Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

Innovative, Collaborative Process Used to Select LMS

LMS PRESENTATION - Spring 2012
by

Jessica Howard

on 27 September 2012

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Innovative, Collaborative Process Used to Select LMS

Innovative, Collaborative Process Used to Select Learning Management System LMS Transitions at Alamo Colleges 1997 - 2007 - WebCT 2007 - District moves to Blackboard Vista Fall 2010 -- Realization: Must change LMS by end of 2012. Colleges begin looking at LMS products in "sandboxes" Dec. 2011 - Instructure Canvas purchased Jan. 2012 - Training and pilots in Canvas begin Feb. 2011 - Faculty-led task team convenes and initiates formal process to choose new LMS Process
Goals District and 5 colleges Faculty, staff and students Inclusive Thorough Efficient Long-Range Goals Grow distance education at Alamo
Use LMS in all classes, not just those online, to increase student success Engaging, learner-centered Instruction First Steps The Team Assess current progress / structure
Create new structure (liaisons)
Create Sharepoint site
Establish timeline (May...) 20 Members:
4 per college
Ad hoc: District IT
~3/4 faculty Months 12-24 Continue to monitor process
Upgrade training and learner engagement continuously
Leverage LMS in other ways Implement pre- and post-training requirements virtually Results 50% improvement in training audit scores after implementation Most current training available no more printed materials Field SMEs & developers worked hand-in-hand training hits bulls-eye Early successes pave way for total immersion in LMS-based training Cut down site time by using pre-/post-training
education Process Conclusion Excited, empowered faculty
Excellent LMS that suits Alamo's needs
A proven process that informs 2012 implementation Used for common areas of interest
Control only within Intranet or LMS
Need to be organized by groups May 2012 Alamo Colleges 3,600+
sections in Alamo's LMS environment (~128,000 students, duplicated count) Jan. 2013 - Blackboard Vista no longer
supported The Charge Establish suitable selection criteria.
Consider training requirements, maintenance and update requirements, and cost compared to effectiveness.
Summarize viable LMS products and rank in order of preference.
Make final recommendation. IMMEDIATELY ALAMO COLLEGES 60,000+ credit students
40,000+ non-credit students
District office
5 colleges
Northeast Lakeview College
Northwest Vista College
Palo Alto College
St. Philip's College
San Antonio College Online surveys created / deployed
Faculty
Students

Codify initial selection criteria

In-person demonstrations of LMS products by vendors Phase One: Determine what faculty/staff/students want in an LMS Faculty Survey Data 278 Responses
75% full-time faculty
25% part-time faculty
27% have not taught an online or hybrid course
44% have taught 5+ online / hybrid courses --Comfort level with learning a new LMS
Beginner - 18%
Intermediate - 43%
Advanced - 26%


--The next LMS should look and feel like Blackboard Vista:
Agree / Strongly agree (61%)
Disagree / Not sure (39%)

--Top tools used in Blackboard Vista: Gradebook, Mail Tool, Assessments, and Backup and Restoring of Content

--Top tools that might relate to a student's learning: Built-in Help, Creating / Managing Multiple Sections of a Course that Share some Content / Functions, Built-in Orientation
Faculty advocated for a range of products and pointed out certain features of products as being more or less desirable.

Repeated articulation of a need for seamless migration of content / ease of learning a new system / simplicity of transition from one LMS to another. Areas of Concern Student Survey Data 1155 Responses
18% have never taken an online or blended / hybrid course Agree / Strongly Agree:
Access LMS through ACES portal (75%)
Should look / feel like Blackboard Vista (78%)

Comfort level with learning a new LMS:
Beginner - 20%
Intermediate - 51%
Advanced - 23%

Top tools used in Blackboard Vista: Assessments, Assignment Tool, Grade and Course Home Page

Top tools that might relate to a student's learning: Built-In Help, Course email sent to Personal Email, and Built-In Orientation Areas of Concern 21% - Technical concerns about implementation and support and low trust level in the institution to make the transition to a new system
17% - Recommendations about new tools they would like or tools that should be kept. Students recommended an orientation for students and training for faculty.
12% - Change generally. Initial Selection Criteria Functional Requirements
discussions
files
email
notes
chat
whiteboard
calendar
progress review
orientation / help
assignments
assessments
group management
community networking
e-portfolios
authorizations
marking tools
gradebook
student tracking
course management
templates, customization
mobile app
outcomes measurement
most recent technology On-Campus Vendor Demonstrations Open to all faculty / staff
Streamed live and available in recorded form
Feedback forms
LMS Team met, shared feedback and indicated individual preference Phase Two: Looking Closer at Preferred LMS Products Blackboard Learn Instructure Canvas Additional selection criteria




Second vendor demonstration on campus SLO component, mobile platforms / solutions, uploads and usage of publisher content, training tutorials, grading tool (including grading discussions), compatibility with browsers live, recorded
elicited student, faculty and team feedback Phase Three: Report Out, Additional Considerations, and RFP Process
Ascertained "popular choice" through the process, and by focusing on two primary areas of student / faculty concern as determined through surveys: Course Transition (ease / reliability of migration, customization)
User Transition (product intuitiveness, training ease / options) Managed v. On-Premise Hosting

Technical Considerations

Cost of Ownership Benefits of Managed Hosting
Cost savings
IT Talent Management
24/7 Support
Scalability
Reliability
Maximum system uptime Report to VPAAs (May)
IT Discussions (smaller, technical group) RFP Process -- begun in Summer RFP Initiated in July with 5-member LMS Review Team (sub-group of original LMS Team) representing all colleges

12 LMS product proposals submitted

September, 2011: Alamo Colleges’ Purchasing Department’s RFP Scoring Matrix scoring shows Instructure Canvas first choice by a significant margin

Scoring criteria and weighting derived from earlier process Sept - Dec. - Planning the Transition
Communication to faculty
Creation of LMS Transition Team
FAQ sheet The Product Chosen Appealing “look and feel” (as determined by AC faculty and students)

Outstanding learning outcomes component, fully integrated with course assessments

Learning outcome functionality at the course, department, college and district level

Improved communication between students and faculty through innovative applications familiar to students

Course migrations into Canvas simple and quick

Online presence of faculty enhanced through easily implemented, collaborative multimedia features http://www.instructure.com/ Outstanding Features of Canvas (Alamo Colleges Summary) canvas F
A
Q
s Faculty Voice Q & A Technical Requirements
authentication
registration integration (SIS)
compatibility with existing district technologies
administration

Vendor Management of Services
hosting
installation

Costs and Pricing
Cost based on FTEs
hardware cost
project implementation
implementation services
training
additional add-ons and services

Training / Support
training options
maintenance

Other
Full transcript