A learning management system (LMS) is a software application or software platform used to administer, deliver, organize, track, and report on learning activities. LMSs are used by schools, universities, companies, government agencies, military organizations, healthcare systems, and other organizations to manage courses, users, enrollment, instructional content, assignments, assessments, grades, communication, learning analytics, compliance records, certifications, and training records.^[1][2]

An LMS is both an instructional system and an administrative system. It gives instructors, trainers, learners, and administrators a shared digital environment for organizing learning activity. In education, this may include course sites, syllabi, readings, assignments, quizzes, gradebooks, discussion forums, calendars, announcements, and integration with student information systems. In workplace and professional training, it may include compliance training, onboarding, certification, employee development, reporting, and learning records.^[2][3]

LMS platforms developed across both academic and corporate training environments. Academic systems emphasized courses, instructors, students, assessment, and instructional management. Corporate systems emphasized training administration, compliance, certification, onboarding, workforce development, and reporting. The two traditions overlapped, but they did not begin from the same design assumptions.^[1][4]

The term developed alongside earlier and related categories, including course management system (CMS), virtual learning environment (VLE), computer-managed instruction (CMI), integrated learning system (ILS), and learning content management system (LCMS). These terms are not exact synonyms. They emerged from different technical, institutional, and regional contexts. In North American higher education, course management system was often used for platforms that helped instructors manage online course materials and course activity. In the United Kingdom and other regions, virtual learning environment became common for similar institutional platforms. Learning management system became the broader category term as education, corporate training, compliance, and e-learning systems converged around course delivery, user administration, assessment, reporting, and analytics.^[1][5]

Learning management systems developed from earlier forms of distance education, computer-assisted instruction, computer-managed instruction, computer-based training, and networked learning. The web-based LMS category took shape during the 1990s as institutions and organizations moved from stand-alone instructional tools, CD-ROM training, individual course websites, and local training systems toward centrally supported platforms for managing users, content, communication, assessment, records, and reporting.^[1][6]

Definition and terminology

A learning management system is generally distinguished by its combination of instructional delivery and learning administration. It does not simply store course files. It manages relationships among learners, instructors or trainers, courses, learning objects, activities, assessments, records, and reports. This combination made the LMS useful for both online learning and traditional classroom-based instruction.^[1][2]

Several related terms preceded or overlapped with LMS. Computer-managed instruction referred to systems that managed learner records, instructional sequences, progress, or test results. Integrated learning systems combined instructional content with management and reporting functions. Course management systems focused on the administration and delivery of academic courses, especially in colleges and universities. Virtual learning environment became a common term in the United Kingdom and parts of Europe for online environments used to support teaching and learning.^[1]

A learning content management system, or LCMS, is related but distinct. An LCMS focuses primarily on creating, storing, organizing, reusing, and managing learning content. An LMS focuses more broadly on delivering learning experiences, enrolling users, managing activity, recording completion, and reporting outcomes. In practice, many modern platforms combine functions from both categories.^[7]

The boundaries among these terms have shifted over time. Early systems were often described by the specific function they supported, such as computer-assisted instruction, computer-managed instruction, computer-based training, or course management. As web-based platforms became more comprehensive, the LMS became the larger category for systems that combined instructional content, communication, assessment, administration, reporting, and integration with other institutional or organizational systems.^[1][8]

Academic and corporate LMS traditions

Academic and corporate LMS systems developed around overlapping but different requirements. In higher education and schools, the LMS often developed from the course shell. A course shell was a persistent workspace organized around an academic course, instructor, roster, calendar, assignments, discussions, files, announcements, grades, and evolving instructional activity. It functioned as a live course environment that changed throughout a semester or academic term.^[1][5]

The corporate LMS tradition grew out of computer-based training, including CD-ROM, LAN-based, and later web-launched training content. In this model, the LMS was primarily a system for assigning, launching, tracking, and reporting packaged learning objects. The learner clicked to launch a course or module, the content ran through a defined runtime environment, and the LMS recorded data such as completion, score, time, status, or pass/fail results. AICC's CMI001 interoperability guidelines were approved in 1993 and were originally designed for CD-ROM and LAN operation before later adding web-based and runtime interfaces.^[9]

