Document 6527383

JISC Grant Funding 03/10
Cover Sheet for Proposals
(All sections must be completed)
Name of JISC Initiative:
Distributed VLE – Strand B: Institutional Pilot
Name of Lead Institution:
Manchester Metropolitan University
Name of Proposed Project:
W2C
Name(s) of Project Partners(s):
(except commercial sector – see below)
This project involves one or
Name(s) of any commercial partner company (ies)
more commercial sector partners Scientia, Talis, Unit4 (Agresso) and ULCC
YES / NO (delete as appropriate)
Full Contact Details for Primary Contact:
Name: Professor Mark Stubbs
Position: Head of Learning and Research Technologies
Email: [email protected]
Tel: +44(0)161 247 3739 | +44(0)7732 653 045
Fax:
Address:
Learning and Research Information Services, All Saints Library
Oxford Road, Manchester, M15 6BH
Project Length:
18 months
Project Start:
01-July-2010
Project End:
31-Dec-2011
Total Funding Requested from JISC:
Funding requested from JISC broken down across Financial Years (Aug-July)
Aug09 – July10
Aug10 – July11
Aug 11 – July12
Total Institutional Contributions:
Outline Project Description
MMU has recently (and publicly) reviewed its learning technologies and will be making
significant investment in a new integrated VLE and Repository. If funded, the W2C project
will enhance and extend this investment by opening up new development paths and share
with the sector the experience of pursuing them on an institutional scale.
The W2C project will demonstrate in particular the potential of widgets, institutional webservices and cloud-sourced services for delivering our institutional vision of convenient,
integrated and extensible learning systems.
It will do this by:
 sharing as widely as possible our vision for learning systems, our scenarios and
1










threshold user expectations that emphasise convenience, integration, personalisation
and extensibility
sharing the business rationale for our recent decision to adopt a “core plus” model for
our learning systems in which a core VLE and Repository is extended through
widgets, web-services and cloud-sourced services
mapping the processes in which institutional data necessary for delivering key user
requirements are created and maintained (using standards such as BPMN),
suggesting change where necessary to maximise opportunities for interoperability
and data re-use
developing, to open standards where possible, web-services for institutional systems
that hold definitive data required to meet user requirements
developing or downloading open source widgets to consume our web-services
deploying the widgets and selected cloud-sourced services into our VLE
evaluating student and staff experience of using the widgets and cloud-sourced
services in the VLE and on personal devices
evaluating teaching and administrative staff experience of working with usage data
available from institutional systems and cloud-sourced services
summarising lessons learned from the widget/web-services/cloud-sourced services
approach for delivering convenient, integrated, personalised and extensible learning
systems
critiquing the value of the CETIS DLE model for explaining our approach and the eFramework for guiding our web-services design
blogging project progress and encouraging feedback on our dynamic case study via
blog comments and twitter
We expect this activity to:
 enhance the capability of our VLE to meet existing and emerging user requirements
 enhance user satisfaction of our learning systems
 heighten awareness about patterns of student engagement and success
 facilitate discovery of learning resources that others have found useful
 accelerate development of a community of practice for educational widgets
 improve, by providing practice-informed feedback, key sources of information
available to others in the sector contemplating similar endeavours
I have looked at the example FOI form at
Appendix A and included an FOI form in this bid
YES / NO (delete as appropriate)
I have read the Funding Call and associated
Terms and Conditions of Grant at Appendix B
YES / NO (delete as appropriate)
2
1
Introduction
1.1
Manchester Metropolitan University (MMU) has recently completed a major review of the
technologies it provides and recommends for supporting learning, teaching and
assessment (http://lrt.mmu.ac.uk/ltreview).
1.2
The review team developed scenarios of desired use from extensive stakeholder
consultation and detailed analysis of strengths and weaknesses of existing educational
technologies, particularly the Blackboard Vista Virtual Learning Environment (VLE).
