1. education
2. distance learning

March 2003
REVISED November 2003
The Ohio State University
e
-Learning
Implementation
Strategy and Plan
Contact information:
Susan E. Metros
Professor and Deputy Chief Information Officer
The Ohio State University
[email protected]
(614) 688-8482
Prepared by:
Susan E. Metros, TELR, Office of the CIO
With support from:
Stephen Acker, TELR, Office of the CIO
Catherine Bindewald, Office of the CIO
Alan Escovitz External Affairs, Office of the CIO
Mary Ann Baxter, IBM Education Practice
Olivia Derr, Global Human Performance Service Line, Accenture
Executive Summary..............................................................................................................................................3
The Distance Learning and Continuing Education Committee Recommendations ....................................5
Phase 1 ..............................................................................................................................................................5
Phase 2 ..............................................................................................................................................................6
Phase 3 ..............................................................................................................................................................6
How is e-Learning Supported and Delivered at Ohio State Today? .............................................................7
e-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan ...............................................................................................10
The Vision.........................................................................................................................................................10
The Plan’s Goals, Outcomes, Objectives, Tasks and Metrics........................................................................11
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 1: A cohesive vision and services across campuses to support eLearning..................................................................................................................................................11
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 2: Funding for and investments to support programmatic change ..13
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 3: Policies and procedures conducive to offering e-Learning..........15
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 4: Student access to e-Learning resources and support .................17
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 5: A technology infrastructure to support a mission- critical eLearning enterprise ................................................................................................................................20
Governance Plan.................................................................................................................................................21
Organization .....................................................................................................................................................21
Threats, Risks and Mitigating Actions .............................................................................................................22
Rewards ...........................................................................................................................................................23
Improving Learning and the Reach of Education..................................................................................24
Improving Access to Knowledge ...........................................................................................................24
Increasing Ohio State’s Prestige and Visibility......................................................................................25
Financial Implications ........................................................................................................................................25
Revenue ...........................................................................................................................................................25
Projected Costs ................................................................................................................................................26
Appendix I ............................................................................................................................................................27
Committee and Tasks Force e-Learning Reports (1997-2002)............................................................27
A Sampling of Report Recommendations .............................................................................................27
Appendix II ...........................................................................................................................................................29
Distance Learning and Continuing Education Committee Report Recommendations (May 2001) ....29
Appendix III ..........................................................................................................................................................30
Ohio State’s Academic Plan’s References to Educational Technology ...............................................30
Appendix IV..........................................................................................................................................................31
Stakeholder Needs.................................................................................................................................31
Appendix V...........................................................................................................................................................34
The Ohio State University Information Technology Strategic Plan Gap Initiatives.............................34
Appendix VI..........................................................................................................................................................35
Tasks and Timeline ................................................................................................................................35
Appendix VII.........................................................................................................................................................37
Organizational Roles..............................................................................................................................37
E-Learning Implementation Strategy Report
2
Executive Summary
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan Vision
The Ohio State University will be recognized by its academic community, its
peers and its regional and worldwide constituents as a premier provider of
learner-centered e-Learning. As an umbrella term, e-Learning represents a fullspectrum continuum of educational technology integration and will facilitate the
“creation and dissemination of knowledge” and the "innovative use of technology
for teaching, learning, research, and organizational effectiveness," as stated in
the Ohio State University Academic Plan.
The use of educational technologies to improve services, quality, and opportunities for learning
has been evolving steadily over the last three decades. E-Learning has grown remarkably in
numbers of applications, diversity of technologies and variety of pedagogies. The development
and integration of new instructional strategies and tools for learning have brought about
fundamental changes in the way educators approach teaching and students approach learning.
Faculty, students, instructional designers, and other practitioners are using a number of new
information technologies to improve learning outcomes, create new models, and place more
responsibility for learning on the learners themselves.
In 2001, then President William E. “Brit” Kirwan appointed a Distance Learning and Continuing
Education Committee and tasked it with making recommendations for improving and advancing
e-Learning at Ohio State. The committee concluded that there are a number of impressive online
endeavors within Ohio State’s colleges and departments and that they have been successful in
their individual efforts. However, enhancement and better coordination of centralized support
could advance learning as a primary resource to the overall academic community. In a series of
recommendations, the committee advised the provost that centrally administered human and
financial resources, associated with distance education and distributed learning, should be
incorporated into a single organizational unit and the leadership of that unit be charged with
developing an implementation strategy. This document serves as that plan.
Over the years, numerous task forces and committees have tried to solve aspects of this “eLearning problem.” This e-Learning strategy and plan examines the needs and vested interests of
a broad constituency of stakeholders comprising resident and remote students, instructors,
support staff, academic leaders and policymakers. Based on user feedback collected from OSU
polls and from the Ohio State Information Technology Strategic Planning surveys and focus
groups, this plan describes how e-Learning is supported and delivered today, how Ohio State
would be better served in the future, and how to alleviate the gaps between where the university
currently stands and where it would like to be.
The Ohio State University’s Academic Plan clearly delineates the role of instructional technology
in advancing Ohio State as a national leader and world-class institution and concludes “we must
equal or surpass our benchmark institutions in the use of technology for teaching, learning,
research, and overall effectiveness.” Ohio State’s current mix of centralized and decentralized
technology support, while serving some needs successfully, is not robust enough nor organized
effectively to meet the Academic Plan’s charge. An important component of this plan is
strengthening the collaboration between centralized educational technology support and the
support provided within the colleges and departments. The ultimate goal of this plan is to support
for credit courses and curricula by providing academically sound resources and services to the
colleges that scale to the collective and selective needs of the university.
Five Critical Success Factors serve as the foundation for this e-Learning Strategy’s goals,
outcomes, objectives, tasks and metrics.
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 1: A cohesive vision and services across campuses to
support e-Learning
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
3
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 2: Funding for and investments to support programmatic
change
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 3: Policies and procedures conducive to offering eLearning
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 4: Student access to e-Learning resources, support and
offerings
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 5: Technology infrastructure to support a mission critical eLearning enterprise
Within this report, an e-Learning organization is structured, reporting to the chief information
officer and composed of three functional clusters-- Business Services, Design and Development
and Support. The organization mirrors the major activities that make up the e-Learning “supply
chain,” and comprises program planning, product design, development and assessment and user
support. The organization is built on the premise that it will be able to closely interface with
existing units within the Offices of the CIO and the university.
The requested budget is for a transitional investment to build and staff the central e-Learning
organization, which, in turn, will work with its advisory committee to identify and solicit additional
funds to roll out a comprehensive solution. The budget reflects the costs associated with
launching a coordinated effort to support the full spectrum of e-Learning activities.
Many of the tasks listed in the “Implementation Plan” section of this report do not require new
money, but the commitment of knowledge, time and energy of dedicated educational and
information technology staff. Others do have funding obligations requiring both annual rate and
cash allocations. The budget items directly align with the tasks required to meet this e-Learning
strategy and the plan’s goals, outcomes and objectives. To fully implement a full-spectrum eLearning operation, it will take an additional three to five years. This plan should be revisited
annually to reflect the transition of new roles and responsibilities of a coordinated and cohesive eLearning effort.
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
4
The Distance Learning and Continuing Education
Committee Recommendations
The Ohio State University has been wrestling with the concept of “e-Learning" for the last five
years. E-Learning is an umbrella term representing a continuum of educational technology
integration. It originates with the supplemental use of technology in the classroom, through
blended or hybrid uses comprising a mix of face-to-face and fully online instruction, to fully online
synchronous and asynchronous distance learning environments delivered to remote learners.
This struggle is evident by the numerous committees and task forces formed over this time period
and tasked with finding solutions. Although these groups churned out numerous reports and white
papers, few, if any of the recommendations have been fully implemented. (A list of committees
and tasks forces and a sampling of recommendations extracted from the reports can be found in
Appendix I).
In 2001, then President William E. “Brit” Kirwan appointed a Distance Learning and Continuing
Education Committee, chaired by Bobby Moser, Vice President of Outreach and Engagement
and the Dean of Food, Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, and tasked it with making
recommendations for improving and advancing e-Learning at Ohio State. The Distance Learning
and Continuing Education Committee met for over a year and submitted a three-phase report.
Phase 1
During Phase I, the committee commissioned Accenture, an outside consulting firm, to work with
an Ohio State project team to study the state of e-Learning at Ohio State and to make
recommendations. They conducted interviews with the college deans, university leaders, staff,
faculty and many other individuals participating in technology-enhanced learning. The committee
found that Ohio State’s Colleges are already using technology in many ways to enhance teaching
and research. However, if Ohio State is to move forward, “a greater cohesion and centralized
1
support will need to be provided .” The committee concluded, therefore, that, “Ohio State needs
to bring an institutional focus to the use of technology in learning in order to deliver education that
st
characterizes the 21 century land-grant institution.”
Additionally, the Phase I project team conducted an external assessment of the learning
technology market. The team found that institutions of higher education are primarily interested
ways to generate revenues via the use of learning technology. The activities seen on Ohio State’s
campus were comparable to their peer institution’s initiatives.
In developing a conceptual model for e-Learning, the committee provided a framework for how
their vision could be put into practice at Ohio State. The model objectives were:
•
Emphasize the core asset of the university (faculty knowledge), not the emergence of
new delivery mechanisms
•
Integrate operations with the three major university areas; research, teaching and service
•
Use technology to bring research and teaching closer together
•
Provide faculty with tools that facilitate the teaching process (i.e., similar to the way email facilitates communication)
•
Target successful opportunities—and minimize the “shotgun approach”
1
st
Distance Learning/Continuing Education Committee (2001). “21 Century Knowledge Dissemination
Strategy” (Phase I Final Report).
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
5
Phase 2
While the Phase 1 report offered a broad overview of e-Learning issues, Phase 2 grappled with
the state of the current e-Learning environment in higher education and the organizational and
institutional implications associated with proceeding with this activity. Generally, in the time since
the initial fact finding in Spring 2001, several Research 1 universities had reduced, reorganized,
or in some cases, eliminated their online distance learning offerings. A tone of caution has since
emerged. While the market for online education still exists, the reality of the difficulties in
recruiting faculty, funding development, competitively pricing offerings, working within outdated
policies, and assuring student success remains a challenge.
The committee concluded that while there are a number of successful online endeavors at Ohio
State, the university lacks comprehensive institutional and organizational mechanisms to facilitate
the development and growth of e-Learning. The committee believed that the most direct way to
develop a strategic plan for e-Learning at Ohio State is to address these organizational issues. In
May 2002, its findings were presented to the Board of Trustee’s and the provost. The committee’s
report included six recommendations. An abridged version follows: (The full recommendations
are found in Appendix II):
Recommendation1: The Committee advises the Provost to direct the University
Registrar to work with the CIO’s office and the Colleges to create a database that houses
information about DE activities in various units across campus.