Academic LMS and course-management systems developed around broader course workspaces. Instructors could create and revise course pages, upload files, post announcements, manage assignments, administer quizzes, maintain gradebooks, open discussion boards, and communicate with students directly inside the course site. The system was not only launching prepackaged content. It was supporting the ongoing work of a course.^[10][11]

This distinction shaped the category. Early corporate LMS systems often emphasized runtime delivery, completion tracking, certification, auditability, and reporting. Academic LMS systems emphasized course spaces, instructor-managed content, student interaction, grades, files, announcements, discussions, and term-based instructional workflow. Modern LMS platforms increasingly combine both approaches, but the original design assumptions were different.^[6][3]

Standards origins: AICC, ADL, SCORM, and IMS

Two early standards traditions shaped the LMS category from different directions. The Aviation Industry Computer-Based Training Committee, or AICC, emerged from the corporate and aviation computer-based training world. Its work focused on courseware interoperability and communication between training content and management systems. AICC helped establish the packaged-content model used in many corporate LMS environments, where a course could be launched, tracked, completed, scored, and reported through a learning platform.^[9]

The Advanced Distributed Learning initiative, established in 1999, developed SCORM as a reference model for reusable and interoperable learning content. SCORM stands for Shareable Content Object Reference Model. It is a technical standard for web-based e-learning that defines how digital learning content communicates with a host LMS. SCORM specifies packaging, launch behavior, runtime communication, sequencing, and tracking rules so that learning content can be reused and exchanged across compliant systems.^[12]

SCORM combined work from several earlier standards efforts, including AICC, IMS, IEEE, and ARIADNE. The standard became widely used in corporate training, government, military, and compliance-learning environments because it allowed packaged learning content to be launched, tracked, and reported across different LMS platforms.^[12]

IMS emerged from a different setting. The Instructional Management Systems project developed through EDUCOM's National Learning Infrastructure Initiative, which treated online learning as part of a broader higher-education infrastructure problem. William H. Graves described the IMS Cooperative as an effort to build the "Internet architecture for learning", not a single instructional management code base or single standard.^[13]

EDUCOM later merged with CAUSE to form EDUCAUSE, and IMS standards work continued through IMS Global Learning Consortium, now known as 1EdTech.^[14][15]

Together, AICC and IMS formed two important standards roots for LMS development. AICC represented the corporate-training and computer-based-training tradition. IMS represented the higher-education online-learning infrastructure tradition. SCORM connected parts of both traditions through ADL, while later standards such as xAPI, Common Cartridge, and Learning Tools Interoperability extended the LMS ecosystem beyond a single course package or single course shell.^[12][15]

History

Several historical phases of distance education preceded the development of the LMS.

Technical aspects

An LMS can be either hosted locally or by a vendor. A vendor-hosted cloud system typically follows a SaaS (software as a service) model. All data in a vendor-hosted system is stored by the supplier and accessed by users over the internet on a computer or mobile device. Vendor-hosted systems are typically easier to use and require less technical expertise. An LMS that is locally hosted stores all LMS data on users' internal servers. Locally hosted LMS software will often be open-source, meaning users will acquire the software and its code (either through payment or free of charge). With this, the user can modify and maintain the software through an internal team. Individuals and smaller organizations tend to stick with cloud-based systems due to the cost of internal hosting and maintenance.^[33]

There are a variety of integration strategies for embedding content into LMSs, including AICC, xAPI (also called 'Tin Can'), SCORM (Sharable Content Object Reference Model), and LTI (Learning Tools Interoperability).^[34][35]

Through an LMS, teachers may create and integrate course materials, articulate learning goals, align content and assessments, track student progress, and develop customized tests. An LMS allows the communication of learning objectives and organizes learning timelines. An LMS perk is that it delivers learning content and tools straight to learners, and assessment can be automated. It can also reach marginalized groups through special settings. Such systems have built-in customizable features, including assessment and tracking. Thus, learners can see their progress in real time, and instructors can monitor and communicate on the effectiveness of learning.^[36][37] One of the most important features of LMS is trying to create a streamline communication between learners and instructors. Such systems, besides facilitating online learning, tracking learning progress, providing digital learning tools, managing communication, and possibly selling content, may also be used to provide various communication features.^[38]

Features

Learning management industry

This section needs to be updated. Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (August 2021)

In the relatively new LMS market, commercial providers for corporate applications and education range from new entrants to those that entered the market in 1990. In addition to commercial packages, many open-source solutions are available.

