Documentation:Learning Environment/Archived Data and Links/Moodle Framework

From Kumu Wiki - TRU
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Capturing and documenting process and technical considerations. This document forks off of broader requirements captured by OL Course Delivery


  • Big picture vision and connection to TRU strategic goals and priorities - e.g. flexible learning, open learning methods and OER
    • consistent across campus flexible learning approach
    • smooth transitions between modalities
    • contributing to openness in multiple dimensions
    • reducing dependence on proprietary vendor systems and changes
    • "Open and flexible learning environments" (Strategic Priorities)
    • "Excellent learning environments..." (SP)
    • "Flexible delivery models for innovative programs" (SP)
    • "Transitions between...virtual, distance and face-to-face learning environments" (SP)
    • "Financial sustainability of the university" (SP)

  • Problem statement re status quo
    • Blackboard future unsure (company structure etc)
    • Destabilizing cycle of complex upgrades
    • Limited ability to meet instructional design needs
    • Desire to work within the "Open" web (students/faculty) as opposed to one vendor system
    • Escalating cost of Blackboard license agreements
    • Current Blackboard Environment setup is not conducive to decentralized course development and maintenance
    • Avoid vertical integration with textbook publishers

Environmental scan (external look)

  • LMS futures, textbook publishers, privacy, open educational practices, hardware devices, student trends, open source software

Needs analysis

  • SWOT analysis e.g. existing strengths and weaknesses of current model of development and delivery (OL, campus)

  • Use cases
    • From all stakeholder perspectives including instructional/administrative/clerical/design/delivery etc.
  • Instructional Design needs
    • Support more flexible learning environments
    • Interact with multiple open source platforms
    • Feedback Mechanisms/Learning Analytics - detailed/coarse
    • Improved course navigation
    • Authentic Design Environment (development in situ)
    • Open boundary course
  • Copyright considerations
    • Limited access for certain materials - very granular access control
    • Separate server to hold material?
    • Straight forward creative commons attribution
  • Student privacy considerations (legal)
  • UI design considerations
    • responsive design (multi-device transitions)
    • intuitive navigation
    • learner choice technology

(points from Paul Hibbitts add)

  • Production considerations
    • flexibility of content in/out
    • code transparency
    • avoiding content lock-in
    • print/compile on demand capacity
    • ability for content to be added with similar look/feel

  • Maintenance considerations
    • ability for OLFM's to maintain with minimum training
    • version control
  • Functional requirements

Roles and responsibilities

  • Project governance & decision matrix
    • Small high-level steering group to ensure strategic interests are met

  • Stakeholder engagement
    • Consultations with partners, and users

Available resources

  • sources
  • potential gaps

Scope of pilot

Critical Path

  • Potential Show Stoppers

Timelines & Milestones

  • Time constrainsts eg. Blackboard licence
  • Competiing IT projects/priorities
  • When do you want students in pilot courses
    • plan backwards from that date
    • options for expedited pilot (eliminate non-vital IT/administrative functions)

  • GANTT Chart creation

Acceptance criteria/testing cycles/reviewers

Training and support for stakeholders

Resources for implementation and scaling

Third party tools, enhancements, plugins

Similar processes

Future considerations