Recommendation 2: The Committee advises the Provost to direct resources to the
development of the OSU Digital "Knowledge Bank."
Recommendation 3: The Committee advises the Provost that centrally administered
human and financial resources associated with distance education and distributed
learning should be incorporated into a single organizational unit. The purpose of this unit
would be to provide leadership and support to colleges and the university community in
the areas of instructional design and technology, student services, and business planning
related to e-Learning.
Recommendation 4: The Committee advises the Provost to consider a funding model
for distance and distributed education that takes a venture capital investment approach.
Recommendation 5: The Committee advises the Provost to review the business plans
of the 6 programs that currently represent OSU’s distance education offerings before the
next budget cycle.
Recommendation 6: The Committee advises the Provost to appoint an Advisory
Committee to revisit and finalize policy recommendations developed over the past few
years regarding intellectual property and develop additional policies associated with the
Knowledge Bank, Distance Education and Distributed Learning.
Phase 3
Finally, in Phase 3, the Accenture/Ohio State team recommended that a long-term organizational
structure be put in place. This structure would need to meet the following goals:
•
Work within the university’s existing structure.
•
Integrate this effort with existing university functions.
•
Remove barriers to entry for interested units.
•
Leverage strengths of budget restructuring environment for college’s to pursue
entrepreneurial opportunities.
•
Allow colleges to pursue new markets while maintaining economies of scale benefits.
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
6
•
Serve as a broker between various colleges to facilitate interdisciplinary initiatives and
maximize resource sharing.
While this e-Learning Implementation Strategy Report is responsive to recommendations put forth
in all three phases, it specifically addresses recommendation 3 in phase 2.
The Committee advises the Provost that centrally administered human and financial
resources associated with distance education and distributed learning should be
incorporated into a single organizational unit. The purpose of this unit would be to provide
leadership and support to colleges and the university community in the areas of
instructional design and technology, student services, and business planning related to
DE and DL activities. Where appropriate, consideration should be given to funding these
activities through a 'fee-for-service' model. The leadership of that entity should be given
the charge to develop an implementation strategy for DE, complete with a business plan
and identification of institutional policies and procedures necessary to support distributed
and distance education activities at OSU.
How is e-Learning Supported
and Delivered at Ohio State Today?
On Campus
The current state of e-Learning at Ohio State is best understood in the broader context of eLearning nationwide, within the State of Ohio, among the CIC peer institutions and within Ohio
State University itself. Looking at the full spectrum of e-Learning, almost every college and
university in the nation-- regardless of size or ranking, public or private, research or two-year-has invested in some level of instructional technology support for their campus community. Some
have chosen to take advantage of economies of scale and build and support centralized units
while others advocate a distributed model that matches specialists with the disciplines. Ohio State
employs a mix of centralized and decentralized technology support. The central support is
primarily out of the Office of the Chief Information Officer (CIO) and its reporting units including
Technology Enhanced Learning and Research (TELR), Courseware Design and Development,
Office of Information Technology (OIT) and Emerging Technologies. Many of the colleges and the
four regional campuses have internal support units. Continuing Education and Faculty and TA
Development (FTAD) also offer instructional support.
Almost all higher education institutions offer instructors some form of incentives to transition
course materials onto online environments and to explore innovative teaching methods. Incentive
grants fund everything from faculty release time to professional support. These incentive funds
are supported through a variety of sources including state appropriations, central administration,
technology fees, etc. Over the years Ohio State has funded through its TELR organization
millions of dollars in grants to faculty and colleges in the form of Faculty Innovator Grants (FIG),
Courseware Development Grants (CDG) and Technology in Instruction Program Grants (TIP). In
addition, TELR managed an investment fund to provide venture capital for distance learning startups. Almost all of this funding has been suspended or lost due to budget cuts. However, the staff
has been successful in competing for Board of Regents and Ohio Learning Network grants to
support specific projects.
The Ohio State’s academic community’s interest in and use of e-Learning has climbed steadily
2
over the last couple of years. The 2002 OSU Poll indicates 38% of the faculty report using new
instructional technologies in nearly every class session, compared to 25% in 2001. An additional
2
OSU Poll 2002, Offices of the CIO, http://www.cio.ohio-state.edu/planit/OSU_Poll_Results.html
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
7
23% said they used instructional technologies in several class sessions, compared to 21% in
2001. Those who report never using these tools have continued to drop, from 33% in 1999 to
28% in 2001 to 18% in 2002.
The Poll also reported that among students, exposure to instructional technologies in nearly every
classroom doubled during the past year, with undergraduates reporting slightly higher use than
graduates. Of the undergraduate and graduate/professional student samples for 2002, 86%
reported using instructional technology in their classes during autumn 2001. Both undergraduate
and graduate students overwhelmingly (96%) feel that instructional technology is either very or
somewhat important in education. Almost half of all students are interested in taking online
courses, with undergraduate students slightly more interested in online classes than
graduate/professional students.
The increased use of technology in the classroom can partially be attributed to the use of WebCT,
the university-supported course management system that provides a suite of tools for faculty to
easily build and manage online learning experiences. WebCT allows students to personalize their
learning experience, conveniently and dynamically access course materials and communicate
with each other and the instructor. Ohio State hosts four installations of WebCT (Office of
Information Technology’s central server, Math and Physical Sciences, Medicine, and the Lima
campus). The majority of WebCT use takes place in supplemental and blended learning
environments. In autumn 2002, more than 28,000 students were enrolled in centrally-supported
WebCT augmented courses. Math and Physical Sciences and Medicine served approximately
12,000 students.
At a Distance
In the spring of 2002, the Registrar reported 951 students enrolled in 61 courses designated with
a “D” representing “Distance” Learning. In addition, Ohio State offers six blended and distance
learning degree programs and certifications. These include PharmD (a non-traditional Doctor of
Pharmacy degree), an undergraduate business degree for regional campuses, a Welding and
Engineering master’s degree, a Gerontology certificate program, masters of Nursing, and an
executive MBA. There are approximately ten other certifications and degrees being discussed or
under development. The design, development, delivery and support for these credit-based
distance learning courses and degrees and noncredit certifications and programs are scattered
across the colleges, departments, TELR and Continuing Education. For example, Pharmacy
offers its PharmD within the college, Business outsources much of its EMBA degree
development, delivery and support to a local company and Welding Engineering is negotiating
with Continuing Education to provide registration and student services. TELR has provided faculty
support and funding for all of these initiatives and hosts the majority of Ohio State’s distance
learning on its WebCT course management system.
The OSU 2002 Poll indicates that Ohio State faculty are evenly split on the desire to offer
distance learning courses. Of the 302 faculty polled in 2002, 44% said they would, 49% said they
would not, and 8% indicated they did not know if they would like to or not. For the past three
years, faculty have been asked, “Given adequate support, would you like to offer a course in a
distance education format?” Those who said they would were 52% in 2000, 39% in 2001, and
44% in 2002. This downtrend (although inching back up) is most likely attributable to a better
understanding of the work required to convert a course to an online format and realistic
expectations about revenue opportunities.
According to a poll commissioned by the Ohio Learning Network (OLN) and conducted by the
3
University of Cincinnati’s Institute for Policy Research , Ohioans, like their national counterparts,
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
8
also are willing to earn college degrees online. Business, nursing and health care are their top
degree choices. Ohioans want to take courses online because they view them as convenient and
flexible, and nearly 70% of them are aware of distance learning. About 60 percent are interested
in taking a class via distance.
While all CIC institutions support the use of technology on campus through central and distributed
services, the ways that they support and deliver distance learning varies significantly. Penn State,
University of Illinois and Michigan State University maintain virtual campuses. Of the remaining
institutions, half have a highly centralized scheme in which one group, usually located in the
information technology arm of the university or in continuing education, handles the production,
design and delivery of distance learning offerings. The other half of the CIC institutions subscribe
to a centralized/decentralized scheme. The exceptions are the University of Iowa and Indiana
University. They use a decentralized support services model in which colleges have their own
internal distance learning support groups.
For the most part, Research 1 Institutions do not fare well in the distance learning market.
Community colleges and the new breed of for-profit universities, such as the University of
Phoenix, are better positioned than the Research 1 institutions to meet industry’s distance
learning needs. The majority of their workforce is non-tenured and adjunct with a primary
responsibility for teaching. Research1 institutions have the most success when they identify a
niche and partner with business and industry to serve that vertical market with high quality,
competency-based education.
Ohio State’s e-Learning Strengths
Ohio State provides a mix of centralized and decentralized educational technology support. Some
colleges have at least one staff member assigned to supporting their faculty’s basic instructional
technology needs. As expected, the colleges that have made significant investments in
technology, especially those with technology fees, have better support structures in place. Faculty
are integrating technology into their teaching and the limited number of distance learning degrees
offered appear to be well received. For the most part, students are engaged and active
participants in online learning opportunities. Counted among Ohio State’s strengths are:
•
High caliber of faculty and staff interested in using technology in the classroom and
developing and delivering content and courses online
•
Expert instructional design and technical support provided by a dedicated and talented IT
staff working within both central and distributed units
•
Professional schools that are well positioned to provide professional development and
accredited continuing education programming, oftentimes to meet state mandated
licensure requirements
•
Demonstrated market demand for online versions of many of Ohio State’s courses and
degrees
•
Commitment to lifelong learning by many Ohioans, especially alumni
•
Excellent statewide, Web-enabled library system (OhioLink)
•
Proactive statewide organization (Ohio Learning Network) charged by the Board of
Regents to promote and advance distance learning across its Ohio member institutions
3
University of Cincinnati’s Institute for Policy Research, “Poll Shows Ohioans Want Degrees Online,” June
6, 2002, http://www.oln.org
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
9
e-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
4
The Ohio State University’s Academic Plan clearly delineates the role of instructional technology
in advancing Ohio State as a national leader and world-class institution:
No change factor is more evident than the continuing and ever-more-rapid
growth of technology, which affects not only what is taught but how, e.g. online
learning. While this is not an area of current strength at Ohio State, we must help
our students - whatever their field of study - become fully conversant with the
latest available technology. We cannot be a great university without making
major progress in this area. Conclusion: We must equal or surpass our
benchmark institutions in the use of technology for teaching, learning, research,
and overall effectiveness.
Additional educational technology issues are threaded throughout the Plan and are listed in
Appendix III.
