1. Developing a Viable ASP Model for Distributed Learning Michael E. Scheuermann Drexel University May 17, 2004

2. What’s the Problem? Many academic institutions that would like to launch distributed learning initiatives have neither the firepower to develop and support a robust system in-house nor the resources to purchase a course management system for their use alone. Their choices and options become extremely limited when faced with these seemingly insurmountable challenges.

3. What Are Their Options? Limiting their online course offerings, if any Using faculty Web sites –to disseminate content Using public resources –to facilitate interaction between course participants Relying on EMail alone –for both of the above Utilizing textbook publisher-hosted apps Trying out a low-level COTS application Looking for partners

4. Today’s Session Drexel University partners with other academic institutions (six+) to provide hosting of online courses, faculty development and support, training, technical expertise, and, in some cases, their complete IT infrastructure. This ASP model represents but one alternative to academic institutions that struggle to provide meaningful and rigorous courses via distributed learning. This model and those used by session participants will be discussed.

5. Why Is This Important? There are myriad course management systems. –Robust, high-quality CMSs are expensive. –They are expensive for large institutions. –Many smaller colleges and universities cannot even consider purchasing them for unilateral use. Other issues surface: –staff training and support, –faculty development and support, –help desk strategies, etc… This applies to many academic institutions.

6. Today’s Goals Many institutions can gain from a lively discussion about various ASP models, tried and successful, or, tried and unsuccessful.  Participants will walk away from a synergistic session with real information that they can consider and put to use when they return to their institutions.

7. IRT ~ Drexel University

8. IRT is headed by Dr. John A. Bielec, the Vice President for Information Resources and Technology and Chief Information Officer (CIO) for Drexel University. Core Administrative Systems (CAS) oversees the administrative database services for finance, human resources, and student information. Mr. Michael J. McCabe is the Associate Vice President for Administrative Systems. Instructional Technology Support (ITS) manages and directs user support and training, web-based software development, the integration of electronic resources with academic departments, as well as management of the campus telephone system. It is directed by Dr. Janice M. Biros, the Associate Vice President for Instructional Technology Support. Core Technology Infrastructure (CTI) is responsible for data/video communications, computing support for ongoing production systems and seamless support for all administrative and academic computing needs of the University. Mr. Kenneth S. Blackney is the Vice President for Core Technology Infrastructure. IRT ~ Drexel University

9. Drexel Snapshot Private institution founded in 1891 –Took on MCP (1850) & Hahnemann (1848) in 2002 after their parent’s bankruptcy History of technological firsts –Computer requirement for all students, ’83 –Major completely wireless campus net, ’00 Regional academic and administrative Application & Network Service Provider –Providing services to 6+ other institutions –KXP2 Internet2 connector for 16 schools Keystone Crossroads – 14 high schools + DU / DUCOM

10. Drexel IT Environment Near-corporate decision making model –Quick decisions to leverage short life cycles Centrally fund emerging technologies –Charge-backs act as disincentive to adoption, use, and innovation Partner with vendors when possible –Guide their development direction –Get product early to begin integration

11. Drexel IT Philosophy Leverage existing technologies –Buy apps - then integrate them - instead of developing apps from scratch Enhance through add-ons, not changes –Costs of developing add-ons is less than cost of supporting baseline modifications Respondus, Wibma, ePortaro, Discover, Waypoint Maximize user choice –Eliminate “one-size-fits-all” programs –Increase reach and convenience to users –Support “largest” number of devices

12. An Example: The DrexelOne Portal SOAP HTTP SMTP LDAP Oracle OCI LDAP NT Domain Mobile Portal Web Portal Announcements Web service Authen- ticator Web Service Headline news Web service SOAP OleDB, LDAP HTTP IMAP Luminus

13. ASPs – What & Why Companies that provide access to applications over the Internet. Outsourcing switches from assets to access. By 2010, the IT utility providers will have 29% of the total IT services market. (Gartner Group) Future companies will buy their IT as services provided over the Internet rather than owning their own hardware and software. (Your Next IT Strategy; Hagel and Brown; HBR 10/01) Small companies using ASPs will grow from 140K in 2001 to over 3M in 2004. (Cahner’s In-Stat, 2000)

14. IT “ASP Network” A Net-centric strategy to provide IT services Leverages IT resources and provides benefits to partner institutions –Lowers IT Costs –Provides a more robust IT environment –Facilitates management scenarios Leverages and aggregates IT resources to provide benefits to vendors

