This document summarizes a presentation given to the CATS group about learning management systems (LMS) in the California State University (CSU) system. It discusses the current LMS landscape across CSU campuses, including the types of LMSs used and costs. It then outlines recommendations from the CSU LMS Futures Workgroup for a more coordinated approach, including a centrally-hosted "safety net" LMS and shared governance model. The presentation concludes by discussing coordination strategies for Blackboard and Moodle, next steps, and opportunities for CATS participation.

1. CSU SystemwideLearning Management Systems and ServicesKathy Fernandes, CSU Chancellor's OfficeJohn Whitmer, CSU Chancellor's Office CATS 2010 April 13, 2010

2. Agenda Welcome and Introductions CSU LMS Landscape LMS Futures Group: Systemwide LMS Recommendations & Governance Moodle Coordination and Strategies Blackboard Coordination and Strategies CATS Participation and Contribution Opportunities Q & A (time permitting) 2

3. Welcome and Introductions Presenters: Kathy Fernandes Director of Systemwide LMS Initiatives, CSU Chancellor's Office John Whitmer Manager of Systemwide LMS Initiatives, CSU Chancellor's Office 3

4. CSU Campus LMS Usage 4

5. Current Context of CSU System-wide LMS’ 77 FTE staff work on LM systems & services Average 3.3 FTE per campus Low of .5 FTE and high of 10 FTE Includes DBA, Systems, Application Admin, Support Tier 1, 2 & 3, training and instructional design We have 23 different LMS integrations with Peoplesoft We have 23 different authentications to the LMS We spend $2.0M/yr on Blackboard licensing & hosting $12M spent since 2005 (inc. WebCT) Another $450k/yr on server hardware and software 5

6. Current Context of CSU System-wide LMS’ We pay for ALL faculty and student enrollments on Bb campus regardless of how many use the LMS Price increase avg. 5% per year (1 exception) Some campuses cannot afford increased cost (and growth) to their LMS The CSU has made multiple requests to Blackboard for a more affordable centralized solution Written proposal is from Bb is coming… 6

7. Continued CSU LMS Context No campus has fully maximized their LMS (100% faculty and student use), and LMS usage continues to grow We have no standard way of reporting systemwide LMS growth Some campuses have automatic LMS course shells created for every single course Some campuses use a template for course shells branded and “resource ready” for course content Some campuses have an LMS database that is larger than their CMS database 7

8. Opportunity? Lots of LMS Migrations Migrating campuses experience pain and costs: 7% increase to keep a license one more year if not committing to the 2 years left in the contract $11,000 per campus for a non-production license for grade challenges and late content migrations Getting ALL the course content out of Blackboard is requiring lots of development time to move the content from the old LMS to the new New training materials, new issues to solve, new skill sets for faculty, staff and students to learn 8

9. CSU LMS Systemwide Recommendations 9

10. Systemwide LMS Recommendations Overview The LMS Futures Workgroup was charged by the EVC of Academic Affairs and the EVC of Business and Finance in December, 2008 to develop recommendations for effective and efficient LMS services environments that Support teaching and learning activities that contribute to improved student success; Improve the management of academic programs on campuses and across campuses; and Can be integrated with appropriate services selected by campuses and the CSU system. The LMS Futures Workgroup will present its draft to the Academic Technology Steering Committee (ATSC) for review, revision, and recommendations. 10

11. Systemwide LMS Recommendations Overview http://dat.cdl.edu/lms/lms-futures-group Two Background Documents LMS Critical Elements LMS External Scan LMS Futures Workgroup Recommendation Report (12/10/09) DRAFT LMS Futures Workgroup Governance Model Recommendations Report (3/17/10) 11

12. LMS System-wide Recommendationsfrom Recommendations for Future LMS Directions for CSU, p. 3-4 Recommendation 1 - Provide an “opt-in” services approach with a collection of resources and best practices Integration of key services SIS integration Shibboleth integration 3rd party application integrations for TurnItIn, Respondus, etc. Standard Reporting 12

