Building Quality into Learning Management Systems – An Architecture-Centric Approach

  • Paris Avgeriou
  • Simos Retalis
  • Manolis Skordalakis
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2784)


The design and development of contemporary Learning Management Systems (LMS), is largely focused on satisfying functional requirements, rather than quality requirements, thus resulting in inefficient systems of poor software and business quality. In order to remedy this problem there is a research trend into specifying and evaluating software architectures for LMS, since quality at-tributes in a system depend profoundly on its architecture. This paper presents a case study of appraising the software architecture of a Learning Management through experience-based assessment and the use of an architectural prototype. The framework of the evaluation conducted, concerns run-time, development and business qualities. The paper concludes with the lessons learned from the evaluation, emphasizing on the compromise between them.


Software architecture architectural evaluation quality attributes quality requirements nonfunctional requirements Learning Management Sys-tem Unified Modeling Language Unified Process 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Oleg, S., Liber, B.: A framework of pedagogical evaluation of Virtual Learning Environments (1999), Available online at
  2. 2.
    Avgeriou, P., Papasalouros, A., Retalis, S.: Web-based learning Environments: issues, trends, challenges. In: Proceedings of the 1st IOSTE symposium in Southern Europe, Science and Technology Education, Paralimni, Cyprus (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bosch, J.: Design and Use of Software Architectures. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Szyperski, C.: Component Software: Beyond Object-Oriented Programming. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1999)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Eriksson, H., Penker, M.: Business Modeling with UML - Business Patterns at work. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clements, P., Kazman, R., Clein, M.: Evaluating Software Architecture. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jacobson, I., Booch, G., Rumbaugh, J.: The Unified Software Development Process. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1999)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    IEEE Learning Technology Standards Committee: Draft Standard for Learning Technology Systems Architecture (LTSA). Draft 9 (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Thorne, S., Shubert, C., Merriman, J.: OKI architecture overview. OKI project document (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cisco Systems: Blueprint for Enterprise E-learning. white paper (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Retalis, S., Avgeriou, P.: Modeling Web-based Instructional Systems. Journal of Information Technology Education 1(1), 25–41 (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kruchten, P.: The Rational Unified Process, An introduction. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1999)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Booch, G., Rumbaugh, J., Jacobson, I.: The UML User Guide. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1999)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rumbaugh, J., Jacobson, I., Booch, G.: The UML Reference Manual. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1996)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Avgeriou, P., Retalis, S., Papasalouros, A., Skordalakis, M.: Developing an architecture for the Software Subsystem of a Learning Technology System - An Engineering approach. In: Proceedings of International Conference of Advanced Learning Technologies, Madison, Wisconsin, pp. 17–20. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2001)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Avgeriou, P., Retalis, S., Skordalakis, M.: A Software Architecture for a Learning Management System. In: Manolopoulos, Y., Evripidou, S., Kakas, A.C. (eds.) PCI 2001. LNCS, vol. 2563, pp. 183–200. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Buschmann, F., Meunier, R., Rohnert, H., Sommertland, P., Stal, M.: Pattern-Oriented Software Architecture. A System of Patterns, vol. 1. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester (1996)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shaw, M., Garlan, D.: Software Architecture: Perspectives on an Emerging Discipline. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1996)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bass, L., Clements, P., Kazman, R.: Software Architecture in Practice. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1998)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    IEEE Learning Technology Standardization Committee (LTSC): Draft Standard for Learning Object Metadata, P1484.12/D6.1 (2001),
  21. 21.
    IMS Global Learning Consortium: IMS Question & Test Interoperability Specification-Best Practice and Implementation Guide, version 1.2.1 (2001),
  22. 22.
    Kazman, R., Abowd, G., Bass, L., Clements, P.: Scenario-Based Analysis of Software Architecture. IEEE Software 13(6), 47–55 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kazman, R., Klein, M., Clements, P.: ATAM: Method for Architecture Evaluation. TECHNICAL REPORT CMU/SEI-2000-TR-004 ESC-TR-2000-004 (2000)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    IEEE: Recommended Practice for Software Requirements Specifications, IEEE Std. 830-1993 (1993)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    ISO/IEC 9126: Information technology-Software product evaluation-Quality characteristics and the guidelines for their use (1993)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cheesman, J., Daniels, J.: UML Components: A Simple Process for Specifying Component-Based Software. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2000)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paris Avgeriou
    • 1
  • Simos Retalis
    • 2
  • Manolis Skordalakis
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Software Engineering LaboratoryNational Technical University of AthensAthensGreece
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of CyprusNicosiaCyprus

Personalised recommendations