1.3
Threshold user expectations (reproduced in 3.1) were distilled from the scenarios around
a vision of an integrated core learning system that could be extended through an
expanding range of supported tools.
1.4
Options for replacing MMU‟s educational technologies were then evaluated in terms of fit
with this vision of an integrated, extensible VLE; the extent to which options would
facilitate curriculum transformation for September 2011; robustness and scalability;
value for money; and avoiding lock-in.
1.5
Acting on these evaluation criteria, MMU selected a hosted Moodle VLE that will be
integrated with an Equella Repository, Talis Aspire hosted reading lists, Apple Podcast
Producer and Microsoft‟s Live@Edu hosted email, document storage and collaborative
workspace.
1.6
The outcomes of MMU‟s learning technologies review are being joined with
recommendations on more agile curriculum approval and employability (see the JISCfunded SRC project); thresholds for the student experience; and a new Learning,
Teaching and Assessment Framework. The Strategic Programme that will unite these
initiatives, known as EQAL (Enhancing the Quality of Learning and Assessment), seeks
seamless, personalised student experience of an enhanced undergraduate curriculum
underpinned by responsive administrative processes, a new VLE and joined-up
corporate systems, from September 2011.
1.7
The EQAL Programme Board has identified business process modelling and systems
integration as key enablers for the EQAL objectives of convenience, agility and reduced
administrative burden. For instance, the Board expects automated creation of baseline
module „shells‟ within the VLE pre-populated with personalised module timetables,
reading lists and assessment deadlines, and integration with Live@Edu presence, alerts
and storage.
1.8
The EQAL Programme Board has also encouraged consideration of technologies that
would enable VLE extensions to be deployed beyond the VLE to students who prefer to
access corporate data (timetables, deadlines, reminders, resource lists, etc) directly on
personal devices. See for instance Edinburgh‟s mobile survey: http://bit.ly/dBv86M
1.9
This W2C project will therefore demonstrate and evaluate the potential of Widgets,
institutional Web-services and Cloud-hosted services for delivering MMU‟s vision of
convenient, integrated and extensible learning systems.
2
Benefits
2.1
The scope of MMU‟s EQAL Programme offers an institutional-level test bed for many of
the ideas championed by the JISC e-Learning Programme - from service-orientation and
freeing time through e-administration, to curriculum transformation and digital literacy.
Whilst the larger SRC project continues to share insights with the sector on processes
3
and information flows for designing employer-responsive curricula (see, for instance, the
2009 JISC Online Conference), this W2C bid has been crafted to evaluate the promise
of widgets, web-services and cloud-services for giving convenient personalised access
to learning systems on an institutional scale. It is anticipated that this evaluation, and
the context of institutional transformation in which it takes place, will be of great
interest to the JISC and the UK HE sector as a whole.
2.2
We expect the W2C project activity to






B1: enhance the capability of our VLE to meet existing and emerging user
requirements – focus groups and road-shows undertaken as part of MMU‟s learning
technologies review revealed strong interest in the VLE as a convenient doorway to
essential study information – project activity will support this directly.
B2: enhance user satisfaction of our learning systems – students told us they
tolerated the “clunky” interface of our existing VLE *if* it gave one-stop-shop access
to study information – we therefore expect an increase in user satisfaction from
aggregating corporate information & cloud feeds within an improved VLE interface.
B3: heighten awareness about patterns of student engagement and success –
we expect web-services for tracking VLE engagement to support our HEA Change
Academy project on Student Retention and Success, now in its embedding phase.
B4: facilitate discovery of learning resources that others have found useful –
we expect a linked-data approach for publishing module information combined with
Talis Aspire will support a “tutors like you also recommended…” service
B5: accelerate development of a community of practice for educational
widgets – the public nature of our learning tech review has already stimulated useful
debate which we expect to continue as we work towards the vision it set out.
