Taskforce initial presentation 4 24-14


Published on

Initial Workshop Info from Learning Management System Review for Cuyahoga Community College.

Published in: Education, Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Taskforce initial presentation 4 24-14

  1. 1. LEARNING MANAGEMENT SYSTEM REVIEW Project Status: May 2014
  2. 2. INTRODUCTIONS Getting to know you, getting to know all about you
  3. 3. PROJECT PLAN OVERVIEW Intentions, Scope, Assumptions
  4. 4. WHY ARE WE DOING THIS? Blackboard has been our LMS since the late 1990’s (18 years) New LMSs in the marketplace with new features and functionality Need to analyze if Blackboard is still the best institutional fit
  5. 5. ASSUMPTIONS There are several assumptions that are guiding the investigation into a possible new LMS implementation at Tri-C. They are: 1. The current LMS (Blackboard) may or may not be the best institutional fit for an LMS. This can only be determined by a review of all feasible LMSs. 2. There will not be an LMS that matches perfectly with the college’s needs.
  6. 6. ASSUMPTIONS 3. Only with a thorough review of enterprise-level LMSs can we determine what the best institutional fit for the needs of students, faculty, and staff will be. 4. The process must be inclusive. All are encouraged to participate and provide feedback as we conduct a needs analysis, prioritize our needs, and implement a rubric-based selection process.
  7. 7. HOW WE EXECUTE THE PROJECT PLAN Synchronous meetings every 2 weeks at every campus location Sprint activities in between synchronous meetings Tight knit work groups Communication on the eNET site
  8. 8. WHAT PARTICIPATION ENTAILS Faculty participation overview Administration and staff participation overview
  10. 10. ROLE-BASED LEADS & SPRINTS How the team will function
  11. 11. PROJECT ASSIGNED ROLES Project Champion & Sponsor Project sponsor  undertaken as one of two charges of the Tech Forum Governance Committee Project champion  Dr. J. Michael Thomson Organizational Roles Project lead  Sasha Thackaberry Project coordinator  Melanie Thompson Project Manager in Implementation Phase  Alicia Christy
  12. 12. DETERMINING WORK GROUPS Technical Integration Work Group Communication Strategy Work Group Social Learning Work Group Publisher Materials Work Group College Referral Work Group RFI Process Work Group ?
  13. 13. DETERMINING ROLE-BASED LEADS Faculty lead Technical leads Administration lead ?
  14. 14. WHAT ARE SPRINTS? 2-week long assigned activities Cross-functional mini-teams (3-4 people tops) Flexible groupings – sprint groups will configure as necessary for tasks Specific deliverables due at the end of 2 weeks Sprint report-outs occur in the bi-weekly meetings
  15. 15. GENERAL TIMELINE January 2014 – June 2016
  16. 16. GENERAL TIMELINE January – June 2014: Needs Analysis and Rubric Development July – August 2014: Demos, sandboxes, initial application of rubric for down-select Fall 2014: RFI process, sandbox classes, testing December 2014: final determination
  17. 17. GENERAL TIMELINE CONTINUED Spring 2015: pilots, training preparation Summer 2015: pilots, training, content migration Fall 2015: concurrent systems (if a change is made), training Spring 2016: concurrent systems, training Summer 2016: all courses in hosted system solution
  19. 19. REVIEW OF PROGRESS TO DATE What we’ve done thus far
  20. 20. PROJECT PLAN Flexibility built in Project success highly dependent upon completion of short-term goals to keep the timeline on track Share project plan to date here (eNET site) Share Needs Analysis to date here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AklwpuBcseSvdDVrd3 R0SVgxR1VrNlVjdE5wTVF3aGc&usp=drive_web#gid=4
  21. 21. LMS REVIEW ON ELI BLOG Central place for documentation of all progress Not the Taskforce’s collaboration space (eNET) Up-to-date info Ability to ask and answer questions quickly
  23. 23. OUTSTANDING MEMBERSHIP NEEDS Student ambassadors Adjunct faculty Finalized list of full-time faculty
  24. 24. ENET SITE Collaboration and tools (click below)
  25. 25. COLLEGE-WIDE COMMUNICATIONS PLANNING Keeping it real Keeping it transparent
  26. 26. COMMUNICATIONS TO DATE Streams & stakeholders
  27. 27. STREAMS USED FOR COMMUNICATIONS eLi blog Blackboard Tab Blackboard login page Blackboard announcements College-wide email preparation for survey College-wide emails for participation in focus groups
  28. 28. STREAMS USED FOR COMMUNICATIONS College-wide emails for students Announcements with Faculty Senate at each campus College-wide Cabinet eLi Advisory Committee Distance Learning Committee Technology Forum Committee
  29. 29. IDENTIFIED GAPS Where we need to do more work
  30. 30. MORE WORK NEEDED Continual challenge of communication Miscommunication about the process and the goal “Followers” on blog has steadily increased
  31. 31. COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY Need for college-wide integrated strategy Creative ideas – use multimedia?  Placard video?  Animated video?
  32. 32. CALLS FOR PARTICIPATION Surveys, interviews, focus groups
  33. 33. CALLS FOR PARTICIPATION Surveys Focus groups Interviews Handling questions as they arise – real-time answers on the blog
  34. 34. NEXT STEPS Where do we go from here?
  35. 35. HOMEWORK Go to eLi blog and “Follow” Read all materials on eLi blog about the LMS Review Go to eNET site Introduce yourself on the discussion board Join one or more work groups Fill out doodle poll for best availability for biweekly meetings
  36. 36. SEND QUESTIONS If you have the question, someone else has the question – let’s answer it for everybody Instead of email  Use the blog for College-wide questions  Use the eNET site for Taskforce-specific questions