Ohio State’s Office of the CIO is completing a campus-wide, intensive strategic planning effort
called PlanIT (http://cio.osu.edu/planit). As discussed previously, the current state analysis clearly
identified interest in expanded use of instructional technologies particularly in campus settings. A
Future State Team gathered additional information from a broad sweep of constituents using a
combination of surveys, questionnaires and focus sessions. Its findings also reflected a strong
interest in the future use of e-Learning by faculty, staff and students alike. The Gap Analysis
Team outlined numerous initiatives based on the Current and Future State Team’s findings. Most
recently, stakeholders and others within the academic community have evaluated and prioritized
these initiatives. Stakeholders included students, both residential and remote, instructors,
information technology support staff, academic leaders and policymakers. A detailed list of
stakeholder needs can be found in Appendix IV. Not surprisingly, many of the top priorities
address e-Learning needs which include developing and updating policies, promoting and
rewarding faculty and staff for appropriately using and demonstrating of e-Learning, expanding
the number of courses and degrees offered at a distance, helping faculty deploy information
technology in support of their research, and providing increased technical and instructional design
support to assist in the design and development of e-Learning and research materials. Other
related initiatives can be found in Appendix V.
The Vision
This e-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan echoes the vision described in the Academic
Plan and upheld in the university’s information technology strategic plan. It also directly
addresses the recommendations put forth in the Distance Learning and Continuing Education
Committee Report. The vision is as follows;
The Ohio State University will be recognized by its academic community, its
peers and its regional and worldwide constituents as a premier provider of
learner-centered e-Learning. E-Learning represents a full-spectrum continuum of
educational technology integration and will facilitate the “creation and
dissemination of knowledge” and the "innovative use of technology for teaching,
learning, research, and organizational effectiveness," as stated in the Ohio State
University Academic Plan.
An important component of this plan is strengthening the collaboration between centralized
educational technology support and the support provided within the colleges and departments.
This plan acts to complement discipline-based support by providing resources and services that
scale to the collective and selective needs of the university.
4
OSU Academic Plan
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
10
Encouraging the use of new technologies for instruction relies on the existence of an “enabling
environment” for faculty developing instructional technology skills and competencies and for
students accessing course content online. For its part, Ohio State must develop policies that tear
down barriers through the provision of adequate and appropriate resources, develop a “culture of
innovation” among the entire university community, and create a dynamic and responsive
infrastructure that anticipates, rather than reacts, to change. This will be accomplished through
the creative partnership between the new e-Learning organization and the colleges to reallocate
current, and locate new resources to implement a more flexible and equitable service delivery
and support system.
The Plan’s Goals, Outcomes, Objectives, Tasks and Metrics
The plan represents a two-year implementation strategy. It is organized into five sections, each a
response to a critical success factor describing what is needed for Ohio State to meet the
Academic Plan’s future state vision and fulfill the Distance Learning and Continuing Education
Committee’s recommendations. Each of the sections is organized by goal, desired outcome,
objectives and the series of tasks required to meet each objective. Each task is associated with a
set of metrics. The tasks and detailed timeline are delineated in Appendix VI.
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 1: A cohesive vision and services across
campuses to support e-Learning
E-Learning is not integrated or coordinated at Ohio State. While there are numerous pockets of
successful e-Learning activities across the main and regional campuses, most faculty members
do not have the level of support centrally or within their colleges to assist them in building
technology-enhanced courses and programs. With few exceptions, the departments and colleges
have not funded educational technology to appropriately scale to the development and delivery
needs of its students, staff and faculty. This lack of coordination is fueled by inconsistent
communications between educational technology specialists working centrally and within the
colleges and at the regional campuses. There are few processes in place to periodically evaluate
and review the business plans of new and existing programs, nor is there support to provide
market analysis, business planning and financial forecasting for faculty and units eager to
develop an online distance education presence.
There also is overlap and redundancy of services between TELR and Continuing Education. This
leads to inefficient and inconsistent processes for developing and launching distance learning
offerings, redundancy of services, poor use of valuable resources and user confusion on where to
go for support and information. In respect to distance learning, TELR focuses on helping faculty
navigate the complex and cumbersome internal processes in order to offer online courses and
degrees. Working closely with colleges, OAA and units such as Faculty & TA Development, it
focuses on supporting sound pedagogy and instructional technology strategies that promote the
full-spectrum of quality e-Learning experiences. In the past it has provided faculty with trained
student interns, incentive funding, research and professional development opportunities,
programming and design support and other relevant services and resources. Continuing
Education negotiates both internal and external contractual agreements for the delivery of
programs and has been able to circumvent many of the internal obstacles such as fixed pricing
through loopholes and an innovative, but often labor- intensive registration solution. CE provides
funding, registration procedures and limited student and technology support for distance learners.
TELR is centrally funded while Continuing Education is partially subsidized centrally, but earns
additional revenue by capturing a percentage of its students’ tuition fee—a fee it has the ability to
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
11
set. Both groups support the development and delivery of for credit and noncredit distance
learning courses and programs and work with the identical faculty and in some cases, the same
students.
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 1: Need for cohesive vision and services across campuses to
support e-Learning
Goal
Desired Outcome
Objectives
Realign internal
resources to build
an organization to
provide and
coordinate
centralized support
for e-Learning at
Ohio State that
complements the
college’s initiatives,
is learner-centered
and excels in client
excellence
Ohio State will
successfully meet
the e-Learning
needs of its
students and the
citizens of Ohio and
beyond by providing
targeted support
and resources to its
academic
community
Effectively utilize university
assets by building a
program and staff to
support the overarching,
centralized, credit-based eLearning needs of the
academic community and
to interface closely with
college and department
faculty and staff in
supporting their
constituents
Tasks
Year one
Merge OIT’s Courseware
Design and Development
Services, Visual Design
Services, Learning
Technologies Center
Multimedia Lab (11 FTE)
with TELR (4.5 FTE)
(Completed 11/02)
Metrics
Move OIT staff into
renovated space in BSE
(Completed 5/02)
Increase use of services
and resources
Year one
Canvass deans and college
IT professionals to
determine which centralized
services best meet their
needs
Survey users to determine
satisfaction and to identify
needs
Survey staff to determine
if they are meeting their
potential and to identify
skill gaps
Number of new services
to meet needs and
projects designed to
advance collaboration
Survey to determine user
satisfaction
Year one
Commission an external
review of Ohio State’s
existing distance learning
programs and support
structure inclusive of TELR
and Continuing Education
Year one
Restructure advisory groups
(ITAC, TELR Coordinating
Council) and form an
advisory committee and
user council to provide
direction and refine mission,
goals and objectives
(Advisory Committee
convened 9/02)
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
12
Report to Provost
resulting in streamlined
operations
Evaluate findings to
determine whether Ohio
State’s distance learning
offerings meet the needs
of its learner population
and are cost efficient
Survey to determine user
satisfaction
Track and report on the
committee’s progress
Year one
Increase communication
and professional
development programming
with college and department
instructional technology staff
(In progress 11/03)
Number of new
communication conduits
and collaborative
opportunities for colleges
and departments
Survey to determine user
satisfaction
Year one
Formalize and expand the
TELR Internship Program to
best serve the academic
community
Survey users to determine
satisfaction and to identify
needs
(Completed 7/03)
Review internship
program and shape
program to meet needs
Increase number of faculty
users
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 2: Funding for and investments to support
programmatic change
Funding is a challenge for distance learning because there is an expectation that it is a revenue
builder when, in fact, the majority of distance learning programs either lose money or just break
even. More often, these spin-off programs are being revisited and redirected to provide a
university a competitive edge by meeting the diverse needs of its student body. A significant
investment is required for Ohio State to realize transformational change in its e-Learning
practices. Opportunities for external funding exists but many require multidisciplinary and
community collaborations.
The major funding weaknesses at Ohio State are:
•
Lack of investment monies available to fund costly upfront course and program
development costs and faculty compensation and release time. In 1999, the university
piloted a venture capital fund and invested in loans to Pharmacy, Welding Engineering
and Art Education. The recipients are expected to payback 50% of the loans within five
years, with the first installments due in 2004. This fund has not been replenished,
although Continuing Education is building an incentive fund for its clients.
•
Lack of set procedures to recapture dollars (fees and subsidy) to use for coverage of
development and delivery costs.
•
Inability to price distance learning competitively within the market. Any differentiated
tuition model, initiated by OAA, that recalculates tuition has to go before the Board of
Trustees for approval.
In addition to fiscal shortfalls, there are human resource problems in building and keeping a
skilled IT workforce. As technology swiftly changes, staff must be retrained, recruited and
retained in order to provide uninterrupted, quality support. Lacking a career ladder and a reward
system, the recruitment and retention of a quality IT workforce throughout the university will
remain an ongoing problem.
Lastly, if Ohio State is to catch up to its benchmark institutions, and even take a lead in select
areas, it will have to invest in a modest but innovative research and development program. The
university should partner with the colleges, vendors, and professional organizations to pilot new
ideas and to assist faculty in leveraging their own research into online e-Learning environments.
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
13
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 2: Funding for and investments to support programmatic
change
Goal
Desired Outcome
Objectives
Encourage and
support the
development and
delivery of topquality e-Learning
for both resident
and remote Ohio
State students and
the citizens of Ohio
Faculty will have the
requisite training
and resources to
integrate technology
into teaching and
learning and
students will enjoy
the convenience
and quality of
technologysupported learning
opportunities
Invest in faculty by
identifying collaborative
and interdisciplinary and
multidisciplinary grants,
projects and revenue
generating partnering
opportunities
Staff will have the
requisite training
and resources to
support their client’s
needs effectively
Tasks
Year one
Obtain approval from
Provost for implementation
plan and budget that adds
human and financial
resources to advance
strategic e-Learning
initiatives
(Phase one funded 7/03)
Year one and ongoing
Formalize a “brokering”
program with academic
units for the purpose of
soliciting and attracting
multidisciplinary and
collaborative external
funding and support
Metrics
Amount of funding and
reallocated staff and
budgets directed towards
supporting this operation
Number of task completed
Number of clients
attracted to suite of
services
Amount of grants
identified and successfully
won
Quality of proposal
outcomes
Number of strategic
internal and external
partnerships
Year One
Establish an incentive
program to provide
instructors and instructional
developers with the
knowledge and support to
advance instructional
technology strategies
Survey users to determine
satisfaction, access
results, and new identify
needs
Number of instructors and
developers applying for
funding
(In progress 7/03)
Qualitative and
quantitative impact of
incentives
Year two
Replenish the Innovation
Investment Loan/Grant
Fund with cash and rate
funds to support front-end
development costs of
college E-Learning
initiatives with 50%
payback.
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
14
Number of profitable
programs launched
Year two
Replicate Ohio State’s Pew
Grant for Course Redesign
e-Learning cost savings
model (initially developed
for Introductory Statistics) in
other curricula
Number of programs
successfully adopting plan
Student assessment of
improved learning
Reduction in number of
students closed out of
courses and number of
course completions
(In progress 7/03)
Amount of cost savings
Build research and develop
partnerships with peers,
vendors and professional
organizations to further the
advancement of e-Learning
on our campus, within the
workforce and outside the
State boundaries
Year one and ongoing
Support and pilot new and
emerging educational
methodologies and
technologies under the
Libraries/IT joint Digital
Union project (housed in
370 SEL)
Number of methodologies
and technologies
successfully adopted and
mainstreamed
Number of partnerships
built and funds collected
to support research
(Opening 1/04)
Invest in IT staff (central
and distributed) by
supporting professional
development and career
advancement
Year one and ongoing
Work with HR to provide
career advancement
opportunities
Customer satisfaction
surveys
Number of staff retained
Coordinate professional
development and training
opportunities
Staff satisfaction surveys
(In progress 7/03)
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 3: Policies and procedures conducive to
offering e-Learning
Ohio State’s policies and procedures are not conducive to offering e-Learning opportunities to
students on campus and at a distance, especially to non-traditional and non-resident students.