B6: improve, by providing practice-informed feedback, key sources of
information available to others in the sector contemplating similar endeavours
– we are already liaising over Wookie deployment documentation and expect this
project to yield a raft of insights that will improve the sector‟s knowledge base.
3
Workplan
3.1
MMU is already working toward deliverables identified in the call. Scenarios developed
during our learning technologies review (http://lrt.mmu.ac.uk/ltreview/2010/01/28/scenarios/)
enabled us to agree a set of threshold user expectations for convenience, integration,
personalisation and extensibility:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
All teaching staff will be provided with laptops (and a monitor, keyboard & mouse)
All teaching rooms will have a means to plug a laptop into a large screen or projector
All staff & students will be able to access WiFi from anywhere within MMU
All students will receive personalised timetable & assignment submission deadlines
and be notified rapidly of any changes to either
All students will be able to book small teaching rooms when rooms not timetabled
All students can expect their engagement to be monitored for active progress review
All staff and students can expect institutional calendar appointments & news items to
be made available for use on personal devices where legally & technically possible
Every Unit (module) will have a presence in the VLE
4
3.2
Our scenarios demonstrated that learning technologies could not be seen in isolation:
we saw interactions with personal and administrative systems as major determinants of
the quality of the overall experience. We developed a “core plus” model of a VLE
integrated with corporate systems, ideally available to students to use with the devices
and services of their choosing and extended through tools the institution arranges,
recommends or recognises:
Arranged: MMU creates accounts on these tools, eg Live@Edu and Turnitin and
ensures access to training materials
2. Recommended: MMU develops recommendations and supporting training materials
for bringing these tools seamlessly into the core, eg using RSS to bring in content
from Twitter, SlideShare or YouTube
3. Recognised: MMU is aware tutors are experimenting with these but there is not yet
a critical mass of users to research and prescribe integration and training
1.
Over time, we expect innovative tutors and
students to identify new tools that could be
taken on as “recommended” – support
materials would be created demonstrating
how a seamless experience can be
established with the core; and, over time,
thresholds for digital literacy would be raised
to embrace the new skills required by all staff
to make best use of new tools. In this way we
see our learning technology base growing
organically over time whilst still maintaining
the convenience of a guaranteed entry point
through the core VLE for students seeking
consistency. In the W2C project we will test
the promise of widgets and web-services
for bringing administrative information,
and arranged and recommended cloud
services into our core integrated VLE.
3.3
We plan to deliver the benefits identified in 2.2 through the following activities:
Scenarios
Processes
Services
Widgets
Evaluation
Case Study
Sharing as widely as possible our vision for learning systems, our scenarios and threshold
user expectations that emphasise convenience, integration, personalisation & extensibility
Mapping the processes in which institutional data necessary for delivering key user
requirements are created and maintained (using standards such as BPMN), suggesting
change where necessary to maximise opportunities for interoperability and data re-use
Developing, to open standards where possible, web-services for institutional systems that
hold definitive data required to meet user requirements
Developing or downloading open source widgets to consume our web-services; and
deploying the widgets and selected cloud-sourced services into our VLE
Evaluating student & staff experience of using the widgets & cloud-sourced services in the
VLE and on personal devices; and evaluating teaching & administrative staff experience
of working with usage data available from institutional systems & cloud-sourced services
Sharing the business rationale for our recent decision to adopt a “core plus” model for our
learning systems in which a core VLE and Repository is extended through widgets, webservices and cloud-sourced services; summarising lessons learned from this W2C
approach for delivering convenient, integrated, personalised and extensible learning
5
systems; and critiquing the value of the CETIS DLE model for explaining our approach
and the e-Framework for guiding our web-services design
Project
Extending VLE deployment & EQAL programme delivery structures to include W2C
Management deliverables & evaluation; engaging with 03/10 programme support; blogging project
progress & encouraging feedback on our dynamic case study via blog comments & twitter
Activity
Scenarios
Processes
[M2]
Services
[M3]
Widgets
[M4]
Evaluation