13. LMS System-wide Recommendationsfrom Recommendations for Future LMS Directions for CSU, p. 3-4 Recommendation 2 - Provide a centrally hosted “safety-net” LMS for campuses that are at risk We recommend a limited production available by July 2010 Moodle first, followed by Blackboard Implement an agile governance and management process for continuously improving the learning management services for campuses and overseeing the CSU LMS roadmap Expand the Total Cost of Ownership analysis to the full range of learning management services, enabling campuses and the CSU system to make informed decisions about costs and effectiveness Adopt a phased approach over the next 3-5 years that enables the CSU to make continuous improvements and adjustments in this dynamic business and technology environment (see Figure 1). 13

14. LMS Governance Shared/Representative governance of LMS Systems and Services UCLA CCLE as model Governance groups: Executive Sponsors, Standards and Practice Group, Common Interest Groups, LMS Subgroups Includes CIO, Academic Technologists, Academic/Student Senate. Organized to distinguish “strategic policy” from “technical operations” 14

15. LMS Governance Diagram 15

16. Blackboard Coordination and Strategies New “Strategic Account” Reps Biweekly meetings CSU-Bb Webinar on Roadmap Blackboard centrally hosted? Upcoming coordination CSU Sandbox for Bboard v9.1 (5 Campuses) Campus Collaboration on hosting old courses? 16

17. Blackboard Contract Renewals 9 campuses on 3-year agreement 5 to join the 2nd year of the 3-year agreement 5 campuses needing short-term extensions will work with Blackboard individually Consider production versus non-production needs Archives of courses for grade challenges, course content 7% increase for a full year of production license 17

18. Moodle Coordination and Strategies Moodle usage increasing within the CSU 4 production deployments, 3 migrations in progress, multiple evaluations CSU Moodle Consortium Meetings 9 Campuses participating Areas: Hosting, Training/Help Desk, Migration, Integrations, additional development Coordinated training resources Lynda.com multimedia tutorials http://seir.calstate.edu/protected/moodle/ Editable object-based tutorial http://quickguides.calstate.edu 18

19. Moodle + LM services in the CSU 19

20. Moodle Coordination: Moodlerooms Hosted Moodle flavors Standard (Power) Enhanced (Joule) Integrations (Conduit-Peoplesoft, Shibboleth) Automated course creation, backup, restore Course content migration support Advanced reporting, automatic notifications, interface Optional ePortfolio, Equella Content Management System Complete description at DAT LMS Site http://dat.cdl.edu/swat/moodlerooms Biweekly meeting with CSU and Moodlerooms Free CSU pilot server available to any campus 20

21. Moodlerooms Joule vs Power Builds 21

22. MR “Power” Standard Moodle 22

23. MR “Joule” Enhanced Moodle 23

24. Systemwide LMS Safety Net – July 1, 2010(Moodle LMS) Safety Net ServicesHosting Moodlerooms, Technical Account Manager, Pilot/Testing Servers, Production Server Service Integration Shibboleth Integration process, Peoplesoft integration process, TurnItin, Respondus, MERLOT search integration, Common reporting queries Training / Support Implementation consulting, Course content migration process support, Lynda.com Moodle tutorials, QuickGuides Maintenance Current Pilot – central coordination can save approx. $50K annually through coordinated hosting and integrations. 24

25. CSU LMS Next Steps ATSC discussion/review Governance and Budget Request 4/21 Begin Governance Implementation Moodlerooms Safety Net (CSUN and Sonoma) CSU Moodle Cloud on Amazon (pending) CSU MB host Humboldt Moodle Consortium (Coordinated Reporting, Migration Tools, and more) 25

26. CATS Participation and Contribution Participate in Moodle Consortium (2nd/4th Tuesdays from 9:00-10:00) Pilot Joule Moodle platform Pilot Blackboard v9.1 Stay tuned to http://dat.cdl.edu for communications from LMS governance committees 26

27. Questions, Comments, Suggestions? Feedback/Evaluation: please complete 5-question survey at: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/M7XVH5L Documents, references and archive on DAT LMS Website at: http://dat.cdl.edu/ (login) Contact information: Kathy Fernandes – kfernandes@csuchico.edu John Whitmer – jwhitmer@csuchico.edu 27