This is one of the primary reasons that Ohio State lags behind its benchmark institutions and
other Ohio colleges and universities. There is a lack of clear and consistent policies related to eLearning including intellectual property ownership, faculty workload, class size, tuition and fees,
funding distribution, creation and delivery of non-credit and certificate programs, graduate school
admission requirements, course approval processes and policies for admissions, registration,
financial aid, etc. Few procedures outline ways to authenticate exams, accept online tuition
payments, accommodate for a flexible academic calendar or differentiate the funding and credit
mechanisms between continuing education and central administration. A major e-Learning
initiative will affect everything from faculty workload to tuition and state subsidy funding. Although,
over the years, numerous committees with broad representation have been formed to address
many of these issues, few recommendations have been implemented. Finally, on the national
front, if distance programs are ever to achieve their full potential, policies and laws must be
updated to reflect the changing environment.
Learners, faculty, administrators, employers, funding agencies, and policymakers are demanding
proof of effectiveness in e-Learning offerings. While pedagogical integrity of course and program
content is evaluated within the academic units, there is little oversight concerning the quality of
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
15
online delivery. The Ohio Learning Network has addressed this issue in a recently published
5
report to its board . However, the university, successful at evaluating teaching, has yet to adopt
and approve criteria for assuring quality in the delivery of online course components and courses.
Oftentimes, course content is transferred directly to digital formats without taking into
consideration the inherent capabilities of technology to transform and transcend traditional
learning into engaging and interactive formats through the use of rich multimedia, a variety of
synchronous and asynchronous communication tools, interactive exercises, simulations and
problem-based scenarios, 24/7access, and the broad reach of the Internet.
Lastly, it takes time and effort to develop high quality, interactive e-Learning experiences, yet
there are very few intrinsic and extrinsic incentives and rewards for faculty even to improve their
basic information technology literacy and skills, let alone sign on to build full-fledged distance
learning courses. Junior faculty often are discouraged from using new technologies in their
teaching practice because it might encroach upon their research agendas and affect their
chances to earn promotion and tenure and other meritorious awards.
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 3: Policies and procedures conducive to offering e-Learning
Goal
Desired Outcome
Objectives
Advocate for and
develop policies
and procedures
conducive to
supporting and
delivering eLearning,
especially distance
learning, within and
outside the State of
Ohio
Supportive and
clearly delineated
policies and
procedures will
allow Ohio State to
offer quality eLearning, especially
distance learning,
that is competitive
with its peer
institutions and
responsive to the
needs of its user
population
Gain a better
understanding of the
competitive and
collaborative e-Learning
environments of our peer
institutions and Ohio’s
colleges and universities
Develop and support
policies and procedures
that are conducive to
offering quality, creditbased e-Learning offerings
Tasks
Year one and ongoing
Inventory and monitor eLearning procedures and
policies throughout the CIC
(Initiated 6/02)
Year one
Determine whether Ohio
State’s distance learning
offerings fill a niche within
the state by collaborating
with OLN to inventory state
institutions
Year one
Resolve e-Learning issues
through policy and
procedural solutions using
collaborative processes
involving many factions of
the academic community
Metrics
Evaluate findings to
determine whether Ohio
State’s distance learning
offerings are on par with
the CIC
Report recommending
programmatic change
based on findings
Number of issues
resolved
Survey of user perception
on improvements to the
system
(In progress 11/03)
Year one
Ensure quality in new
modes of delivery through
OAA curricular oversight of
credit-based, distance
learning offerings
Student satisfaction
Growth in enrollment
(In progress: OAA’s
Curricular control
Committee, 7/03)
5
Ohio Learning Network Task Force on Quality in Distance Learning, “Quality Learning in Ohio @ a Distance,” Decmber 2002.
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
16
Year one
Recommend to that Council
on Libraries and Information
Technology clarify and
revise intellectual property
(IP) policy issues on
ownership of online content
and courses
Revised IP policy in place
by predetermined date
(In progress: Office of
Technology transfer
leading, 7/03)
Year two
Develop fair revenue
sharing models for distance
learning between faculty,
colleges and the university
Year two
Implement and widely
disseminate IP policy
Number of faculty
participating
Amount of revenue
collected and shared
Number of instructors
aware of and satisfied with
new policy
Increased number of
instructors submitting
content to online
environments
Number of successful
revenue sharing
partnerships
Year two
Advocate for a faculty
academic reward system
that encourages integrating
educational technology into
teaching, research and
service
Number of faculty eLearning users who are
tenured and promoted
Student evaluations
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 4: Student access to e-Learning resources,
support and offerings
Research indicates that easily accessible student services are one of the most important
components of a successful distance learning program. Ohio State support services are diffused
for the remote learner. They are difficult to locate, not available beyond standard work hours and
may not be Web-enabled. Ohio State lacks:
•
A single point of presence to funnel all e-Learning requests and services comprising a
call center and a customizable portal or gateway to virtually link the university’s
decentralized resources in one place that is accessible anywhere and anytime.
•
Social services for students who do not physically come to campus, but still require
health care information, career and academic advising, access to a virtual bookstore and
library materials and social interaction with other online peers.
•
A quick and streamlined enrollment process that enables students to sign up and pay for
courses over the Web and immediately be authenticated within the Ohio State system so
that they can begin their courses and access relevant resources without a delay.
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
17
On a related topic, the university loses out on an opportunity to build online brand name
recognition because distance learning courses and programs offered by the colleges
departments, and through Continuing Education may be both episodic and decentralized. No
campus entity is charged with developing and managing a branding program or standards for the
decentralized units to adopt. Ohio State is a name that is equated with diverse and high-quality
education. Branding translates into visibility, which can increase enrollments. It also provides for a
graphic interface and design system that is consistent and responsive to users, especially those
with special needs, and makes it easier for students to find and navigate through relevant
information.
Finally, while the academic community has excellent access to published materials through
OhioLink, the state’s online library system, it lacks coordinated access to unpublished institutional
data, information, and knowledge. An innovative Knowledge Bank Network project, designed to
embrace the university’s vast amount of published and unpublished data, information and
knowledge into a usable and accessible enterprise-wide system has great promise, but it is only
in the conceptual stage.
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 4: Student access to e-Learning resources, support and
offerings
Goal
Desired Outcome
Objectives
Provide and
coordinate student
access to eLearning and other
institutional
knowledge
resources
Students taking
courses at Ohio
State will have onestop access to
services and
resources
regardless to
whether they come
to campus or
access the
university at a
distance
Initiate an end-to-end
solution for developing and
delivering distance learning
courses, programs and/or
degrees
Tasks
Year one
Inventory campus eLearning services and
resources provided by
colleges, OAA, OES,
Advising, Bursar’s office,
CE, etc.
Year two
Realign campus eLearning services and
resources when and where
appropriate to support
seamless access to OSU
processes and courses
Year two
Collaborate with OES to
plan and develop an online
admission and registration
process for credit-based
DL courses
(In progress 11/03)
Collaborate with CE to
streamline administrative
and student support
procedures
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
18
Metrics
Survey to evaluate student
and faculty satisfaction
Better use of resources
dedicated to e-Learning
across the system
User satisfaction surveys
Number of users
Year two
Develop and implement
online orientation program
for distance learners
User satisfaction surveys
Feedback from
assessments
Investigate and implement
best practices for
assessment
Year one
Develop a consistent
branding for Ohio State’s
e-Learning offerings
Increased brand
awareness
Build reputation
Prestige in global eLearning venues and
markets
Year two
Develop and implement a
marketing strategy and
materials
Create a point of presence
online portal for Ohio
State’s distance learning
offerings
Year one
Redesign the TELR
Website to work towards a
single, web-based, point of
presence for online course
listings and student, faculty
and staff support
Increase in enrollments
Survey of users perception
of ease of use and ability to
locate resources
Number of hits
(Completed 9/03)
Year two
Expand the TELR Website
into a robust and
customizable portal linking
e-Learning services across
campus and the regional
campuses
Coordinate with existing
student services to build a
user-friendly, student
service web presence to
meet the needs of remote
learners
Provide remote students
with support structure
similar to their resident
counterparts
Year one
Pilot the expansion of the
OIT Technology Support
Center/Help Desk to add a
Distance Learning Call
Center with an online
student services
component
(Initiated conversations
with Help Desk. Adding
to Knowledge Base.,
7/03)
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
19
Survey of users perception
of ease of use and ability to
locate resources
Number of hits
Demonstrated excellent
service levels and
increased user satisfaction
Review of pilot evaluation
with decision to build or
outsource
Year two
Establish a Distance
Learning Call Center (inhouse or outsourced) to
address general
information requests and
technological, academic,
and student service issues
Demonstrated excellent
service levels and
increased user satisfaction
Increased student use and
enrollments with less
attrition
Lower user service costs
Increased visibility in
market
Increase the number of
Ohio State courses listed in
OLN’s OhioLearns! and the
number of students enrolled
Year one
In collaboration with OES
and OAA, devise a method
to track, update and report
e-Learning statistics and
activity to OBR and OLN
OBR requirements
satisfactorily met
Improved accounting of eLearning activity
Number of courses listed in
OhioLearns!
Number of new students
enrolled in Ohio State’s
listed distance learning
courses/programs
Partner with the University
Libraries and others to
create and manage a
nationally recognized
institutional knowledge
repository
Year two
Provide academic
community with training
and support to build and
access learning object
collections
Expand breadth and usage
of the repository
(In progress. All TELR
grants require Learning
Object deliverable.
Collaborating with
Knowledge Bank to host
7/03)
Number of community
members trained and
perceived quality of training
and support
Number of objects
submitted and number of
hits
Survey of user satisfaction
National visibility
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 5: A technology infrastructure to support a
mission- critical e-Learning enterprise
The functional requirements of an e-Learning operation necessitate the investment in multiple
technology solutions and skilled support personnel to run them. Examples include an enterpriselevel course management system, a robust streaming video infrastructure and a contentmanagement repository. These solutions must be periodically upgraded and staff must be trained
so that they can keep current with the constantly changing technology. Ohio State has already
has made investments in technology solutions which could potentially address some functional
requirements; however, formal evaluation and additional investments need to be made in
coordination with the colleges. This is especially true as faculty, staff and students request more
technology support for delivering noncredit courses, conducting research, using rich media, and
facilitating student interaction.
