1. Wilma Hodges hodgesw@seminolestate.edu

2.  Began faculty training and moving content in Nov. 2009.  Original plan was to be fully migrated to Sakai by July 31 st, 2010.  Migration is proceeding at scheduled pace, and right now it looks we should be able to meet our target date without problems.  Currently running a selectively patched version of Sakai 2.6.x.  Plan to upgrade to Sakai 2.7 prior to fall term.

3.  185 faculty members have completed Sakai training to date.  Our Sakai workshop is approximately 5 hours in length, and offered in the following formats:  Two part workshop, parts 1 and 2 offered consecutive weeks in 2.5 hour blocks.  Combined session, 5 hours, offered on a single day.  Online version, offered via Sakai, completely self- paced.  Completion of workshop is required for instructor/editor access to Sakai course sites.  Lots of Open Labs offered for hands-on help.

4.  DL staff (4 FT and 1 PT) have migrated 246 courses from ANGEL into Sakai to date.  Approx. 75 migration requests yet to be completed before fall term.  DL migrates courses for faculty based on faculty request.  Priority for courses being offered in Sakai soonest.  We tried to have at least one course per faculty member migrated prior to Sakai workshop attendance so that they could work with real content.  Some ANGEL sites were not requested for migration because:  Faculty plan to rebuild the course in Sakai using a new textbook or make other extensive course material changes.  It is a brand new course being developed from scratch.

5.  Process of bringing content into Sakai is more “piecemeal” than it was when we went from WebCT/Bb to ANGEL.  Cannot import entire ANGEL course at once via archive file. However, in the past, we ended up with a lot of extraneous directories in the ANGEL file structure which made course files difficult to locate and edit. Spent a lot of time after the fact “cleaning up” courses in ANGEL.  Content migration to Sakai typically involves a combination of file transfer, cut and paste, and (in some cases) using Respondus to export/import assessments.  The rebuilding process can be somewhat time consuming, but usually results in a course that is better organized and easier for faculty to edit/update than the “file dump” method we used for WebCT 4.1 courses in the past.

6.  We also contracted Longsight to create some custom ANGEL content import tools for us.  Works with ANGEL 7.4 archives and IMS exports.  Process runs on ANGEL archive files to bring in all assignments, announcements, and (optionally) can be configured to bring in Content as Resources.  Resources import was developed for another institution. We do not use this option, as most of our faculty use Modules to author and display content rather than Resources.  Separate import (using IMS export file) will bring in all assessments in the course.

7.  Spring Term 2010  Class sections in Sakai = 188 (ANGEL = 753)  Faculty using Sakai for one or more courses = 58  Summer Term 2010  Class sections in Sakai = 290 (ANGEL = 215)  Faculty using Sakai for one or more courses = 109

8.  We are self-hosted, but have a contract with Longsight for support.  Sakai server performance has been good, with the exception of some intermittent file server operating system issues (related to Linux Ubuntu).  We currently have 2 Sakai web servers in a load balanced configuration. We also have a database server and a file server.  Currently, we have higher Sakai usage than ANGEL.  Sakai is averaging about 260 concurrent users in the system (approx. 130 per server), while ANGEL is averaging about 170 total (or 85 per server).  On the first day of summer classes, we had an over 600 concurrent sessions (300 per web server) running in Sakai during peak times of day.

9. Current ConfigurationPlanned for Fall 2010  Database Server (1) ◦ Linux Ubuntu Server 9.04 (64bit) ◦ MySQL ◦ 8GB RAM ◦ Dual dual core processor ◦ 140GB mirrored hard drive  File Server (1) and Web Servers (2) ◦ VMWare virtual machines with 4 processors and 4GB of memory, each running Ubuntu Server 9.04  Database Server (1) ◦ Linux Red Hat Enterprise Server 5 (64bit) ◦ MySQL ◦ 32GB RAM ◦ Dual quad core processor ◦ 140GB mirrored hard drive  File Server (1) ◦ 6GB RAM ◦ Single quad core processor ◦ Red Hat Enterprise 5 (64-bit)  Web Servers (4) ◦ 4GB RAM ◦ Single quad core processor ◦ Red Hat Enterprise 5 (64-bit)

10.  Faculty have been surprisingly receptive to the change in LMS.  Students and faculty alike seem to be adapting to Sakai very quickly.  No quantitative user satisfaction survey data has been collected yet, but anecdotal comments from faculty and students have been mostly positive.  Several faculty and students have stated that they actually like Sakai better.