Next Gen LMS CUBoulder This Gen Technology Blackboard

Next Gen LMS @ CU-Boulder

This Gen Technology: Blackboard (Web. CT) CE 8 Service: § § § Courses in SIS (until this spring) All standard tools plus anti-plagiarism powerlink Automatic provisioning incl. drops/adds Provisions to rollback course content in case of “oops” But “self archive”

This Gen (cont. ) Support: § Service Delivery – create courses and assign proper permissions for instructors and designers. § DACs – Help faculty with tools, content, and making most effective use of technology (incl. LMS). § Escalated Support – Last point of issue escalation.

This Gen (cont. ) Operations: § Application Manager § DBA (Oracle) Funding: § Adequate § ~2 FTE plus DACs § License, equip. maint. , equip. R&R

Baby Step Spring 2009 – Allow non-SIS “Courses” § Establish through Service Delivery § Support through Escalated Support (cannot provide same level of assistance as DACs)

Other LMSes on Campus All for really good business reasons: § § Physics (Moodle) Leeds School of Business (Blackboard 8) Law School (TWEN – hosted) Others ? ? No support from Central IT

LMS in the Campus IT Strategic Plan CU Boulder should develop a model for identifying, critically evaluating, and strategically supporting emerging web-based learning tools. This model should be adopted by faculty and support personnel as they consider technologies to employ in their teaching, research, and service work. A campuswide committee should be formed to identify promising educational technologies, assessing their potential for adoption, and communicating their findings to the campus. Link

Bottom Line Goals Change the Technology: § Flexible framework § Suite of “plug in” tools § Allow customizations & in-house written functionality. Change the Service: § Customization § Everybody in the fold (campus learning technology ecosystem? )

Result • “Team” to establish functional needs and evaluate options. • Significant additional funding for LMS: Ø +3 FTE for support and development/customizations. Ø Additional funding for infrastructure

The Vision Coming into Focus Campus LMS “infrastructure”: § § One centrally provided framework “Pluggable” tools; even to/from another framework Aggregated Course “portal” Data integration service – feed any framework (within reason – IMS? ) Support, Support: § Incl. help assessing effectiveness

The Vision (cont. ) LMS framework gets early consideration when contemplating new needs: § § Collaboration tools Surveys Simple workflow Etc. E. g. ARPAC (Side Story) Implication: LMS is an ERP - Manage it accordingly

Status • Faculty team process completing – decision to RFP. • ARPAC going live on hosted Bb 9 (what have we done? !? ) – Testing concept of Business Service built on Enterprise Service (See Aside). • Wish to pilot something in Fall ’ 09 • Turn off Web. CT CE 6 Fall ‘ 10

Aside Enterprise Service • Program Management (strategy) • Escalated Support • Application Management • Development • • System Operations/Hosting Call in-take Service Delivery Database Operations Business Service Responsibility of business unit (must provide) Business unit can provide or contract with central IT

Key Questions Hire, or use $$ to contract and host?