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
20
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 5: A technology infrastructure to support a mission-critical eLearning enterprise
Goal
Desired Outcome
Objectives
Provide Ohio
State’s academic
and research
community with the
technology
infrastructure to
support access to
easy to use, Webenabled e-Learning
productivity tools
and services
Ohio State’s
academic
community will have
the computing
power and
infrastructure
required to support
a broad spectrum of
educational
technology
methodologies and
practices
Provide faculty and
students with technologies
that support and extend
teaching and learning
Provide seamless and
quality course
management support for
Ohio State’s credit and
non-credit courses and
programs
Tasks
Year one
Provide scalable, robust
and reliable academic
systems infrastructure
Year one
Lead a formal, system
wide evaluation of
enterprise-level course
management systems
(Evaluation complete.
Decision to be made by
7/04)
Select best solution and
implement installation
Provide migration paths
and training
Year one
Pilot process to extend use
of the course management
system (WebCT) to
noncredit offerings
Develop cost recovery
model
Metrics
Poll users to define needs
Evaluate user feedback
Evaluate responses
gathered from formal
evaluation and weigh
against available human
and fiscal resources
Number of new system
users (instructors and
students)
Survey users to determine
quality of service
Number of requests for
service
Survey instructor and
student satisfaction with
process
(Completed 9/03)
Year two
If feasible, support
noncredit courses within
CMS structure
Number of units using
service
Model covers costs of
supplying service
(Completed 9/03)
Governance Plan
Organization
The central e-Learning organization described in this document is composed of three functional
clusters: Business Services, Design and Deliver and Support (Figure 1). The organization mirrors
the major activities that make up the e-Learning “supply chain” and comprises program planning,
product design, development and assessment and user support. Staff needs have been matched
across functions with assignments, determined by project requirements, skill sets and interest. The
staff report to the deputy chief information officer. An advisory committee reports to the provost
with a dotted reporting line to the deputy CIO. The organization is rounded out with administrative
support and a User’s Council reporting to the deputy CIO. The organization is built on the premise
that it will be able to closely interface with existing units within the Office of the CIO and the
university. (Detailed descriptions of organizational roles can be found in Appendix VII.)
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
21
E-Learning
Functional Organization
DRAFT
November 2002
Provost
CIO
Advisory
Committee
Administration
Deputy CIOs
Users Council
Admin Support
Business
Services
Market Research
Marketing and
Promotion
Business
Support Interface
Design and
Delivery
CIO
Comm Team
External Affairs
Project Management
Resource
Development
Universitywide
Office of Research
Tech Transfer
College of Business
University Relations
Continuing Ed
P-12 Initiatives
General Counsel
Content
Delivery
Entrepreneurial
Opportunities
Research and
Development
Technology
Support Interface
CIO
Programming
System Administration
DBA Administration
WebCT Operations
A/V Engineering
Classroom Design
and Support
Networking
Emerging Technologies
Support
Faculty/Staff
Support and
Training
Student Services
Universitywide
College/Unit Ed Tech
and Technical Staff
Disabilities Services
Office of Technology
Licensing
Public TV/Radio
Course
Management
System Support
Academic Student
Support Interface
CIO
Technology Support Center
Universitywide
Enrollment Services
Bursar
Academic Affairs
Academic Advising
Career Services
Continuing Ed
Faculty and TA Support
Libraries
Disabilities Services
College/Unit Ed Tech
and Technical Staff
Figure 1: Functional Organization Chart
Threats, Risks and Mitigating Actions
Implementing a centralized e-Learning support service, especially as it relates to distance
learning, does not come without associated threats and risks. These generally fall into three
categories: Financial, Programmatic and Infrastructure. What follows is a chart delineating
the threats and risks paired with solutions for addressing them.
Financial
Threats and Risks
Mitigating Actions
Loss of revenue due to
misjudged market and
program expenses
Escalating program
development and
technology costs
Provide market analysis, business planning, and financial forecasting in
order to better understand the cost of entering the market
Unplanned costs of
maintaining equipment
Devise a mechanism to ensure cyclic, rate-funded renewal and
replacement of technology assets
Phase in the implementation strategy based on financial forecasting
Build or join consortia to create economies of scale when negotiating
with vendors
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
22
Programmatic
Lack of funding for new,
critical, student-oriented
support functions
Place and finance student-oriented support functions apart from
instruction and content delivery
Student dissatisfaction
and withdrawal from
courses/program
Provide technology literacy options for resident students and suite of
student support and social services for remote students
Constantly survey stakeholders to collect feedback on existing services
to better understand needs
Conduct exit interviews with students who withdraw from programs
Plan not supported by
deans
Canvass deans regularly for input. Design programs to meet their
needs
Work closely with college IT staff to complement their efforts
Provide clearly defined ROI
Lack of faculty interest in
using e-Learning
Provide better conduits for communication
Provide faculty incentives with clearly defined ROI
Infrastructure
Faculty resistance to
change in academic
culture and mission. ELearning is perceived as
threatening or as an addon to existing structures
and not as a new way of
teaching and learning
Educate faculty and administrators by working one-on-one and
customizing training and support to meet their discipline-specific needs
Lack of student interest in
using e-Learning
Invest in communication, public relations, and marketing services to
promote Ohio State’s educational brand
Insufficient technical
infrastructure
Value e-Learning as a mission critical-operation and support
accordingly.
Equipment failures
Run redundant operations
Work with cohort groups of faculty
Collect and share best practices
Provide meaningful faculty incentives
Hire or realign talented staff
Inability of technology to
scale to Ohio State’s
needs
Manage expectations
Carefully evaluate technical specifications prior to purchase
Communicate with user groups and peer institutions
Rewards
The rewards for implementing this e-Learning implementation strategy plan are numerous and
directly affect the entire university community and learners within the State of Ohio and beyond.
The first and foremost reward is that this plan supports and advances many of the information
technology initiatives proposed by Ohio State’s Academic Plan. The Academic Plan state’s that
“…we must help our students -whatever their field of study - become fully conversant with the
latest available technology… We must equal or surpass our benchmark institutions in the use of
technology for teaching, learning, research, and overall effectiveness.” The rewards associated
align directly with the Academic Plan in three distinct ways: 1) improving learning and the reach of
education; 2) improving access to knowledge; and 3) increasing Ohio State’s prestige and
visibility.
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
23
Improving Learning and the Reach of Education
Implementing this e-Learning strategy will increase Ohio State’s ability to deliver technologyenriched education programs in classrooms and online, locally and worldwide. This unit is tasked
with meeting the needs of its student clientele by working towards enabling technology to improve
learning, and ultimately, the quality of an Ohio State student’s education. Technology, used for its
inherent capabilities of increasing interaction, providing anytime access to credible data,
information and knowledge, and delivering educational content using multimedia modalities, has
the potential to inspire students to become curious, disciplined, and passionate about learning.
When attention is paid to matching instructional strategies with meaningful technology delivery
solutions, students benefit from engaging learning environments customized to meet their
particular learning styles. Programs can be custom-designed around the needs and interests of
the recipient instead of around the scheduling and resource needs of the provider.
Online technology pushes pedagogy to the forefront. Faculty, students, instructional designers,
and other practitioners are using a number of new information technologies to improve learning
outcomes, create new models, and place more responsibility for learning on the learners
themselves. Furthermore, students who use educational technology are more apt to be
information literate and thus are better prepared for meeting competitive career and/or advanced
degree requirements. Technology can also leverage research into the learning environment and
introduce students to higher order thinking earlier in their academic careers. In addition, students
with special needs are better served if they have access to adaptive technologies and alternative
course offerings.
Lastly, offering online sections of select over-enrolled introductory courses can alleviate the
perpetual problem resident students have with closed sections. This can improve graduation
rates and reduce attrition, along with expanding capacity to meet expected growth in enrollments.
Improving Access to Knowledge
It is no longer necessary for educational programs to be built around the assumption that
students and teachers must meet face-to-face as a group for learning to take place – broadband
telecommunications allows learners successfully to share virtual space as well as physical space.
E-Learning opens up new markets for students who want to access Ohio State’s offerings from a
distance at times convenient to their varied lifestyles and busy schedules. This is a relatively
untapped market for Ohio State and it spans a broad and diverse audience. High school students
could prepare for successful transitions into Ohio State by taking online versions of college-level
or advance placement courses that would aid in first year retention rates and attract top students
from across the country. Colleges could develop courses that provide pathways for students
enrolled in two-year programs to articulate into select Ohio State four-year degree programs.
Adult learners could overcome geographical barriers to higher education by enrolling in flexible
graduate and professional degree programs that do not dislocate them from work and home.
Employers already make use of Ohio State’s Continuing Education services by contracting with
the university to deliver corporate training and workforce development. As more and more jobs
demand higher levels of education, this need will grow. In addition, the university can reach out to
its alumni and offer programs that meet professional and personal growth goals, ultimately
fostering better relationships and loyalties with the university.
Both resident and remote students will be rewarded with better access to the university’s eLearning offerings and support services through a single point-of- presence portal. This virtual
consolidation of online e-Learning services will alleviate confusion on where faculty, staff and
students and external users go for information and support.
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
24
The campus community also will benefit from a realigned centralized e-Learning unit that can
offer a better coordinated and a higher quality level of service and support. The university benefits
from using its resources more effectively and taking advantage of economies of scale.
Lastly, as the initiative to maximize the intellectual capital of Ohio State’s academic community
moves forward, access to quality course content will grow. Ohio State’s constituents will not only
have access to OhioLink’s vast collection of published materials, but to the Ohio State Knowledge
Bank’s collections of text and rich media, course materials and learning objects. Faculty who
submit, access, preserve, and share educational content are better prepared to integrate
technology into teaching and learning. They can build engaging and interactive learning
experiences using multimedia and streaming video to complement text-based content and
learning objects. They also are better positioned to use the inherent capabilities of technology to
leverage their research into the learning environment, which translates into higher order learning
experiences for Ohio State students.
Increasing Ohio State’s Prestige and Visibility
The Academic Plan stresses the need to be a leader in all areas of teaching, research, and
outreach and engagement. Although this e-Learning strategy does not make recommendations
for a spin-off, degree-granting online entity, it does recommend a coordinated e-Learning strategy
that will improve the competence, confidence, and effectiveness of its faculty. By focusing
distance learning offerings, support and services in a single point of presence, Ohio State will
build a brand identity that will increase its prestige and visibility amongst its benchmark peers.
Ohio State will be known for high-quality online education directed towards niche markets of
proven need. Ohio State also benefits by serving as good stewards of the land-grant, outreach
and engagement mission because it has wisely invested in using technology to extend programs
to reach a broader Ohio citizenry.
Ohio State has gained prestige and visibility in the research and development activities of TELR
staff and the published work of faculty associates with TELR projects. This year alone, TELR has
solicited almost $800,000 in collaborative grants with faculty to explore a diverse set of issues
including learning objects, new paradigms for teaching and learning, and learning communities.