15. The HE Environment Limits Both Vendor and Institutional Solutions Comprehensive Research Universities Other 4 year Colleges and Universities Community Colleges and 2 year institutions Total 9362 968 440 Trade Schools 1,563 1,972 5041,470 Number of U.S. Institutions of Higher Education By Segment Public Private

16. Why Vendor Solutions Often Don’t Succeed Resources only available at the top of the pyramid Hardware and software costs Short technology life cycle History of implementation failures Lack of skills and support structure at the institutional level IT - strategic but not core mission to “schools in the middle”

17. Vendor Challenge Optimize “feet on the street” Leverage investment in current applications –Time is the enemy (3 years is really 6 months in “Internet time”) Expand use of applications to other institutions Reinforce the ASP model as a solution to academic and business challenges Promote virtual services - a “click” away

18. Why Institutions Often Don’t Succeed on Their Own Lack of experienced IT leadership –One year of experience ~ ten times –Under-developed / non-existent IT strategy Limited technical skills –Dependence on products one knows –Risk ~ not a criteria in product “choice” Lack of resources –Short life cycle for technology demands continual renewal and cost –Competing institutional priorities IT fragility

19. Institutional Challenge Provide IT solutions –meet critical business and academic needs 24x7 Optimize scarce resources to provide –robust server and network infrastructure –timely business and academic applications –professional skills and support structure Develop & document policies and procedures Facilitate productivity – utilize Web, EMail

20. Institutional Choices Self develop Best of breed Single vendor Outsource staffing of in-house facilities Consortium – just doesn't work! Managed service provider / co-location Application Service Provider (ASP)

21. Consortia – Many Models ~ Mixed Results MAC initiative (UK) HIS (Germany) AMUE (France) Ladok (Sweden) CASMAC initiative (Australia) NERCOMP (US Regional – New England) SEPCHE (US Local – Pennsylvania)

22. New Model ~ A Technology Flagship University-Based ASP Provides a solution to challenges faced by “colleges in the middle” Also provides a vertical channel for vendor application, product, and other sales Based on off-site “Service Provision” - Access, not on-site software and hardware - Assets Subscriptions, not site licenses Leverages staff and skills Strategic collaboration, choice – Federation

23. Why Drexel as a Provider? Higher education (HE) “full service” ASP today Trusted technology provider in HE market First to market – regional flagship focus Four years of proven success Other schools participating – concept works Leadership and skills Entrepreneurial environment Infrastructure in place Vendor relationships

24. Example: Progress to Date at Cabrini College IT leadership and staffing in place Advisory structure in place Help Desk in place EMail and WebMail in place –Virus protection standardized and controlled –100 MB mail per mail box

25. Services Improved Course development in WebCT in place - 40 courses developed in 6 months Connection to Internet quadrupled Wireless operational throughout campus Web site hosting available Server elimination begun Proxy server in place for off-campus access to the library

26. Totally Replaced ERP System IT policies, procedures, documentation, and standards dramatically improved Substantial savings on new PC purchases Transition to SCT Banner administrative applications –8-month time period –July 2003 implementation –Hosted at Drexel

27. Example: Progress to Date at Neumann College Leadership in place Fully-staffed Help Desk with evening and weekend hours and tracking system “Technology Thursdays” workshop series Networking help for residence hall students Student computer purchase recommendation “Acceptable Use” policy in place Official Email policy in place

28. Infrastructure Improved Assessed and tuned network and servers Greatly-improved EMail performance Inventoried all PCs on campus Wireless access throughout Main campus and in Life Center and Residence Halls Extensive WebCT course development Norton Anti-Virus software for all PCs Faculty Web server online

29. Computing Facilities Expanded Creation of Public Access cluster Renovation of 30-station classroom Overhaul of library workstations with dedicated support State-of-the-art Faculty Resource Center for instructional development ~ open and staffed Videoconferencing facility ~ fully operational

30. Unintended Partner Benefits Business process changes – Best Practices Cultural changes Increased accountability Cost avoidance (avoiding bad decisions) Increased sense of urgency Improved competitiveness

31. Schools Are Developing New Metrics Importance of quality and effectiveness of service Evaluating performance vs. peers rather than internal performance Recognizing the capability of access vs. owning assets Refocusing on academic core mission

32. Drexel’s Vendor Relationships Applications via Drexel vendor relationships –SCT ~ Banner administrative systems Finance, HR, Student Information, Portal SCT Web products for faculty, staff, and students –Hyperion ~ Brio ~ query report generation –WebCT ~ Course Management System –Oracle ~ database –SAP ~ business applications for educational use –Microsoft and Sun ~ OS, directory, EMail, etc.

