phrases, and concepts in qualitative sources (Content analysis 2022). Another technique used in this technical report is a comparative analysis of texts. One might say that this is the fundamental and traditional way of research, especially the qualitative one like this report (Gilbert 2021). Conceptually similar key elements or functions of two objects described in relevant textual data are analysed, and then one makes inferences about these. These are two methodological approaches, content analysis and comparative analysis, which one resorted to in developing this paper.
Methods Applied
In this work, such types of digital sources of textual information were used as online articles and web pages directly related to Moodle and Google Classroom topics. In order to find these, one used such popular and mainstream search engines as Google Search and Google Scholar (Using Google, Google Scholar, and other web search engines n.d.). Their inclusion in the methods is because these digital online tools provide the most search engine coverage and significant search neutrality.
Thematic key terms such as Moodle, Google Classroom, and LMS were entered into a Google search box to find relevant data for a technical report. The first step was to review and online ratings of LMS sheets on websites such as G2 (Top 10 Moodle alternatives & competitors n.d.). It was necessary to identify and select an actual and high-ranking Moodle competitor that is not as mainstream as Blackboard Learner and Canvas. After establishing Google Classroom as a suitable counterpart, the exploration and analysis of thematic scientific and professional articles began. The following section is an interpreted collection of what has been gathered and researched using these search, comparative, and analytical methods and steps.
Key Features
The analysis of academic works and professional articles showed that the design of the discussed two LMSs differs significantly in terms of ways of functioning. Moodle and Google Classroom’s key features such as financial distribution model, ease of use, integration, customisation, and technical support will be compared. Among those that these MLSs have in common is that their developers offer them free (TrustRadius Research Team 2020). This first point completes the similarities in the fundamental elements of these software systems.
User-friendliness is the quality of digital applications that directly affects their success with the target audience. Experts say that Google Classroom is a much easier software program than Moodle (Kiran 2020). Its price is the limited range of functions and the overall lesser flexibility of the structure provided by the former. For LMSs, their ability to integrate with other digital entities, Student Information Systems specifically, plays a significant role. Google Classroom also loses to Moodle on this integration feature (Kiran 2020). It can only integrate digital programs with other corporate applications and second-tier educational programs, unlike Moodle with its ability to merge with top-tier systems. Moodle is also a more versatile LMS in customising its appearance and functionality than its counterpart (Kiran 2020). It requires higher computing skills and general professional knowledge from the user. As with the previous two key features, Google Classroom’s technical support is much less extensive and skilled than the LMS that MCAST uses (Kiran 2020). It is surprising given that Google is a much larger corporation than Moodle developers’ company is.
Graphical Interface and User Experience
The graphical interface is another component of the LMS and other digital software that makes the application more marketable and user friendly. Both major digital systems use simple yet contrasting colour schemes. Both include large icons for thematic categories and small ones for specific features and tabs (Barman and Karthikeyan 2020). The difference is that Moodle’s one looks more detailed and loaded than that of Google Classroom. The graphical interface shapes the user experience, and Google’s system wins here. For example, their intuitiveness is the same for students in e-learning but different for teachers (Octaberlina and Muslimin 2020). These LMSs provide both sides with guidelines and digital training, but Moodle requires a more developed initial understanding of the topic. Moodle user experience is richer and more multifaceted than its counterpart, but it has primary cognitive barriers that are yet easy to overcome.
Conclusion
Moodle, the MLS that MCAST currently uses, and Google Classroom, it’s market competitor, were compared in this technical report. The latter would be suitable for MCAST if this educational organisation were looking for ease of software and hardware structure, graphical interface, and use. However, they need versatility, and multifunctional performance and, consequently, Moodle remains the more attractive variant within this comparison of two mainstream high-ranking LMSs.
Works Cited
Barman, B. and Karthikeyan, J. (2019) ‘Facilitating ELT through Moodle and Google Classroom’, Restaurant Business, 118(10). Web.
Content analysis (2022) Web.
Gilbert, E. (2021) How do I write a comparative analysis? Web.
Kiran. (2020) Moodle or Google Classroom – What’s better? Web.
Octaberlina, L. R. and Muslimin, A. I. (2020) ‘EFL students perspective towards online learning barriers and alternatives using Moodle/Google Classroom during COVID-19 pandemic’, International Journal of Higher Education, 9(6), pp. 1-9.
Top 10 Moodle alternatives & competitors (no date) Web.
Simanullang, N. H. S. and Rajagukguk, J. (2020) ‘Learning management system (LMS) based on Moodle to improve students learning activity’, Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1462(1), pp. 1-7.
TrustRadius Research Team (2020) Google Classroom vs Moodle. Web.
Using Google, Google Scholar, and other web search engines (no date) Web.
Brandt, D. (2021) Moodle LMS review.Web.
Getting started is easy (no date) Web.
Hurix (2020) Google Classroom or Moodle – Which is the better option for you? Web.
Langevin, S. (2021) Google Classroom: Exceptional, simple communication, collaboration, and document sharing. Web.
Lim, A. (2021) Key LMS challenges: A practical guide for school leaders. Web.
Nguyen, S. (2021) Moodle or Google Classroom – comparison. Web.
Pappas, C. and Zaharias, P. (2018) LMS user experience: Does it really matter? Web.
Rossouw, L. (2020) Comparisons and advocacy: Moodle vs Google Classroom. Web.