The University of Massachusetts Amherst

Author: Fred Zinn

Categories
Requirements

Future LMS Requirements for Teaching

The first of three posts about the requirements we’ve identified for a future LMS: Teaching, Transition, and Behind the Scenes.

Core requirement: because most tools of this sort can handle the needs of medium  to small classes, the LMS we choose needs to provide tools that specifically assist instructors in managing large classes.

Ideally, instructors should be able to use this tool to communicate with, and manage the data for, large numbers of students (200-600 students).  in addition to standard features for posting content, this tool needs to provide an efficient mechanism for assessing student work (collecting, commenting, grading, and recording) no matter what the type of activity (discussions, quizzes, papers). This tool also needs to have flexible features for allowing an instructor to receive assistance from a variety of people (not just TA’s, but also staff, librarians, and other collaborators).

Basic considerations: it needs to be intuitive to use, yet flexible.

An intuitive system will increase the number of self-sufficient self-starters among the instructors (and decrease the complaints from students that their instructors “do not use it well”). It  needs to provide a flexible environment that adapts to the multitude of teaching styles and requirements on campus. A system which is easy to start using, but provides a deep set of features would be the best option. There are many “basic” features that instructors have come to expect in an LMS: content delivery, grade book, quizzes, discussions, assignment drop box, etc. (see below). These should all be represented in the feature set.

Bonus features: it needs to be adaptable to new technologies and cultural shifts

An adaptable system will be able to change with the times–allowing new modules or features to be added as needed. Current trends in student-driven activities, mobile devices, and RSS dissemination/aggregation need to be addressed now, but the system also needs to be able to adapt to trends that are yet to come.

Continue reading “Future LMS Requirements for Teaching”
Categories
Surveys and Discussions

LMS Survey Results

As part of the search for a new learning management system (LMS), we reviewed several surveys from 2009 that included faculty and student feedback on SPARK. A summary of what we learned is available in PDF format (download SPARK Survey Summary). Here is the short version:

How Instructors View SPARK

The features instructors value most about the SPARK LMS are posting course content (e.g. readings and syllabi) and managing grades. The next most commonly used features are (in order): collecting assignments, managing online discussions, and giving quizzes and surveys (assessments).

The one aspect of SPARK that instructors would most like to see fixed is its interface inefficiencies and speed (it was often referred to as “clunky”). Below this on the list are specific requests for improvements in the gradebook and assignment tools.

Features that instructors would like to see added to SPARK, having a way to share content outside the limitations of the official roster (making at least parts of a SPARK course public or open to people at other institutions) shares the top slot with wishing that SPARK would integrate better with other tools, such as UDrive, UMail, and Blogs. Display of video within SPARK is becoming a more and more popular request.

How Students View SPARK

Overall, students find SPARK to be very useful (with very few dissenters). They primarily use it for viewing documents, submitting assignments, taking quizzes and participating in online discussions (in that order).

The top item  students would like to see changed about SPARK matches that of the instructors: the interface to be less “clunky.” Just below this, students would like to see a better integration of SPARK with the other tools they use in their online lives, such as sending them emails when something is posted. A consistent comment from students is that they wish their instructors used SPARK, and if they do, use more of its features.

—

Do you have thoughts on SPARK you would like to share? Post a comment here, or send an email to futurelms@oit.umass.edu with what you like, what you think should be improved, and/or what you think should be added to the next LMS for SPARK.

Categories
Process

Committee Charge

Here is a written version of the charge Chief Information Officer John Dubach delivered to the Future LMS committee at our first meeting on June 23, 2010:

“Recommend to me and the Provost the next LMS for UMass Amherst. You may recommend one or more, ranked or unranked. In your evaluations, focus on finding the LMS with the broadest feature set balanced with ease of use.

In your discussions, focus on the tools and their features; avoid getting bogged down in essentially philosophical discussions such as “open source vs. commercial” or “the corporate culture of Blackboard”. Also, although UMassOnline is currently going through a similar selection process, and there is a strong interest in how our systems will synch, I want you to recommend the tool(s) that you believe are best for this campus. The provost and I will take responsibility for considering these issues when we make our choice.

Final point: there are essentially three types of options available to us. A commercial LMS, an open source LMS, or an option referred to as “Best of Breed” in which there is no single tool, but rather a collection of tools–each chosen for what they do best. Each of these options costs money and resources; just because open source does not involve licensing fees, does not mean we will save money. Compared to the commercial option, open source and best of breed can cost as much or more in staffing. Again, when you make your choice, do not get bogged down in discussion of resources; recommend what is best and the provost and I will attend to this issue.

Thank you for your time and attention to this important choice.”

Categories
Announcement

Choosing New LMS Software for SPARK

To the SPARK community:

Blackboard Inc., the company that provides Blackboard Vista–the software behind the SPARK Learning Management System (LMS) at UMass Amherst–has announced that they will discontinue support for this software as of January 2013. This product derived from our original WebCT software which Blackboard acquired a few years ago.  There is no option to upgrade or stay put, and conversion to Blackboard’s new offering is tantamount to a new implementation.  Therefore, we must review available options and choose a new system to underlie SPARK.

SPARK is now used in over 1400 courses by nearly 1000 instructors in 93 departments across campus. There are about 70,300 “seats” in SPARK occupied by over 21,000 individual students (including undergraduate, graduate, and continuing studies students).  Because of its ubiquity, changing the software that underlies SPARK requires careful consideration.

There are many possibilities available to us, including open source options and the new product offered by Blackboard. The final decision for our future direction will be made based on recommendations by an advisory committee made up of faculty and staff who will meet to review the options available and collect input from the community.

UMassOnline, which provides the LMS for many of our Continuing & Professional Education courses, currently uses the same software that we do and faces a similar decision.  They have initiated a parallel review; we will keep in touch with their efforts.

In order to have a swift but orderly conversion to the new system, our advisory committee will begin work immediately and provide recommendations as soon as possible. The goal is to have a decision in place by early Fall 2010 so that we can get started with testing, pilots, and eventual full conversion to the new system.

There will be many opportunities for the community to review our options and provide feedback. If you have thoughts on this issue and would like to submit them now, please send an email to futurelms@oit.umass.edu. Updates on this project will be posted here on the “Future LMS” blog.

Thank you for your attention to and input on this important matter.

James V. Staros
Provost and Senior Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

John F. Dubach
Chief Information Officer