Deliverable (L=Led by, S=Supported by)
User scenarios (http://lrt.mmu.ac.uk/ltreview/2010/01/28/scenarios/)
Process maps for personal timetables
Process maps for engagement data
Process maps for resource usage
Relevant process maps published
Web-service for single-sign-on to Live@Edu cloud service
L S
L
L
L
L
L
Web-service for personal & module timetables
Web-service for module hand-in deadlines
Web-service for VLE engagement reporting
Web-service for VLE marks export
Web-service for linked data module description
Web-service for library resource lists
L
L
L
L
L
L
Web-service for resource list recommendation
Relevant web-service APIs + technical model documented
Module / personal timetable widget
Module / personal deadlines widget
Module reading list widget
Relevant widgets developed & deployed to VLE + for mobiles
L
S L
L
L
L
L
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S S
S
S
S
S
S
L
L
L
L
L
[M6]
Case Study
L
[M7]
Project Mgt
[M1]
[M3]
EQAL user experience evaluation metrics identified
EQAL evaluation data analysed
Case study published critiquing DLE & e-Framework guidance
EQAL approval to incorporate W2C in user experience strand
JISC-approved W2C project plan
6 month progress report submitted to JISC
S L S
L S
S L
L S
S L S
L
12 month progress report submitted to JISC
Ongoing engagement with 03/10 programme + blogging & twitter
Completion reports published
L
S L S
S L S
[M7]
3.5
We expect identified activities to deliver benefits according to the following schedule:
6
S
S
S S
S
Pilot groups identified to compare VLE + mobile widgets
Interim report from student focus groups + learner device surveys
Staff identified to evaluate resource + engagement data
Interim report from staff focus groups + evaluation
Staff + student evaluation report published
Summary of business rationale for MMU‟s “core plus” VLE model
[M6]
Unit4
ULCC
Indicative deliverables are as follows (a JISC-approved plan is the first milestone):
LRT
BIT
UET
Talis
Scientia
3.4
Benefits
B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6
X
X
X
X X
X
X X
X X
X
X
X X
X X
X X
Scenarios
Processes
Services
Widgets
Evaluation
Case Study
Project Mgmt
2010
2011
J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D
√
M2
M3
M4
M6
M7
M1
M3
M5
M7
3.6
Within the EQAL Programme, we are currently developing a benefits management
framework to monitor and ensure benefits delivery. Including W2C project activity within
the “seamless user experience” strand will ensure W2C receives the scrutiny and
support of the EQAL Board and its support team. It will also place W2C on a trajectory
for institutional embedding as the threshold expectations approved in the learning
technologies review are for every Unit to have a VLE presence and for personal
timetables and deadline reminders to be available to all students. EQAL sets a
timeframe of institution-wide delivery by September 2011, which has been incorporated
into the initial schedule. However, evaluation activity may well highlight the need for
further input from the Services and Widgets work-streams in order to deliver a robust
solution that satisfies user expectations for the EQAL timeline and benefits framework.
3.7
Initial assessment of risks for W2C is as follows:
Risk
Prob Severity Score
(1-5) (1-5) (P x S)
Action to Prevent/Manage Risk
Staffing
Loss of key staff
2
4
8
More input than budgeted is required
HE cuts provoke I.A. from Unions
Staff lack required skills
2
2
2
4
3
5
8
6
10
3
4
12
2
3
6
2
5
10
1
3
4
4
4
12
1
3
3
Letters of support; regular
communication; engagement as
strategic partners in EQAL
1
4
4
2
5
10
Letters of support; publish webservice APIs only
Finance Dept sign-off + EQAL review
Organisational
Fail to get required access to corporate
systems
Fail to acquire required information
from business processes
Technical
Security of web-services compromised
Fail to develop widgets/web-services
Widget deployment fails to scale
External suppliers
Fail to get required technical
assistance from Scientia, Talis, Unit4
(Agresso) or ULCC (VLE hosting)
Legal & Financial
Commercial suppliers take legal action
over published code
Inadequate budget for required work
7
Document emerging know-how
regularly; ensure buy-in from line
managers for speedy replacement
Ensure line manager buy-in
Strong line management
Pick right team; maximise synergy
with day-jobs; training; link to PDRs
Stakeholder buy-in and escalate to
EQAL Board if necessary
Engage stakeholders in process
modelling; strong comms strategy
Use appropriate security model
reviewed by appropriate partners
Participate in training + CoP
Liaise closely with Wookie developers
+ ULCC; Moodle block contingency
3.8
MMU Legal has been consulted in the production of this bid and has advised that webservice code should remain private (to mitigate the risk of exposing commercial data
structures), but web-service APIs, evaluation reports, process maps and the case study
be shared under a Creative Commons license. The project intends to release widget
code developed within the project under a suitable open-source license as advised by
OSS Watch.
