2. The Collaborative Hosting of Moodle
Topics
The organizational structure that helped UCLA evolve from
having ~25 LMS systems on campus to under 5
How CCLE goes about the planning and decision making
process
Cost, benefits and lessons learned in making the collaborative
host of a large system work.
3. Decentralized IT
Academic
Many Autonomous Departments
Primary clients: faculty and researchers
No Central Funding
Administrative
Business and Student Applications; ex. payroll
Campus Communication Technology
Obvious Synergies
Email
Course Management Systems
5. What is CCLE?
Common Collaboration and Learning Environment
• Common System for the Campus (Moodle v1.9.8)
Supports: Instruction, Collaboration and Research
Users: Faculty, Students and Staff.
First successful, large scale, project that pulls together
many different campus departments to host a single
service.
6. Growth of CCLE
2500
2000
Fall
Total Winter
1500
Course Spring
Sites 1000 Summer
500
0
2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011
Logins per Day Total Users
Spring 2011 7,113 23,854
Spring 2010 4,178 19,362
7. Defining CCLE
Guiding Principals:
School/division staff and support are the foundation for the CCLE
Encourage broad adoption through “opt-in” participation
Planning and Governance should be open and participatory
Academic priorities and faculty/student experience drive decisions
Support creativity and innovation
Allow for more than one Moodle installation in the plan
8. Defining CCLE
Possible Organizational Structure:
Common Software, Central Coordination,
No Coordination Less Autonomy/Flexibility
Decision: Less Coordination, More Autonomy/Flexibility
One shared campus-wide system
Some unit-only installations
Establish an administrative home for the CCLE
9. Shared Governance Model
Oversight
Academic Leadership, Deans, CIOs
Governance
Standards and Practices
Faculty Group Student Group
Group
Operations
Autonomous Department
Common Interest System
CCLE Home Group (CIG)
Autonomous Department
System
Shared Campus
Operations CCLE Subgroups Autonomous Department
System
10. Shared Governance Model
Oversight
Academic Leadership, Deans, CIOs
CCLE Home
CCLE Coordinator (hired Sept. 2008)
Governance Developer
Lead
Standards and Practices
Faculty Group
Support Coordinator Student Group
Group
System Administrator – Shared System
Operations
Autonomous Department
Common Interest Opt-in units can
System
CCLE Home Group (CIG)
run their own
Autonomous Department
System server
Shared Campus
Operations CCLE Subgroups Autonomous Department
System
Common Code
base in SVN Local support is at the unit level
11. How it Works: Communication
Standards & Practices Group (S&PG) – Monthly meetings, email
Determine guidelines, policy and approves spending
When necessary decision by vote
Common Interest Group (CIG) – Weekly meetings, email
Balance day-to-day issues with mid-long term planning
CCLE Subgroups –Weekly meetings, email, Jira
Developers - Crucible, Jabber
Functionality
User Support
System Operations
CCLE Home:
Organize, Facilitate, Coordinate, Mediate, Moderate, Execute
12. Requirements Gathering
CIG and SPG
F&F Matrix
Faculty Survey Student Survey
Faculty Advisory Group Student Advisory Group
CCLE
F&F Matrix
CCLE Projects
13. Prioritizing Feature Requests
Features and Functionality Matrix (H, M, L)
Feature Types:
• System Operations
• CCLE Archival
• User Interface
• Functionality Improv.
• Integration with
Campus Systems
• Other CCLE sites
• Staffing Resources
• Admin/Support Tools
• Mobile
• Copyright
• Documentation
• Merge Code to
Moodle .org
• Contribute to
Moodle .org
• Governance
• Other
Value Technical Difficulty
15. CMS on Campus 2011
Arts and Architecture - CCLE
Anderson – CCLE (2012)
Public Affairs - CCLE
Statistics - CCLE
Social Sciences - CCLE
Engineering – CCLE (2013) Humanities - CCLE
Mathematics – CCLE (2012)
GSEIS - CCLE
Physical Sciences - CCLE Life Sciences – CCLE
Nursing - CCLE
Public Health - CCLE
16. Challenges and Insights
Building Trust: communication and transparency
Getting commitments and contributions from staff
Difficulty building a community of Moodle developers
Balancing individual needs in a shared environment
“Fairness is Relative”
Differing Perspectives and Priorities
Compromise is Constant
Managing entropy
Funding challenges – “common good”
17. Challenges and Insights
Collaboration has a Cost:
Many meetings – essential for communication
Compromise, but power in numbers
Projects take longer
CCLE governance mirrors government
Few vocal people drive direction
Some choose to not get involved
Free ridership
Having a priority setting and decision making
process is essential
18. The Collaborative Hosting of Moodle
Questions
Curtis Fornadley, PMP
CCLE Coordinator
cfornadley@oid.ucla.edu
Hinweis der Redaktion
Opt-inIdentify Local support PersonS&PG Representative (Voting member, attend monthly meeting)
Opt-inIdentify Local support PersonS&PG Representative (Voting member, attend monthly meeting)