1. Choosing The Learning Management System for Miami University PROJECT UPDATE

2. GOAL FOR MEETING: DECIDE ON THE LMS PRODUCT

3. Why now?  Support ends for our current version of Blackboard  Operational support ends June 2010  All support ends Oct. 2012  One year’s cancellation notice  Significant frustration with current version of Blackboard from faculty and support staff  Preparing for the future

4. LMS Project Milestones  Research LMS trends  Determine student and faculty needs  Compare systems, features and costs  Make a decision  Develop transition plan  Blackboard 9.0 Commercial  Cascade Open Source (eliminated early-on due to scalability concerns)  Desire2Learn Commercial  Moodle Open Source  Sakai Open Source

5. LMS Implementation Timeline

6. Community Needs Assessment  FLINGs on all campuses  Feedback session during LTSI  Focus Groups/Online Comments  LMS Lab Days on all campuses  Survey  Webinars from higher ed institutions & vendors  Conference calls with: Gartner Louisiana State University Indiana UniversityVermont State Colleges University of California- Davis

7. Ranked Features from Faculty Survey 1.Efficient grade book 2.Easy assignment creation and submission 3.Easy migration to the new system 4.Ability to fully work with our institutional systems (e.g. Banner) 5.Ability to manage multiple sections of the same class 6.Ability to communicate and collaborate 7.Ability to customize and add new features 8.Video capability (uploading files) 9.Ability to work with current applications (e.g. Chalk & Wire, TurnItIn, clickers, etc.) 10.Easy and secure guest access 11.Ability to work on mobile device (Total Response: 133)

8. Ranked Concerns from Faculty Survey 1.Poor system performance 2.Poor usability of the new system 3.Difficulty in migrating existing content 4.Lack of ongoing support for the new system 5.Lack of ability to customize the new system 6.Lack of training for new system 7.Cost of new system (Total Response: 133)

9. Feature Feedback from Students  Consistent usage at a minimal level by all faculty  All courses are in one place  Mobile app capability

10. Feature Feedback from Staff  Integration with Banner  Immediate enrollment  Grades  Same functionality with current organization sites  User-friendly

11. LMS Preferences  Overall  Clear that Blackboard is not preferred  Oxford: Open Source (Moodle, Sakai)  EHS: Open Source  FNA: Open Source  FSB: Open Source  SEAS: Open Source  LTSI: Open Source (Moodle preferred)  LMS Lab Days: Moodle, Desire2Learn  Regionals: Desire2Learn

12. Survey at a Glance  3 Positive on Moodle  4 Positive on Sakai (Total Response: 133)  53% – Learning new LMS in a year will not be too much work (18% Disagree)  54% – Embrace new technologies eagerly  59% – Comfortable transitioning to new technologies  64% – Disagree the only function is to handle routine administrative tasks  65% – Need no additional time selecting the system  75% – LMS positively impact the teaching and learning process  78% – LMS should be flexible to meet their needs  Additional Comments:  3 Positive & 6 negative on Blackboard  None on Desire2Learn

13. Survey at a Glance Embrace New Technologies EagerlyComfortable Transitioning to New Technologies (Total Response: 133)

14. LMS Decision Path

16. LMS Resources for Miami  Open source LMS  4 FTE directly supporting the faculty and the LMS  1 Current Application Developer  2 New Application Developers  1 New LMS Coordinator  Desire2Learn  2 FTE directly supporting the faculty and the LMS  1 Current Application Developer  1 New Application Developer

17. LMS Differentiating Features Bb 9.0D2LMoodleSakai WhiteboardYN (Additional Cost) YN (Integrate w/ Elluminate) SearchNYYY WikiYNYY Role ViewNYYY Contextual HelpNYYY (Out of 36 listed features)

18. Moodle Ohio State University Athabasca University California State University Idaho State University Iowa State University Louisiana State University MIT Open University Orange Coast College Texas A&M University University of California University of North Carolina University of Washington Sakai Ohio State University University of Dayton Indiana University Arizona State University Cornell University Georgia Tech Johns Hopkins University Stanford University University of California University of Delaware University of Michigan University of Virginia Virginia Tech Yale University Desire 2 Learn What Other Universities are Using Ohio State University University of Akron Oklahoma State University Rochester Institute of Technology Tennessee State University University of Arizona University of Iowa University of South Dakota University of Wisconsin

19. Trends  Public Universities  9.2% - Sakai  5.1% - Moodle  Private Four-year Colleges  25.9% - Moodle  4% - Sakai (2009 Campus Computing Survey)

20. GOAL FOR MEETING: DECIDE ON THE LMS PRODUCT

21. Recommended Next Steps  Communicate benefits of the choice  Convene governance committee  Identify migration plan  Create support structure  Schedule training  Form learning community for pilot faculty  Build system beta site