4
Community Engagement
4.1
Hopefully, it will be apparent from the openness of our learning technologies review blog
(http://lrt.mmu.ac.uk/ltreview) that MMU is willing to work with and share findings of its
work in this area with the wider community – our blog postings have included candid
information about VLE usage, file size growth, decision rationale, internal “threshold”
targets and integration challenges.
4.2
W2C team members are experienced in project communication, from Mark Stubbs‟ use
of a blog as a community coordination vehicle in XCRI, through to Dave Lee‟s detailed
stakeholder communication strategy work for the EQAL project – extract below:
Stakeholder
Students
What we need from them
+ Clear guidance on what
they need from our work
+ Regular feedback on
prototypes & pilots
Perception risks
+ We‟re making life
more complicated
Teaching and
administrative
staff
+ Acceptance of new
working practices
+ Feedback on how they‟d
like systems to operate
+ We‟re adding to
workload & complexity
+ Our work will make
colleagues redundant
MIS staff
+ APIs to corporate
systems (particularly
Unit4‟s QLS student system
& the Scientia timetable)
+ Support with resource list
creation & maintenance
+We‟ll shift the locus of
control, compromise
security + increase
workload
+ We‟ll create routes to
resources that library
colleagues don‟t
understand or support
+ We‟re risking a robust
VLE service with
immature technologies
Library staff
VLE hosting
partner
+ Technical assistance with
& performance evaluation
of VLE extensions
Risks if not engaged
+ We might not focus on
students‟ priority areas
+ We create interfaces that
students don‟t like and
won‟t use.
+ Staff won‟t engage with
new systems;
+ Union action;
+ Our work won‟t be fit for
purpose
+ We won‟t be working with
definitive data
+ Students presented with
conflicting interfaces
+ We won‟t be working with
definitive data
+ Students presented with
conflicting interfaces
+ We struggle to deploy
widgets into VLE, and/or
compromise service quality
4.3
A programme communication and evaluation strategy is being developed for EQAL,
which W2C will exploit by adding updates into programme briefings and relevant items to
the agenda for stakeholder workshops, particular those organised to support the
“seamless user experience” and “organisational infrastructure” strands.
4.4
Section 3.4 commits to maintaining an active blog, which will remain within the LRT
website beyond the funded period and be available for JISC project archiving.
4.5
Section 5 shows that W2C has been budgeted to allow project staff to engage with
programme level activities, dissemination events and JISC CETIS communities around
Wookie, widgets and the DLE.
4.6
Our case study deliverable [M7] will critique the value of the CETIS DLE model for
explaining our approach and the e-Framework for guiding our web-services design.