33. Provider Benefits Lower university IT costs as a % of budget Provide more robust IT environment Provide an additional income stream –reinvestment, not profit Facilitate management scenarios –Collaboration –Consolidation

34. Services and Applications DrexelCoMCabriniNeumnPCOMRosemtSSHEWilkes Services IT Leadership/Strategy Desktop support Server support Help Desk Training Networking Internet2 gateway Applications Email Online Courses Storage Library Finance (consult) Human Resources Student Info. System Alumni Portal Academic Software (SAP) 15 schools of business across the United States

35. Low-Hanging Fruit ~ Quick-Hit Applications Portal applications EMail Web hosting Course management Academic computing Storage Affinity relationships

36. More Difficult Administrative Systems Student Information Finance Purchasing Human Resources and Payroll Institutional Advancement Library Administration Clinical Practices

37. Can Virtual Learning Be Far Behind? Repository approach ~ sharing courses –thousands of online courses added to global repository daily Focus to date has been on: –new markets and –nontraditional students Hybrid environment ~ becoming the norm Quest for higher quality, cost avoidance –Virtual Classics Department (ACS)

38. Schools Are Leveraging Drexel Assets IT staffing Operational staffing Software and business applications Hardware and network Via: –specialists –internal consultants / shadowing –ASP services –external relationships Lowering IT costs

39. Leveraging Works Both Ways Organization / Cost Center Staff Paid Staff Avail Leverage Benefit Drexel University50.218365% College of Medicine26.8475179% Faculty Practice Group2.9033% ASP Partner Schools15.0555265% TOTAL95.00

40. Without Leveraging - the First Dollars are Spent Twice Drexel University 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 051015 IT Spending Performance/Capacity Small Partner School 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 051015 IT Spending Performance/Capacity A spending level of 3 yields a performance level of 9 A spending level of 9 yields a performance level of 81

41. Leveraged ~ Both Organizations Benefit Dramatically Drexel and Partner 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 051015 IT Spending Performance/Capacity PartnerDrexelCombined IT Spending3912 Performance981144 Partner schools’ spending remains constant, but performance increases 1500% Drexel spending remains constant, but performance increases 78%

42. dcollege.net Delivery Structure dCollege.Net Drexel UniversityPartners Colleges at the middle of the pyramid Affinity partners Others…

43. Virtual Administration The dot.com “bleeding edge” wave is over Major “close followers” position for next wave: –Microsoft ~.Net Strategy Passport services offerings –Cisco ~ Intelligent Network Services Strategy Virtual organization serviced via a “network of networks” –Sun ~ Open Net Environment ~ services on demand –IBM ~ e-Business On-Demand Computing –HP ~ Adaptive Computing Strategy The Next Competitive Advantage –Virtual Administration via the net – access not assets

44. Virtual Administration is Just “A Click Away” Leverage the ASP model for other outsourced digital services –Finance –Human Resources –Facilities –Students –Institutional Advancement –Alumni

45. Finance ePurchasing –Purchasing card – Paymentech.comPaymentech.com –Furniture and office supplies – Staples.comStaples.com –Laboratory supplies – FisherScientific.comFisherScientific.com –Computing equipment – Dell.com Gateway.comDell.comGateway.com eTravel –Expedia.comTravelocity.comExpedia.comTravelocity.com eTransactions –AJDrexelbank.comVerisign.comAJDrexelbank.comVerisign.com

46. Human Resources ePayroll –ADP.comADP.com eBenefits –Retirement – TIAA-CREF.comTIAA-CREF.com –Health Insurance – IBX.comIBX.com eRecruitment –Monster.comMonster.com

47. Student eFinancial Aid –SallieMae.comSallieMae.com –PHEAA.orgPHEAA.org eAdmissions –Collegenet.comCollegenet.com eBookstore –BarnesAndNoble.comBarnesAndNoble.com –eFollett.comeFollett.com –Amazon.comAmazon.com

48. How Will HE Institutions Handle the Move from Assets to Access? Strategic advantage or disadvantage Provider, consumer, or both Impact on structure and governance –Administration, academic course delivery, faculty Student populations –Digital / Information Divide ~ narrowed or widened Impact on revenue and expenditures –Facilities, technology, cost-avoidance opportunities

49. What’s Next for “Institutions in the Middle”? Don’t stop with IT services Resource limitations impact other services Recognize limits on internal business process growth and development Business process inadequacies are routine Compensation, skills, and support ~ a problem Virtual administration the next wave ~ followed by virtual (collaborative) learning

50. Questions? mes27@drexel.edu 215-895-0244