deciding on a new lms-an inclusive rfp and decision-making process
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
DECIDING ON A NEW LMS:AN INCLUSIVE RFP AND
DECISION MAKING PROCESS
Rhonda D. Blackburn, PhD
C. Christine Salmon, PhD
University of Texas at Dallas
WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO? Who we are Why RFP Process Timeline Results Outcomes and Issues
WHO WE ARE University of Texas at Dallas Approximately 15,000 students and 800
faculty Four online programs
WHY CONDUCT AN RFP? Blackboard Vista end of life Buy-in from faculty and students Two systems on campus Go with the best solution for our campus
OUR PROCESS LMS Committee Instructional Technology survey Focus groups Request for Proposal Review submissions Bring top three companies to campus Decide on the new LMS
TIMELINE Summer 2010
Sent out survey Fall 2010
Reviewed surveyConducted focus groupsStarted writing RFP
TIMELINE CONTINUED Spring 2011
Finished RFP, sent it out (March 7)Deadline for proposals (April 4)Develop rubric to evaluate vendorsBring in top three vendors, have faculty and
students involvedDecide on new LMS (hosted or self-hosted?)
TIMELINE CONTINUED Summer 2011
Begin backend implementation and integration with PeopleSoft
Begin building documentation Fall 2011
Continue backend implementation and integration with PeopleSoft
Continue documentation
TIMELINE CONTINUED Spring 2012
Complete backend implementation and integration with PeopleSoft
Complete documentationBegin training faculty who will use it in
SummerBegin migrating content from old LMS
Summer 2012Pilot new LMS, run simultaneously with old LMSContinue trainingContinue migrating content from old LMS
TIMELINE CONTINUED Fall 2012
Add more faculty to the summer pilot groupContinue to run simultaneously with old LMSContinue trainingContinue migrating content from old LMS
Spring 2013Any faculty who want to use new LMS canContinue to run simultaneously with old LMSContinue trainingContinue migrating content from old LMS
TIMELINE CONTINUED Summer 2013
Everyone is on new system and old system is used only as archive, no one is on old LMS
Migrate any additional content from old LMS
AT LARGE INPUT Instructional Technology Survey
Focus groups11 focus groups
4 faculty (1 online) 4 student (1 online) 1 instructional designer 1 back-end 1 accessibility
INSTRUCTIONAL TECH SURVEY Desire for more online courses Single sign-on Easy navigation Reliability and stability Prompt support
FOCUS GROUPS PROCESS Determined number and target
audiences Developed guiding questions Developed pre-focus group survey Conducted focus groups (audio
recorded) Analyzed results from survey and
discussion
RESULTS – OVERALL
FacultyFaculty unaware of existing featuresFaculty trainingEasy migration to new system
StudentsLack of use by facultyFew fully online courses – used as supportConcern with stability
RESULTS Usability Tools Accessibility Overall improvements
USABILITY Powerful but for power users Learning curve is more work than it’s
worth Could look more modern, updated
TOOLS Communication Collaboration Assessment Learning modules Course management Integrated tools Additional tools, functionality
INTEGRATED TOOLS Library, library reserves (f)(s) Video server, YouTube, iTunesU (f) Google docs (f) Turnitin, Grademark (f) MuchLearning (calculus) (s) Skype (s)
ADDITIONAL FUNCTIONALITY Online document editing (f) Push notification for course updates (s) Notification system (missed exam,
announcements, discussion, etc) (f) Easily embed videos (f) Web conferencing (s) Resume function on quizzes (s) Picture roster (s) Consistent look among courses (s) Wikis (f)
OVERALL IMPROVEMENTS Login Mobile Public Migration Listings myCourses
OUTCOMES AND ISSUESCaveatThe Office of Educational Enhancement was dissolved, so the support for the campus LMS has been downsized.
OUTCOMES AND ISSUES
What we know 8 vendors responded to the RFP 3 chosen to present on campus
What we don’t know Process for vendor presentations Process for decision making Timeline / process for implementation What training will be available*