8
5
Budget
5.1
The budget below demonstrates how synergy with MMU‟s plans to extend its VLE
enables a high level of institutional contribution with JISC funding enabling
experimentation, documentation, open source widget code and programme engagement
Directly Incurred staff
Mark Stubbs, Principal Investigator
Dave Lee, Project Manager
Kieron Lonergan, Developer
Steve Nisbet, Developer
Alex Lee, Developer
Geoff Butters, Usability Evaluator
Jenny Craven, Usability Evaluator
Jill Griffiths, Usability Evaluator
Total Directly Incurred Staff (A)
Days
Aug 09 –
Jul 10
Aug 10 –
Jul 11
Aug 11 Jul 12
TOTAL
Non-Staff
Travel and expenses
Hardware/software
Dissemination
Evaluation
Other
Total Directly Incurred Non-Staff (B)
Directly Incurred Total (C) (=A+B)
Directly Allocated
Staff
Estates
Other
Directly Allocated Total (D)
Indirect Costs (E)
Total Project Cost (C+D+E)
Amount Requested from JISC
Institutional Contributions
Percentage Contributions over the life of
the project
JISC
No. FTEs used to calculate indirect and
estates charges, and staff included
1.22
5.2
50.04%
Partners
49.96%
Which staff: Stubbs, M; Lee, D; Lonergan,
K; Nisbet, S; Lee, A; Butters, G; Craven, J
& Griffiths, J
Arrangements for evaluation will be finalised in the project plan [deliverable M1] when
03/10 funding decisions have been made - approaching institutions for peer review of
W2C at this stage risks a conflict of interest.
9
6
Team Experience
6.1
W2C will be undertaken by appropriately-skilled staff who are already in place.
6.2
Section 3.4 has shown how input to W2C will be matched to three key areas of
expertise: technology (LRT); business improvement (BIT) and usability/evaluation (UET).
6.3
The table below shows how the roles and expertise of W2C staff map to those areas:
Area
LRT
Staff
Prof Mark Stubbs
Project Role
Principal
Investigator
Kieron Lonergan
Developer
Steve Nisbet
Developer
Alexander Lee
Developer
BIT
Dave Lee
Project Manager
and
Business Analyst
UET
Geoff Butters
UE Team Leader
Jenny Craven
Usability
Evaluator
Jill Griffiths
Usability
Evaluator
Expertise
As Head of LRT, Mark has overall responsibility for
MMU‟s VLE. He coordinated the recent learning
technologies review and leads the “seamless user
experience” strand within EQAL. He has led and
contributed to a number of related JISC projects
including XCRI, SRC and REACh.
Kieron is MMU‟s MLE Development Manager. He
coordinated the Live@Edu cloud-services pilot and is
responsible for deployment of the MyMMU “one-stopshop” SharePoint portal and supporting web-services
Previously responsible for MMU‟s web infrastructure,
Steve is now MMU‟s Learning Systems Manager. He
established the Moodle demo environment to support
the learning technologies review and has recently been
leading on the integration of Apple Podcasting services
and Wookie widgets
Alex supported the WebCT VLE since its launch in 2006
and is now an MLE developer with particular
responsibility for integrating the new Moodle VLE
Dave is a Business Analyst in MMU‟s Business
Improvement Team. A qualified project manager, Dave
project-managed roll-out of the Live@Edu cloud service
to all students and currently provides process mapping
& project support to the EQAL Board.
Geoff has contributed to and coordinated a number of
JISC and EC-funded projects, including evaluation of
the DNER and usability of the Copac online catalogue
Jenny has worked on a variety of JISC, EPSRC and EC
–funded research projects, primarily concerned with
web accessibility and usability, including user testing on
the JISC Personalisation Projects Programme
Jill has worked on a number of projects focussed on
programme evaluation & user testing for library & info
services, most recently for resource recommendation
6.4
Skills of the MMU team will be complemented by close working relationships with key
partners: Scientia, Talis, Unit4 (formerly Agresso) and ULCC. The travel and expenses
budget has been set to facilitate attendance by partners at relevant project and
programme meetings.
6.5
Links between the W2C project and MMU‟s EQAL initiative will also provide access to
business process expertise, ensure definitive data are available to enhance the VLE for
learners, and provide mechanisms for responding to any inaccuracies identified when
exposing those data.
10