Case Study: CMS in Transition: Managing Change
By Joanne Dehoney
Director, eLearning, TELR
Ohio State University
[email protected]
Rebecca Andre’
eLearning Consultant, TELR
Ohio State University
[email protected]
In a relatively short time – three years – e-Learning offerings
at The Ohio State University (representing supplemental, blended
and fully online courses) grew to include a significant share of total courses.
In FY04, 1,643 instructors in 135 departments at the university offered 2,507
courses (3,487 sections) through WebCT.
Forty-five thousand students--about 77% of the student body--had a WebCT account
in FY 2004. Large first year courses in the departments of biology, statistics,
chemistry, and theater depended on WebCT’s course management and testing
functions – unaware that WebCT 3.2 was really not designed to manage the
high load. Given the importance of robust and scalable courseware to the university’s
educational mission, it was time to explore CMS options.
In June 2003, the Office of the CIO determined that the WebCT environment would
meet Ohio State’s needs for no more than twelve to eighteen more months.
A committee of 42 OSU administrators, systems engineers, and faculty users,
representing multiple colleges, formed three groups to review policy, product
strategy, and stakeholder CMS perspectives. Four CMS finalists (WebCT, Desire2Learn,
Blackboard,
and Angel Learning) were thoroughly tested
by users from across the university. In winter 2004, the recommendation of the
majority of team members was to purchase Desire2Learn (D2L). Ohio State’s
eLearning support organization, Technology Enhanced Learning & Research
(TELR), was given responsibility for the implementation.
Moving from a reasonably entrenched system to something completely unfamiliar
is not a task to be taken lightly, particularly for an institution as large
as Ohio State. For TELR the central challenge would be to meet the needs of
large numbers of students and instructors with a small number of support personnel.
Six months of planning went into the D2L implementation effort before TELR even
finalized the licensing agreement. Planning covered every detail of the project
from an 18-month projected calendar of communications, to service level agreements
with internal partners such as the Help Desk, to user support.
We are currently about half-way through the implementation with many significant
milestones behind us. Overall, the change has been reasonably trouble-free,
especially from the viewpoint of faculty and students. Our complete project
assessment will not take place for another eight months, but interim results
suggest that three aspects of the implementation—attention to branding
and visual identity, diverse and modular instructor support, and prioritizing
the development of bridging applications—have helped us manage change.
Branding and Visual Identity
To create identification with the new learning environment, TELR branded D2L
at Ohio State “Carmen,” a reference to the OSU alma mater song,
“Carmen, Ohio” (http://www.osu.edu/download/index.php). The TELR
visual design team came up with an appealing graphic identity, revising it in
response to feedback from students, faculty and staff. The Carmen icon is now
instantly identifiable across campus, and anchors not just the CMS interface,
but also our campus communications and advertising campaign. We believe this
attention to brand has been a key component of fostering acceptance of the new
system.
Modularized Instructor Support
TELR developed an array of options for learning about Carmen that de-emphasizes
one-to-one consultation and promotes system exploration. Instructors can explore
the system on their own through an animated Flash? tour, interactive “WebCT
to Carmen” comparisons, a tool-based help system or a scenario-based instructional
site. An online community of practice facilitates collaboration and provides
one of several communication paths for TELR to share information about the system.
For those who prefer instructor-led learning, TELR designed a mix-and-match
selection of mini-workshops. The longest— at 90 minutes —is the
complete system overview in which instructors use one of their own courses as
the instructional case. Instructors are encouraged to stack workshops to suit
their schedules. About 400 instructors have attended a workshop in the past
three months, and only a fraction of these have required follow-up assistance.
Bridging Applications
Based on feedback from faculty and an analysis of help desk calls, TELR developed
a set of custom applications to manage aspects of using the new CMS that fall
outside the system itself. First, we refined the software that packages WebCT
files for transfer to Carmen until 90% of transferred courses required no hand
touch-up. TELR also devoted significant time to the development of a website
that helps faculty plan their move to Carmen and optionally select training.
Behind the scenes software parses their prior use, if any, of WebCT to recommend
an optimal schedule for the move. The software manages the workshop seats, waiting
list, and email notifications and queues courses for transfer. Other applications
manage many of the customization requests the TELR team would otherwise receive
from faculty. The self-service aspects of the custom applications appeal to
faculty and divert mundane tasks from professional staff to technology.
Through planning, several paths emerged to smooth the change process. TELR’s
investment in branding, diverse and modular instructor support, and custom application
development have helped the implementation stage for Ohio State faculty, staff
and students. In all three cases and throughout the project, our objective has
been a user-centered implementation that also respects the talents and dedication
of the institution’s technical and academic support staff.
