1. © Blackboard, Inc. All rights reserved. WebCT & Blackboard Bob Alcorn, Senior Architect

2. About Forward-Looking Statements » We may make statements regarding our product development and service offering initiatives, including the content of future product upgrades, updates or functionality in development. While such statements represent our current intentions, they may be modified, delayed or abandoned without prior notice and there is no assurance that such offering, upgrades, updates or functionality will become available unless and until they have been made generally available to our customers.

3. Session Overview » Have you heard about this merger thing? » Vast potential of users and systems… on different islands of functionality » Some background on Blackboard Vista™ vs. Academic Suite™ and current development » Guide to the architecture roadmap

4. It’s all Java, right? Can’t be that hard. So, What’s the Big Deal?

5. Right… » Windows and Linux are both written in C and x86 assembly. What’s the big deal? » Oracle and SQL Server both support ANSI-92 SQL? What’s the big deal? ».NET and Java both support SOAP. What’s the big deal? » …etc. » Compatibility is (obviously) deeper than technology » But technology isn’t even the hardest part – it’s the functional mapping

6. Academic Suite™ Structural View

7. Tools, Services, and Frameworks

8. Vista Architecture Overview

9. Reconciling Different Worlds » Access Control Models » Vista™ – Hierarchical model that includes context-specific permissions and ACLs » Academic Suite™ – flexible roles, with domains » Deployment » Academic Suite™ – heterogeneous technology stack » Apache, Perl, Java, IIS,.NET » Java/Servlet technology » Vista™ – technology requirements » WebLogic, SQL Server 2005 » JEE architecture – EJB, JMS

10. Reconciling Different Worlds » Administrative and Organization Principles » Vista™ - Institutions/LC Hierarchy » Academic Suite™ – rule-based Domain Manager » Learning Object Management » Vista™ – intrinsic, extensible model » Academic Suite™ – licensed component (Content System™), different use cases » Web-based File Management

11. The Roadmap » Integration with Blackboard Community System™ » “Project Arch” – release TBD » Common APIs » Enable a new class of Building Blocks and PowerLinks » Integration beyond Blackboard Community System™ » Evolving interoperability toward the full Academic Suite – Content System, Caliper » “Next Generation” » Visionary teaching and learning tools » Broader vision of Enterprise Architecture within Education

12. You Are Here… » Project Arch is currently in development » Community System™ integration with Vista » Community System 7.2 (the Caliper/Outcomes system codebase) » Vista 4.x, Campus Edition 6.x » Themes » Preserve investment in integration infrastructure » Time to market » Client continuity – Arch cannot disrupt existing commitments » High-Level features » Single Sign On and session management » Portal module interaction to aggregate Vista institutions » Common data integration

13. Project Arch » Data Integration » Vista Institutions will serve as data sources for data integration to Community System » Integration to Community System via Snapshot » Institution roles will be assigned to map Community System tabs

14. Project Arch » Portal Integration » Assignment of institution roles to integrated users, based on the Vista institution » Automatic construction of tabs and modules that aggregate data from targeted institutions » Creation of new module types to communicate with Vista channels

15. Project Arch » Authentication » Community System™ is the front-end, but authentication will be delegated back to Vista™ » Preserves existing investment in authentication integration » Integration for full lifecycle – including session timeouts

16. Project Arch – Deployment Configuration

17. Next Step: Common APIs » First step is API for integration between Blackboard Community System and Vista » These APIs will be private in first version » Next step is to evaluate Building Block/PowerLink touch points » Generalization of use cases in the Arch framework » Specific transactions (launch, query, SSO) » API encapsulation of transactions for multiple technology bindings » General, LS components » 1 – N Community System™  Learning System™

18. API Challenges » Technology mismatch » Deployment Models » Building Blocks uses a drop-in container model » Building Blocks is less rigorous about differentiating between “public” and “private” APIs » Vista has a drop-in model, but constrained to specific, programmatic operations » Technology Bindings » B2 does not have a comprehensive Web Service strategy » Vista’s public APIs are Web Service based

19. API Directions » Align with the emerging Enterprise Architectures » Multi-Tier » Application tier integrations » Data tier integrations » Outcomes System – reporting, warehouse integration » Most likely will not be an evolution of existing Building Blocks/PowerLinks infrastructure » Incompatibilities in basic models » Integration architecture vs. functional architecture » Incremental improvement will continue to happen, but is a different class of problem

20. Technical Directions » SOA » Define the core services that comprise the e-Learning infrastructure » Align with the broader initiatives – Beyond, Outcomes, etc » Tools Interoperability Framework » Foundation of core behaviors (launch, report) » Requires extension » 1.0 Guidelines limited to useful, but basic operations » Full richness of Community System™ to various learning system interactions will need to encompass a much wider range of operations and rich data types » Why not WSRP? » Semantic interfaces make the most sense – WSRP is an API for returning markup fragments

21. TIF - High-Level Design

22. The “Wish List” » Short-term » Identity, authentication, session » Launch operations (TIF launch and outcomes) » Course lists » Long-term » Repository – discovery, provisioning » Outcomes – objectives/measurement, reporting » Beyond Initiative

23. “Next Generation” » Bring the best capabilities of both platforms » Breadth, Depth » Expand the interaction model to drive a richer client experience » Technology dimension – AJAX, etc. » Social dimension – student-centric interactions, “architecture of participation” » The vision is deeper than LS » Outcomes » Community » Beyond

24. Questions?