As of 2023, in the U.S. higher-education market, the leading LMSs by number of institutions are Canvas (Instructure)^[43], D2L Brightspace, Blackboard Learn (Anthology), and Moodle. According to the "State of Higher Ed LMS Market for US and Canada: Year-End 2023 Edition",^[44] Canvas holds approximately 41 % institutional market share, followed by Blackboard at 17%; Moodle and Brightspace are tied at about 16 % each.^[45][46]

Many users of LMSs use an authoring tool to create content, which is then hosted on an LMS. In some cases, LMSs that do use a standard include a primitive authoring tool for basic content manipulation. More modern systems, in particular SaaS solutions, have chosen not to adopt a standard and instead offer rich course authoring tools. There are several standards for creating and integrating complex content into an LMS, including AICC, SCORM, xAPI, and Learning Tools Interoperability. However, using SCORM or an alternative standardized course protocol is not always required and can be restrictive when used unnecessarily.^[47]

Evaluation of LMSs is a complex task, and substantial research supports various forms of evaluation, including iterative processes that assess students' experiences and approaches to learning.^[48]

Advantages and disadvantages

Both supporters and critics of LMSs recognize the importance of developing 21st century skills; however, the controversy lies in whether they are practical for teachers and students alike.^[49]

In one study, an LMS led to a reported higher computer self-efficacy, while participants reported being less satisfied with the learning process that is achieved in the LMS.^[50] A study among Indian students has suggested that a negative experience with an LMS can leave "the learner with a passive, un-engaging experience, leading to incomplete learning and low performance".^[51]

See also

• 8 learning management questions – Set of questions for teachers
• Competency management system
• Educational technology – Use of technology in education to enhance learning and teaching (e-learning)
• Intelligent tutoring system – Computer system to provide instruction to learners
• LAMS – Learning Activity Management System
• Learning objects
• Learning Record Store (LRS)
• List of learning management systems
• Massive open online course
• Student information system – Software for educational institutions to manage student and school data
• Virtual learning environment

References

Bibliography

• Levensaler, Leighann; Laurano, Madeline (2009), Talent Management Systems 2010, Bersin & Associates, archived from the original on 11 October 2009, retrieved 25 October 2009

Further reading

• Connolly, P. J. (2001). A standard for success. InfoWorld, 23(42), 57-58. EDUCAUSE Evolving Technologies Committee (2003). Course Management Systems (CMS). Retrieved 25 April 2005, from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/DEC0302.pdf
• Cook, David (2007). "Web-based learning: pros, cons and controversies" (PDF). Clinical Medicine. 7 (1): 37–42. doi:10.7861/clinmedicine.7-1-37. PMC 4953546. PMID 17348573. Retrieved 24 September 2018.
• Demian, Peter; Morrice, James (15 December 2015). "The Use of Virtual Learning Environments and Their Impact on Academic Performance" (PDF). Engineering Education. 7: 11–19. doi:10.11120/ened.2012.07010011.
• Ellis, Ryann K. (2009) A field guide to learning management systems. American Society for Training & Development (ASTD)
• Gibbons, A. S., Nelson, J. M., & Richards, R. (2002). The nature and origin of instructional objects. In D. A. Wiley (Ed.), The instructional use of learning objects: Online version. Retrieved 5 April 2005, from http://reusability.org/read/chapters/gibbons.doc
• Gilhooly, K. (2001). Making e-learning effective. Computerworld, 35(29), 52-53.
• Hodgins, H. W. (2002). The future of learning objects. In D. A. Wiley (Ed.), The instructional use of learning objects: Online version. Retrieved 13 March 2005, from http://reusability.org/read/chapters/hodgins.doc
• Popat, Kris (2007). Virtually There: Learning Platforms. Scunthorpe: Yorkshire and Humber Grid for Learning. ISBN 9780955600609.
• Weller, M. (2007). Virtual Learning Environments: Using, choosing and developing your VLE. London: Routledge. ISBN 9780415414319.
• Wiley, D. (2002). Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory: A definition, a metaphor, and a taxonomy. In D. A. Wiley (Ed.), The instructional use of learning objects: Online version. Retrieved 13 March 2005, from http://reusability.org/read/chapters/wiley.doc