TELR staff members are disseminating information about the innovative work being done at Ohio
State through international conference presentations, postings to professional listservs, and
through articles accepted into international academic and trade journals.
Financial Implications
Revenue
The Academic Plan predicts “…that the substantial resources that will be required to seed
distance learning programs over the next several years have the potential for significant net
earnings in the longer term.“ As previously discussed, distance learning is a growing market,
however, it has proven not to be the revenue enhancement that some academic administrators
imagined. It is very expensive and time consuming to develop high-quality, media-rich, interactive
learning experiences that must be competitively priced in order to attract savvy education
shoppers. As a result, few virtual universities have turned a profit and many have closed down or
have been merged back into the academic fray. Since the courses are online, competition is no
longer the institution 20 miles away, but the world. Within the local Columbus market instructional
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
25
6
design services are priced at $210 per hour . In today’s environment, the university’s that are
most successful in offering full spectrum e-Learning solutions choose to expand access to quality
education for both its resident and remote audiences, not solely to make money. However,
successful implementation of technology-enhanced knowledge dissemination relies on the
university’s ability to explore and implement new and innovative funding and revenue models.
Although resources are becoming scarce, this is a time when higher education needs to invest
more not less in technology to provide quality education to students, to pursue state priorities,
and to achieve desires efficiencies.
The budget requested for this implementation strategy is for a transitional investment to build and
staff the central e-Learning organization, which, in turn, will work with its advisory committee to
identify and solicit additional funds to roll out a complete solution.
Projected Costs
Many of the tasks listed in the “Implementation Plan” section of this report do not require new
money, but the commitment of knowledge, time and energy of dedicated educational and
information technology staff. Others do have funding obligations requiring both rate and cash
allocations. The budget items directly align with the tasks required to meet the previously stated
goals, outcomes and objectives. A budget would reflect what it would take to launch a centralized
unit to support the full spectrum of e-Learning activities. However, the use of educational
technology is heavily weighted towards supporting supplemental and blended environments used
by the approximately 50,000 students on campus, not the limited number of students accessing
Ohio State’s resources at a distance. The budget would not take into account the general fund
support and revenue earnings realized by Continuing Education, a fee-for-service entity reporting
to Outreach and Engagement, that contracts with units inside and outside the university to offer
credit and noncredit courses, certificates and degrees. Continuing Education currently provides
similar, but limited, services to meet the needs of remote learners. However, they do not scale to
a universitywide implementation nor address academic rigor. Additionally, many departments use
profits earned by their own credit and noncredit distance learning operations to subsidize distance
learning student services.
The Offices of the CIO have allocated $1,132,889 to establish this unit. $670,259 was reallocated
from OIT when 11 of the 13 staff members from Courseware Design and Development Services,
Visual Design Services, and Learning Technologies Center Multimedia merged with the 4.5 staff
of TELR in November 2002. Two instructional technology staff members were detained by OIT
and assigned to other units. A detailed budget will be submitted as a separate document.
Funding sources might include additional reallocations within the Offices of the CIO, human and
financial resources from realignment of units within the university (as recommended by the
Distance Learning/Continuing Education Committee), the Office of Academic Affairs, and the
Colleges and regional campuses. Continuing Education and TELR could devise a revenue
sharing relationship in which TELR provides the academic and support services for credit bearing
courses and curricula. External funds to support equipment, research and development and
faculty and staff support could be solicited from state funding allocations, grants, vendor
partnerships, and possibly capital requests and debt financing.
6
“Labor Costs,” KMI, Columbus, OH, 2002.
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
26
Appendix I
Committee and Tasks Force e-Learning Reports (1997-2002)
•
McKinsey and Company (1997). “Distance Learning- Charting a Course in New Waters.”
Report for The Ohio State University Board of Trustees.
•
The Distance Education Pricing and Policy Task Force (1998). “Recommendations for an
Interim Distance Education Pricing and Costing Policy for Degree Courses That Expands
Enrollment.” Report for The Deans Learning Technology Committee.
Acker, Stephen (1999). “Distance Education Revenue Distribution and Development
Funding Models.” Prepared for the Deans’ Learning Technology Committee.
Escovitz, Alan (1999). “Integrating Technology into the Teaching and Learning Process at
The Ohio State University.” Prepared for the Office of Academic Affairs.
•
•
•
The Distance Education Task Force (2000). “Financing Technology Enhanced Learning
(TEL)” Prepared for the Deans’ Learning Technology Committee.
•
Technology Enhanced Learning, Research and Service Review Council Report (2000).
Prepared for the Distance Education Task Force of the Deans’ Learning Technology
Committee.
•
Soter, Anna (2000), White Paper on “Technology-Delivered Learning and Teaching:
Beyond To Do or Not to Do.” Prepared for the Ohio State University Academy of
Teaching Executive Council and FTAD.
•
Acker, Stephen and Strider, Eileen (2001). “The TELR Story.” Prepared for the Office of
Academic Affairs.
st
Distance Learning/Continuing Education Committee (2001). “21 Century Knowledge
Dissemination Strategy” (Phase I Final Report). Prepared for The Ohio State University
Board of Trustees.
Distance Learning/Continuing Education Committee Phase 2 Interim Report (2002).
Prepared for The Ohio State University Board of Trustees.
•
•
A Sampling of Report Recommendations
•
Develop a long-term strategy of restructuring of the university’s budget system to
provide appropriate financial incentives for technology-enhanced instruction and
distance education.
•
Create a pricing and revenue distribution policy for distance learning. One suggestion
was to use a simplified model figured on a student credit hour basis rather than
separate fee and subsidy FTE formulas. Distribute all fee, surcharge, and subsidy
revenue on a 75/25 basis with the larger share to the academic unit.
•
Provide incentives for the development of on-campus courses that meet the Academic
Plan and the university’s strategic needs of addressing closed courses, expanding
access to GEC courses, facilitating advanced placement, and creating courses
essential for developing an online degree program.
•
Create and sustain a Distance Education Innovation Fund to pilot projects.
•
Address subsidy revenue issues for non-resident graduate students.
•
Appoint an elective review and develop a feedback process in which expert peers carry
out review of faculty innovations in technological products and processes.
•
Develop a process for tracking Web-enhanced classroom courses and distance
education offerings.
•
Align the requirements of a student information system to meet the end-to-end needs of
distance learning students.
•
Examine promotion and tenure policy related to technology enhanced course
development.
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
27
•
Revamp Ohio State Policy on Patents and Copyright to clarify faculty intellectual
property rights when developing online content for distance education offerings.
•
Provide resources to expand technical support and student services for distance
education students.
•
Clarify how TELR, Continuing Education, University Communications, and individual
academic programs should work together to market and promote distance learning
opportunities.
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
28
Appendix II
Distance Learning and Continuing Education Committee Report
Recommendations (May 2001)
Recommendation1: The Committee advises the Provost to direct the University Registrar to
work with the CIO’s office and the Colleges to create a database that houses information about
DE activities in various units across campus. Units participating in DE activities should report their
offerings of web-based and technology enhanced courses quarterly for inclusion in a DE course
inventory.
Recommendation 2: The Committee advises the Provost to direct resources to the development
of the OSU Digital "Knowledge Bank." The Knowledge Bank will collect, organize, maintain, and
share important information about teaching and research at the University. Because lists of
faculty publications, a research directory, and a repository for digital learning objects will be part
of the Knowledge Bank, the Provost should direct the CIO’s office and the Colleges to explore the
use of a unified reporting system for faculty publications to facilitate the creation of an annual
inventory of knowledge assets associated with faculty research.
Recommendation 3: The Committee advises the Provost that centrally administered human and
financial resources associated with distance education and distributed learning should be
incorporated into a single organizational unit. The purpose of this unit would be to provide
leadership and support to colleges and the university community in the areas of instructional
design and technology, student services, and business planning related to DE and DL activities.
Where appropriate, consideration should be given to funding these activities through a 'fee-forservice' model. The leadership of that entity should be given the charge to develop an
implementation strategy for DE, complete with a business plan and identification of institutional
policies and procedures necessary to support distributed and distance education activities at
OSU.
Recommendation 4: The Committee advises the Provost to consider a funding model for
distance and distributed education that takes a venture capital investment approach. Due to the
costs and uncertainties regarding development of this activity, the central administration would
provide a one-time investment in a proposed project. Investment would be competitive and would
be based on evaluation of the business plan and expected net revenue return on that investment.
Investments would be recouped through either direct payback from the proposing unit or through
a profit sharing agreement with the proposing unit.
Recommendation 5: The Committee advises the Provost to review the business plans of the 6
programs that currently represent OSU’s distance education offerings before the next budget
cycle. Colleges with financially viable but under-capitalized programs should be advanced
additional resources in the short run.
Recommendation 6: The Committee advises the Provost to appoint an Advisory Committee to
revisit and finalize policy recommendations developed over the past few years regarding
intellectual property and develop additional policies associated with the Knowledge Bank,
Distance Education and Distributed Learning. This committee should also be charged with the
responsibility of reviewing programs and projects that request central administration investment.
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
29
Appendix III
Ohio State’s Academic Plan’s References to Educational Technology
• “We should also recognize that the development of distance learning programs can help
us benefit students from around the world while reducing the need for costly physical
facilities. In addition, following a period of transitional investment, distance learning
programs have great revenue-raising potential.”
• The University lags its benchmark institutions in the creation and dissemination of
distance-Learning programs. Fortunately, the substantial resources that will be required
to seed distance learning programs over the next several years have the potential for
significant net earnings in the longer term. Cost and revenue profiles for this initiative will
be developed within a new strategic Information Technology plan to be prepared by the
incoming Chief Information Officer.”
• “Build 25 state-of-the-art classrooms (5/yr for 5 years) in addition to the 85 for which
funding is in place while enhancing classroom cleanliness and providing modern
equipment.”
• “Provide faculty, staff, and students with the latest technology tools for leadership in
teaching, learning, research, and career development within the next 5 years.”
• “Focus on distance and web-based education programs, comprehensive student support,
on-campus Internet connectivity, infrastructure, remote connectivity, and a data strategy
to improve coordination, quality, and accessibility of information and response times.
Seek sponsored-research support to evaluate the effect of new technologies and
teaching methods on student learning. Create web-based and distance learning
programs that can reduce the incidence of closed courses in high-demand areas and
provide improved state-of-the-art Information Technology capabilities to improve the
quality of academic advising and other student support services.”
• “[Use] Information Technology capabilities to improve the quality of academic advising
and other student support services.”
• “We also need to utilize instructional technology and changes in the budget process to
more quickly and effectively respond to academic program choices in emerging areas,
such as Information Technology and Management.”
