Outcomes Reflections and Whats Next James Hilton University

Outcomes, Reflections, and What's Next James Hilton University of Michigan Brad Wheeler Indiana University 1

Sakai Project Timeline Jan 04 Michigan • CHEF Framework • Course. Tools • Work. Tools Indiana • Navigo Assessment • Eden Workflow • One. Start • Oncourse MIT • Stellar July 04 SEPP Conference 172 Attend Aug 1. 0 Stanford • Course. Work • Assessment OKI • OSIDs May 05 Dec 1. 5 Release Pilot Sakai 1. 0 Release • Tool Portability Profile • Framework • Services-based Portal • Refined OSIDs & implementations Sakai Tools • Complete CMS • Assessment What we said… Dec 05 Activity: Maintenance & Transition from a project to a community Sakai 2. 0 Release • TPP • Framework • Services-based Portal Sakai Tools • Complete CMS • Assessment • Workflow • Research Tools • Authoring Tools Activity: Ongoing implementation work at local institution… Primary Sakai Activity Architecting for JSR-168 Portlets, u. Portal Re-factoring “best of” features for tools Conforming tools to Technology Portability Profile Primary Sakai Activity Refining Sakai Framework, Tuning and conforming additional tools Intensive community building/training 2

In production use with >25, 000 users at u. Mich Full 1. 5 Pilot at IU January-May 05 3

Perspective Sourcing decisions are not new…. Build 1970 -80 s Build or Buy 1990 Risks Build, Buy, or “Borrow” 2000 2010 Benefits 4

In Search of a Better Model… …for how we pay and what we get. Software is not free. Creating Software Sustaining Software Commercial Coordination Stakeholder Coordination Closed IP Open IP Licensing Fees Community Source Projects Educational Community License Bundled IP & Support Unbundled IP & Support Maintenance Fees Partnering Organizations + Commercial Support Options Objective…sustainable economics and innovation for satisfied users 5

Control of Code & Destiny But with responsibility too! Twin Peaks Navigator PKI Dartmouth üCost of Systems operations, maintenance, timing, evolution üFunctionality of Systems integration, standards…innovation Chandler/Westwood 6

Michigan, Indiana Independent decisions for community source engagement 7

Why UM went down the Sakai path • Legacy system with no positive trajectory forward • Saw market consolidation in CMS • Saw the potential of tapping core competence and starting a virtuous cycle of development/teaching/research • Strategic desire to blur the distinction between the laboratory/classroom between knowledge creation/digestion • NRC report and the need for collaboration • A moment in time opportunity (Mellon and synchronization) • Leverage links between open source, open access and culture of the academy/wider world 8

What goals did we set? • Replicate functionality of legacy CMS and Worktools • Find collaborating partners (Sakai is at least as interesting from the collaboration experiment perspective as it is from the technology perspective. ) • Get better at discerning open source winners. It shouldn’t be like playing the lottery. • Evolve a business plan that would be sustainable • Implement parts that were not built at UM 9

What have we learned? • Collaborations are hard work and they require shared vision (when visions vary, or when they change, collaborations struggle). • Projects like Sakai need to be entered into in a fully intentional way. – Separate board with dedicated developers. – Sakai sits between institutions with a clear governance structure. • Open source requires real project discipline. Sakai is as spontaneous as a shuttle launch. • Learn to balance pragmatics and ideals and trust your partners. 10

What have we learned? • Hard to test for scale • Importance of alignment/support from Provost/President • It’s good to be public. Our success or failure will be spectacularly public • There are 89 K open source projects in the naked city. Our focus, and potential sweet spot for collaborative action, is open source at the enterprise level. Think Linux on serversus desktops; Apache versus Mozilla; and Sakai versus classroom specific applications. • Zeitgeist is critical. Important to link with repository efforts, open access push, and scholarly publishing opportunities if we are to keep academic commons/culture open. 11

Sakai, OSPI, Kuali Lessons • Collaboration is a capability • Organizational readiness, learning • Value for the future • Choose your partners well • Like-minded institutions, timelines • Sakai structure is promising • Small core development team • Large partners organization 12

Community Source Projects “Community source describes a model for the purposeful coordinating of work in a community. It is based on many of the principles of open source development efforts, but community source efforts rely more explicitly on defined roles, responsibilities, and funded commitments by community members than some open source development models. ” …. from “Institutional Investments www. sakaiproject. org for Institutional Outcomes” 13

What’s Next ü More leverage between community source projects ü Improving commercial support options ü Lots of tools and extensions ü The model used for Sakai is broadly applicable ü The Partner’s Program grows 14

8 -14 June 2005 - Baltimore 15

Outcomes, Reflections, and What's Next James Hilton University of Michigan Brad Wheeler Indiana University 16