EduTools 2.0 is an update to the original EduTools comparison tool for learning management systems (LMS). It will involve annual updates and additional community involvement through vetting and sharing. The process for procuring or upgrading an LMS will involve strategic planning, an RFP and vendor evaluation, and vendor selection. Key communicators from various departments will provide guidance and participate at different stages, including setting direction, developing criteria, conducting evaluations, and preparing for change.

1. EduTools 2.0

2. EduTools 1.0
• Ground-breaking comparison tool
• Used for RFP generation
• Provider content vetted by WCET
• Resource-intensive to maintain

3. Genesis: WCET LMS CIG

4. Revision Drivers
• Ubiquitous
• Converging feature sets
• Handle administrivia
• Student expectations
• Focus on learning not learner management
• Constant change

5. Driving Questions
• Semi-permeable borders
– Content
– Non-students
• Personal learning environments
– Content
– Non-students
• Small pieces, loosely joined

6. EduTools Survey
1. Portal 6. Interoperability
2. Communication 7. Accessibility
3. Tests 8. Community
4. Grades 9. Administration
5. Reports 10.Technical
11.Price

7. LMS “Essential” Questions
Portal Accessibility
How enables students to connect with other enrolled Compliance with W3C Content Accessibility?
students outside of the course?
How faculty upload content files to a single location
Community for multiple sections of same course?
How used to make content available to users outside
the institution? Administration
Describe the data feeds between any SIS integration
Communication
partners to your LMS.
How does the LMS allow faculty to manage small
groups within courses.
How can programmers develop integrated services Technical
(e.g. single sign-on for tutoring)
Describe any LMS migrations which have required no
post-migration manual clean-up.
Assessment
What data is available to allow institutions to student
progress on system-wide basis? Pricing
Describe the TCO price for:
Grading
• small institution, 2,000 students, 100 staff/faculty
Describe how a faculty member imports and exports
grades from your LMS. members, single-CPU application server.
• medium-sized campus, 12,000 students, 500
Data staff/faculty, four-CPU application server.
How can institutions use the LMS to monitor faculty
participation in courses on a system-wide basis?

8. EduTools Data
• LMS Filters
– Type
• Proprietary vs. Open Source
– Location
• Local vs. Hosted

9. Product LMS Respondents
Filter
Agilix BrainHoney Commercial Hosted (SaaS)
CampusCruiser Commercial Hosted (SaaS)
Instructure Canvas Commercial Hosted (SaaS)
Edvance 360 Commercial Hosted (SaaS)
Pearson eCollege Commercial Hosted (Saas)
Blackboard Learn Commercial Hosted or Unhosted
Desire2 Learn Commercial Hosted or Unhosted
ATutor Open Source
.LRN Open Source
LON-CAPA Open Source + Hosting
Moodle Open Source
Sakai Open Source
MoodleRooms Joule Open Source Hosting
Others available but did not participate in
survey

10. Authentication “Essential” Questions
Functionality Support
• What designed to do and how • Skill sets needed to manage the
does it do it? product?
• Evidence the solution provides • Training and documentation
reliable authentication? provided?
• User experience of faculty • How user support provided?
members and of students?
• Reports available to Technology
admin, staff, faculty? • Hardware purchases or software
• How student privacy assured? downloads required of users?
• Can campus systems (e.g.
LMS, SIS) be integrated?
Pricing
• Status of partnership with any
• Pricing model? LMS providers?

11. EduTools Data
• Authentication Filter: Technology
– Biometric
– Challenge-Response
– Monitoring

12. Product Filter
Authentication Respondents
Axciom Identify-X Challenge Questions
BioMetric Signature ID Biometrics
Trustable Passwords by iMagic Software Biometrics
Voice Verified by CSIdentity Biometrics
Digital Proctor Monitoring
WebAssessor & Online Proctoring by Kryterion Monitoring
ProctorU Monitoring
Securexam by Software Secure Monitoring

13. EduTools Mockup

14. Direction
• Annual updates
• Additional resources
• Vendor input
• Community involvement
– Vetting
– Sharing

15. Future
Ed U Tools
2.0
coming soon

16. End

17. RFP

18. PLE

19. Survey Questions

20. Communications
Steps  Strategic Decision Procure/ RFP and Vendor Vendor Selection
Communicators Planning Upgrade Evaluation
Executive/ Steering initiate overall direction, set direction for RFP shepherding oversee RFP, Legal, other
Committee change frequency procurement, purchasing issues
Information Technology provide guidance on IT recommend window for security & accessibility hardware decisions and
infrastructure capabilities, acquisition and integration evaluation provisioning discussions
Academic Units provide guidance on recommend window for develop evaluation criteria; identify evangelists to
current/future usage acquisition vendor research/reviews begin the change process
Instructional Design provide guidance on future propose evaluation criteria, conduct evaluation by develop transition schedule
and Support needs transition strategies instructional designers
Marketing and provide guidance on public get direction from sketch communications provide communications
communication perceptions Academic Units and IT plan/message consistency plan to stakeholders
Faculty and Faculty provide feedback on propose evaluation criteria participate in evaluation prepare for change
Senates current limitations
Students or Student provide feedback on propose evaluation criteria participate in evaluation prepare for change
Senate Organizations current limitations (users)
Enrollment Mgt/ provide feedback on propose evaluation criteria participate in evaluation revise schedule and text
Registrar current limitations descriptions
Governing Bodies provide direction for collaborate with Executive participate in evaluation,
shared service needs Committee on issues determine community
Vendor none provide general info: RFI provide specific info in provide demonstrations,
helps frame RFP response to RFP references and test a/c’s