Cypher Learning's Neo is a Learning Management System designed for universities and schools. It has all the features you would expect, such as the ability to create competency-based courses, groups, set assignments, have the assignments marked automatically, gamification, badges and the increasingly-popular micro-credentials approach. In addition, you can have parents sent alerts when certain events occur. If you are looking for a learning platform, this seems to me to be as good as it gets. It has a nice visual layout, and drag and drop capability.

However, I think it's important for institutions to consider the following issues.

First, from my research into competency-based education (as part of my MA) it suffers from the unfortunate characteristic that someone can end up ticking all the boxes but still, overall, not be competent. It's a good example of the whole being greater than the sum of its parts. There's a corollary too, which is that a person might not tick all of the boxes, but still be competent overall — an example of good enough as opposed to faultless.

Secondly, although I think there is a place for automated assessment, and have advocated it for years, it's not enough. It's good for saving teacher time and work, and for getting quick feedback, but you still need more in-depth assessment, looking at students' work, and (dammit!) actually talking to students.

Thirdly, I have to agree with Stephen Downes' comment regarding micro-credentials (admittedly not regarding Cypher Learning, but the general point is well-made I think), that when you read the marketing hype about microcredentials (given by FutureLearn in this case) you'd think you could achieve a PhD in a few months without venturing from your sofa!

Something else I found when working both as an advisor and an independent consultant in schools is that no matter how easy it is to create subject portals (say) -- and in Cypher Learning it is easy to do so -- some subject departments will achieve amazing things and others will do very little. That's not to make a judgement -- there may be all kinds of reasons -- but to state an observable fact.

All of which is to say that there is more to setting up courses and all the associated infrastructure than installing a learning management system, no matter how comprehensive or well-designed it is. It's a statement of the obvious -- for which I make no apology, having seen some well-meant but ultimately useless innovations in schools -- but there needs to be a properly thought-through strategy, linked to the school's vision, with training, a shared understanding of what is expected by staff, who are given the time required to meet them, robust technical support. and full commitment from the senior leadership team. The system itself is a component of a much larger ecosystem.

As I've said, the Neo LMS seems pretty good, so if your school is at the stage where it could derive the most benefit from such a system, you will be pleased to know there is a free trial version. Why not set up a pilot study and try it out?