• “Become the catalyst for the development of Ohio’s technology-based economy. Increase
collaborations with the private sector to enhance research, successfully transfer
University technology, and provide experiential learning and career opportunities for
students.”
“Our continuing education programs, supplemented increasingly by distance learning,
make lifelong learning a reality for all citizens.”
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
30
Appendix IV
Stakeholder Needs
Resident Students
Resident students require access to e-Learning within their classrooms, in labs, at places where
they study, and in their dorms and homes. Campus-wide applications such as WebCT, the
university-supported course management system, provide easy access to course materials and
communication and productivity tools. Resident students’ needs include:
• Up-to-date hardware, peripherals, software, network access, and a safe and reliable
computing environment
• Seamless access to crucial information, data, knowledge and services accessible over
the Internet or telephone
• Expectations for anything, anywhere and anytime availability to courses and support
• Contextual resources to supplement classroom experience
• Information technology literacy to be better prepared to meet career and/or advanced
education goals
• Instructional strategies that match their learning styles
• Ease of preparation (orientation) and pathways (advising) for learning
• Access to over-enrolled general education courses
• Convenient alternatives to advanced placement testing and course offerings
• Innovative transitional pathways from high schools and two-year campuses to Ohio State
Remote Students
Remote students usually comprises adult learners who are returning to the university to upgrade
skills related to their career goals or to earn a credential such as a degree or certification. These
“non-traditional” students may live in the Columbus area or may reside anywhere within the world.
The U.S. Department of Education recently released a study showing that older women with
families and jobs were more drawn to undergraduate distance learning programs during the
7
1999-2000 academic year than were members of other groups . Eighty percent of these students
are already in the workforce. They are quickly adapting to new delivery trends and are beginning
to shop for education much the same way as they do for other products, based on brand identity,
price, convenience, and service. E-Learning also plays a significant role in workforce
development by providing targeted skill-based training to citizens across the state and beyond. It
also can serve the educational needs of homebound individuals and those with special access
needs.
Interestingly, the majority of remote students enrolled in distance learning courses are, in fact,
resident students. This is a national trend. These “local distance learners” seek out e-Learning
opportunities for the convenience and scheduling flexibility. On the undergraduate level, these
students are representative of the new breed of “nontraditional” traditional students. Seventythree percent of all undergraduates today are in some way "nontraditional” and they have many
of the same needs as the resident student. In addition, they require
•
24/7 access to course materials and academic and technical support
7
National Center for Education Statistics (2002). “Non-Traditional Undergraduates,”
http://nces.ed.gov//programs/coe/2002/analyses/nontraditional/index.asp
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
31
•
Branded credentials that represent a meaningful return-on-investment
•
Anytime-anyplace access to minimize time away from work and family
•
Focus on outcomes (learning) and competencies (practical knowledge)
•
Targeted, up-to-date content to meet professional and personal goals
•
Modular approach to self-paced courses and course content
•
Articulation pathways
Instructors
Full-time and adjunct faculty and graduate teaching assistants, are central to the e-Learning
experience as they provide the educational content along with intellectual engagement and
inquiry. While instructors are experts in their discipline, few have the time or skills to design and
develop technically sophisticated e-Learning materials. In respect to teaching, instructors need:
•
Up-to-date hardware, peripherals, software, network access and a safe and reliable
computing environment
•
Conveniently located instructional computer labs and Internet-ready classrooms
•
Readily available technical support
•
Educational technology and other professionals to design and develop their e-Learning
course components and courses
•
Professional training and education (technical literacy if necessary, but more
importantly, guidance on instructional strategies)
•
Software applications to simplify the process of designing, developing and delivering eLeaning.
•
Rewards that are both intrinsic (pride, accomplishment, positive student and peer
feedback) and extrinsic (funds, release time, tools, support, workload management,
revenue and royalties).
•
Credit for adopting technology in teaching in promotion and tenure and salary
decisions.
•
Protection of intellectual property in a policy that clearly defines ownership
•
Access to digital media and text-based educational content and resources
•
Access to the network and servers from work, home and on the road
•
Ability to use technology to advance their professional research and personal growth
goals
Information and Educational Technology Support Staff
IT staff play an integral role in content creation and course design, a time-consuming and costly
endeavor. Many universities are moving towards an “unbundled” course design model in which
faculty serve as subject matter experts, not instructional technology experts. That role is assigned
to professional design teams comprising instructional designers, visual designers, Web
programmers, writers, photographers, videographers, etc. Support staff also are responsible for
training, authoring, documentation and troubleshooting. A sampling of their needs include:
•
Up-to-date hardware, peripherals, software, network access, and a safe and reliable
computing environment
•
Professional training and education and access to current resources such as industry
publications, conferences, events, conventions, etc
•
Respect and merited recognition that their work is relevant to the university’s mission
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
32
•
Facilities conducive to working effectively that are easily accessible to campus clientele
•
Career ladder opportunities and incentives for advancement
•
Opportunity to experiment with and access to cutting-edge technology
•
Informal and formal internal communication conduits for leveraging individual strengths
and sharing knowledge and resources
Academic Leaders
Ohio State’s academic leaders (the president, provosts, deans, department chairs, etc.) have a
vested interest that information technology meets the campuses needs and serves the Academic
Plan. Their e-Learning needs are similar to other stakeholders and also include:
•
Academic experiences that meet the needs of a changing student population
•
The ability to serve rural and underserved urban populations, in line with the land-grant
mission and the state’s economic development goals
•
Technology solutions for existing challenges such as closed sections, space issues, etc
•
The ability to attract a high quality, diverse traditional and non-traditional student
populations
•
Loyal lifelong e-Learners and an engaged alumni community
•
The ability to recruit and retain top-notch, technology-savvy faculty
•
International visibility and prestige
•
Proven cost savings through effective use and alignment of personnel, resources, and
space allocations
•
The potential to generate revenue
Policymakers
The governor, congressional representatives, local politicians and members of the Ohio State
Board of Trustees and Ohio Board of Regents make policy and financial decisions about distance
learning that affects its growth and acceptance. In their minds, e-Learning can play an important
role in improving the state’s economic growth and promoting technology transfer opportunities.
They need e-Learning solutions to provide:
•
Improved economic benefits through technology-enhanced workforce development
•
Flexible and competitive educational opportunities to keep educated citizens living and
working in Ohio
•
P-12 teacher training resulting in improved instructional strategies and learning
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
33
Appendix V
The Ohio State University Information Technology Strategic
Plan Gap Initiatives
(November 2003 Version)
Action 1: Establish a Collaborative, Universitywide IT Funding Strategy, FY 2004 – FY 2005
Action 2: Improve Universitywide IT Communications and Enhance IT Education, Training and
Certification Programs for Staff, FY 2004 – FY 2008
Action 3: Improve Universitywide IT Governance Structure and Coordination of Resources, FY
2004 – FY 2008
Action 4: Enhance Network Access and Quality, FY 2004 – FY 2008
Action 5: Improve and Better Coordinate CyberSecurity, FY 2005 – FY 2008
Action 6: Establish and Enhance e-Learning Policies and Support Services, FY 2004 – FY 2006
Action 7: Enhance the Quality of Learning Environments and Increase the Number of Smart
Classrooms, FY 2004 – FY 2008
Action 8: Evaluate, recommend and implement an Integrated Student Information System, FY
2005 – FY 2008
Action 9: Increase Technical Support for Faculty, FY 2004 – FY 2008
Action 10: Increase Support for Research, FY 2004 – FY 2008
Action 11: Improve User Community Support, FY 2004 – FY 2008
Action 12: Develop and Implement a Knowledge Bank, FY 2004 – FY 2006
Action 13: Develop and Implement a Data Warehouse, FY 2004 – FY 2006
Action 14: Create an Enterprise-level Business Continuity Plan, FY 2005 – FY 2008
Action 15: Establish an IT Education, Training and Computer Literacy Program, FY 2006 – FY 2008
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
34
Appendix VI
Tasks and Timeline
F
‘02
Tasks
W
‘03
S
‘03
Su
‘03
F
‘03
W
‘04
S
‘04
Su
‘04
F
‘04
W
‘05
Inventory and monitor e-Learning procedures and
policies throughout the CIC.
Pilot process to extend use of the course
management system to noncredit offerings.
Develop cost recovery model.
Redesign the TELR Website to work towards a
single, web-based, point of presence for online
course listings support.
Provide scalable, robust and reliable academic
systems infrastructure.
Lead a formal, system wide evaluation of
enterprise-level course management systems.
Select best solution and implement installation.
Provide migration paths and training.
Realign internal resources to build unit by merging
OIT staff with TELR staff. Move OIT staff into
renovated space in BSE.
Obtain approval from Provost for implementation
plan and budget that adds human and financial
resources to advance strategic e-Learning
initiatives.
Work with HR to provide career advancement
opportunities and coordinate professional
development and training opportunities.
In collaboration with OES and OAA, devise a
method to track, update and report e-Learning
statistics and activity to OBR and OLN.
Canvass deans and college IT professionals to
determine which centralized services best meet
their needs.
Conduct an external review of Ohio State’s
existing distance learning programs and support
structure.
Inventory campus e-Learning services and
resources provided by colleges, OAA, OES,
Advising, Bursar’s office, CE, etc.
Restructure advisory groups and form an advisory
committee and user council to provide direction
and refine mission, goals and objectives.
Determine whether Ohio State’s distance learning
offerings fill a niche within the state by
collaborating with OLN to inventory state
institutions.
Increase communication and professional
development programming with college and
department instructional technology staff.
Formalize and expand the TELR Internship
Program to best serve the academic community.
Support and pilot new and emerging educational
methodologies and technologies under the
Libraries/IT joint Digital Union project.
Formalize a “brokering” program with academic
units for the purpose of soliciting and attracting
multidisciplinary and collaborative external funding
and support.
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
35
S
‘05
Establish an incentive program to provide
instructors and instructional developers with the
knowledge and support to advance instructional
technology strategies.
Resolve e-Learning issues through policy and
procedural solutions using collaborative processes
involving many factions of the academic
community.
Ensure quality in new modes of delivery through
OAA curricular oversight of credit-based, distance
learning offerings.
Recommend to that Council on Libraries and IT
clarify and revise IP policy issues on ownership of
online content and courses.
Develop a consistent branding for Ohio State’s eLearning offerings. Build reputation. Develop and
implement an e-Learning marketing strategy and
materials.
If feasible, support noncredit courses within CMS
structure.
Pilot the expansion of the OIT Technology
Support Center/Help Desk to support a Distance
Learning Call Center and online student services
Replenish the Innovation Investment Loan/Grant
Fund to support front-end development costs of
college E-Learning initiatives with 50% payback.
Replicate Ohio State’s Pew Grant for Course
Redesign e-Learning cost savings model
Develop fair revenue sharing models for distance
learning between faculty, colleges and the
university.
Implement and widely disseminate IP policy.
Advocate for a faculty academic reward system
that encourages integrating educational
technology into teaching, research and service.
Realign campus e-Learning services and
resources when and where appropriate to support
seamless access to OSU processes and courses.
Collaborate with OES to plan and develop an
online admission and registration process for
credit-based DL courses.
Expand the TELR Website into a portal linking eLearning services across campus and the regional
campuses. Coordinate with existing student
services to build a user-friendly, student service
web presence to meet the needs of remote
learners.
Establish a Distance Learning Call Center (inhouse or outsourced) to address general
information requests and technological, academic,
and student service issues.
Provide academic community with training and
support to build and access learning object
collections. Expand breadth and usage of the
repository.
Develop and implement online orientation
program for distance learners. Investigate and
implement best practices for assessment.
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
36
Appendix VII
Organizational Roles
Administration
This administrative unit provides engaged leadership and strategic vision, along with tactical
oversight of e-Learning operations. Responsibilities include developing a support structure and
guidelines that enable the central organization to assist the colleges and regional campuses to
effectively developing and delivering of high quality e-Learning content. Key responsibilities
include:
•
Setting strategic direction and realistic goals with corresponding metrics
•
Implementing continuous improvement strategies to ensure the organization is
responsive to the university’s and the State of Ohio’s needs
•
Developing and assessing programs and products
•
Managing and realigning staff to meet these new challenges
•
Providing fiscal oversight
•
Soliciting internal and external funding and exploring fee-for-service business
opportunities
•
Building partnerships within and outside the boundaries of the university
•
Contributing to building Ohio State’s international reputation
•
Serving as a communication conduit between centralized and decentralized IT staff
•
Facilitating policy development and communicating changes to the academic community
The Advisory Committee
A standing advisory committee is necessary for the e-Learning organization to effectively work
within the university environment and serve as a champion for issues related to the entire
continuum of e-Learning, from supplemental to fully online use. The provost appoints members of
this executive-level committee. The tentative list of appointees includes OAA Student Affairs, and
University Relations administration, college and regional campus deans, department chairs, IT
management staff and statewide business and education leaders. This committee reports to the
provost with dotted line reporting to the deputy chief information officer. Key responsibilities
include:
•
Guiding the selection of distance learning investments
•
Identifying resources and funding
•
Recommending policy revisions and new policies and procedures
•
Reviewing Ohio State’s new and existing distance learning programs
•
Championing new education paradigms
Users’ Council
The User Council advises the deputy CIO. Its membership comprises faculty, staff and students
who are integrating technology into teaching and learning environments. The CIO will request that
the dean’s identify and appoint members. Key responsibilities include:
•
Guiding the selection of distance learning investments
•
Advocating for acceptance of new education paradigms
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
37
•
Providing constructive feedback about and directing e-Learning
•
Testing new processes and products
Business Services
The organization must have a clear understanding of discipline-specific e-Learning markets in
order to guide investment in Ohio State’s distance learning programs and products.
Market Research
The first steps for designing and developing courses, programs or degrees at a distance
are conducting market research, conceiving a business plan and forecasting financial
success. It is essential to complete these tasks prior to making any investments in time
and funds to subsidize upfront development expenses. Market research takes advantage
of the expertise housed on campus and within the College of Business and Continuing
Education. Market research staff will work closely with the Project Management and
Communications teams and the Accounting Office within the Office of the CIO. Key
responsibilities include:
•
Working with academic and business units to identify core markets
•
Conducting thorough market assessments to test new concepts and initiatives
•
Reviewing existing programs to determine financial viability and progress
towards meeting performance objectives
•
Developing business plans for new programs
•
Providing current information on peer institutions and on other major university
distance learning initiatives
•
Researching current and future profitable markets that match Ohio State’s
strengths
Marketing and Promotion
Once an idea is deemed successful it must be carefully marketed, branded and promoted
in order to attract new student audiences. This function forges close relationships with the
Office of the CIO Communication Team and the campus-wide University Relations. Key
responsibilities include:
•
Generating awareness and demand for e-Learning programs/products
•
Ensuring that users have an accurate and thorough understanding of the
campuses’ e-Learning roles, missions, and strategic directions
•
Providing marketing strategies that result in high impact, targeted advertising
placement and promotional campaigns
•
Evaluating the success of the marketing strategies
•
Working with campus or external experts to develop and promote an e-Learning
branding system for Ohio State affiliated e-Learning programs/products
•
Ensuring Ohio State is represented at strategic educational and industry events
Entrepreneurial Opportunities
In order to be successful and profitable the organization must create new avenues for
collaboration and partnership with both the public and private sectors. These
relationships, in turn, will foster the expansion of educational, economic, and social
opportunities for the university. The new e-Learning organization will forge interinstitutional agreements on the basis of academic complementarities rather than
proximity. This may involve the formation of broader partnerships with peer universities
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
38
for the purpose of sharing educational technology resources across a wide range of
programs and services. Potential synergies will be identified and creative linkages
developed among academic departments, divisions, and regional campuses and
between other universities, government and strategic technology businesses. This
function aligns closely with the Office of the CIO’s External Affairs and relies on the
expertise within the university’s Office of Research, Technology Transfer, P-12 Initiatives,
Office of Development, and General Counsel. Key responsibilities include:
•
Identifying markets and mutually beneficial internal and external partnerships.
•
Identifying funding and, if appropriate, revenue generating opportunities.
•
Providing best practices for identifying and disseminating investment funding
and/or loans.
•
Providing clients with current information regarding entrepreneurial and grants
opportunities.
Design and Delivery
This function provides core design, development and delivery services to the academic
community. Staff working in this area must possess up-to-date, professional skills. These include
instructional, graphic and multimedia design, writing, and programming skills.
Resource Development
With the unbundling of courses, resource developers play an integral role in building eLearning materials. Staff tasked with resource development can then collaborate with
other technology resource developers across campuses and within the university’s Office
of Disabilities Services. Key responsibilities include:
•
Consulting with faculty about their e-Learning resource needs
•
Imparting technical and instructional knowledge and support
•
Developing course components, programs and/or learning products
•
Assisting faculty in evaluating the success of technologies used in teaching
•
Staying current in instructional technology theory and practice
•
Seeking ways to continuously improve operational efficiencies
•
Collaborating with the Libraries, Office of Research, and the colleges on building a
learning object repository (Knowledge Bank) with federated search capabilities.
Content Delivery
Teaching methodologies that work in a face-to-face classroom will not always transfer
successfully to an online environment. Taking advantage of technology’s inherent
qualities is integral to its successful application to the teaching and learning enterprise.
This requires not only an understanding of the pedagogy, but also a high-level of
technical expertise. This function interfaces with the Office of Information Technology
(OIT) technical teams including WebCT operations, system and database administration,
audio and video engineering, classroom design and support, networking, etc. Similar to
the Resource Development function, members of this group will work closely with the
other campus instructional technology resource developers and content delivers. Key
responsibilities include:
•
Consulting with faculty about their e-Learning delivery needs
•
Imparting technical and instructional knowledge and support
•
Staying current in instructional technology theory and practice
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
39
•
Seeking ways to continuously improve operational efficiencies
•
Matching content and audiences to the best choices in delivery modalities
•
Ensuring high quality and efficient delivery of program/products
•
Assisting faculty in evaluating the success of technologies used in delivering
content
Research and Development
Technology changes at a quick pace and it is essential that the university be aware of
new developments that affect teaching and learning in order to provide clients with the
best solutions, improve productivity, reduce redundancies, and save money. As an R-1
institution, Ohio State plays a leading role in the research and development (R&D) of new
applications, services and resources that promise to improve e-Learning. The R&D
component of the organization will serve as a “scout” to identify and explore new
technologies to seed, access and ultimately make these innovations operational. The
staff will work hand-in-hand with the Office of the CIO’s Emerging Technologies and
External Affairs teams and the University’s Office of Technology Licensing. Key
responsibilities include:
•
Exploring interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary R&D partnerships
•
Identifying faculty research opportunities
•
Seeking research grants and other funding opportunities
•
Fostering R&D through experimentation and testing of new innovative processes
and products
•
Working with vendors to provide Ohio State with emerging and new technologies
•
Identifying economies of scale such as cross-campus site licensing opportunities
Support
Supporting the developer (whether it be information technology staff or faculty) and the learner
ensures that skill development, technical support, online socialization, and other needs are met.
Faculty and Staff Training
Training assures that faculty have the skills and knowledge required to use technology
successfully in their teaching, research, and creative activities. It also assures that both
central and distributed IT staff gain the skills and knowledge to successfully do their jobs.
Key responsibilities include:
•
Providing targeted and convenient training opportunities in response to the user
community’s needs
•
Providing tiered levels of skill development
•
Providing up-to-date documentation for the user community
•
Incorporating user feedback into training and support
•
Expanding faculty and TA Development support services to include the application
of instructional technology for teaching residential and off-campus students and for
assessing technology-enhanced learning approaches
•
Providing ongoing workshops for faculty development in instructional technology
and pedagogy
•
Creating a centrally available resource for faculty to learn how, and what, to use to
enhance their instruction or research
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
40
•
Create flexible/modular central space staffed with technology experts working with
faculty to develop course materials
Student Services
As mentioned previously, research indicates that in order for distance learning programs
to be successful, they must provide a strong student service component. This begins the
moment a prospective student searches the OSU Website for information about Ohio
State’s distance learning offerings and follows that student through alumni standing. The
hallmark of a sound student service component is easy-to-find information and seamless
access to a full array of student services specifically designed for a student who most
likely will not have access to the physical campus.
The Student Services function aligns with OIT’s and the colleges’ technology support
centers. It interfaces with the university’s Enrollment Services, Bursar’s Office, Academic
Advising, Career Services, Libraries, and Disabilities Services, Continuing Education,
Faculty and TA and Development and other campus student services. Key
responsibilities include:
•
Ensuring necessary student services and academic resources are available to
remote students
•
Creating and managing a single, Web-based point of contact for distance learning
general information and student services
•
Overseeing a centralized, one-stop, multi-modal communications e-Learning
support center
•
Providing prospective distance learning students with IT literacy and skill
inventories to self-assess their likelihood of success as online learners
Course Management System (CMS) Support
This function is an extension of the Resource Development and Content Delivery
functions of the organization. WebCT, the university’s course management system, has
evolved into a mission critical operation. This function deals specifically with day-to-day
faculty, staff, and student CMS support and interfaces with OIT’s WebCT technical
operations, Technology Support Center. In addition to the CMS specific resource
development and content delivery functions, key responsibilities include:
•
Managing the CMS’s interface.
•
Providing up-to-date documentation for the user community.
•
Interfacing with the technical team so that decisions are made unilaterally.
•
Providing CMS related technical support in coordination with the Help Desk.
•
Testing upgrades and peripheral products.
•
Working closely with the vendor to improve product.
E-Learning Implementation Strategy and Plan
41