Sara Kim, PhD, Director, Associate Professor Instructional Design and Technology Unit, UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine Katherine Wigan, BS, MBA, Senior.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Ingenuity. Expertise. Results. Get Ahead Moving from Live Training to Blended Training.

Advertisements

Welcome Simulation Planning Workshop. Todays Objectives and Goals Learn from others who have been through the process Use the Simulation Planning Guide.

UCSC History. UCSC: A brief history 60s University Placement Committee A lot of field trips/interaction with employers.

OUR STRATEGIC PLANNING JOURNEY. Our Workplan Step One: Preparation May / June Start-up and planning meetings R&R; milestones; calendar; processes Training.

Products being integrated to create Home Base OpenClass Collaboration Schoolnet Instructional Tools and Assessment PowerSchool Student Information Core.

SIM- Data Infrastructure Subcommittee January 8, 2014.

Update on Goals 1 and 2 Curricular Domain Curricular Domain – accomplishments to date Developed baseline information about current level of faculty.

LMS RFP (LEARNING MANAGEMENT SYSTEM) The LMS Research Team Center for Instructional Technology December, 2011.

PATIENT-CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH INSTITUTE PCORI Board of Governors Meeting Washington, DC September 24, 2012 Sue Sheridan, Acting Director, Patient.

PREPARING FOR SACS Neal E. Armstrong Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs July 13, 2004.

New Web-Based Course Evaluation Services Available to Schools and Departments Presentation to Faculty Council November 6, 2009.

Open Library Environment Designing technology for the way libraries really work November 19, 2008 ~ ASERL, Atlanta Lynne O’Brien Director, Academic Technology.

WILU ’07 York U. Courseware and Collaboration: Teaming Up with Instructional Technology Liaisons Anne Fullerton Liaison Librarian Katherine LithgowLT3.

IT Strategic Planning Project – Hamilton Campus FY2005.

Process Management Robert A. Sedlak, Ph.D Provost and Vice Chancellor, UW-Stout Education Community of Practice Conference At Tusside in Turkey September.

Ricki Sabia, JD edCount, LLC Senior Associate and NCSC Technical Assistance and Parent Training Specialist Universal Design for Learning: Working to Create.

Part II: Strategic Planning for a Successful 1:1 Program

SDLC Phase 2: Selection Dania Bilal IS 582 Spring 2009.

1 Open Library Environment Designing technology for the way libraries really work December 8, 2008 ~ CNI, Washington DC Lynne O’Brien Director, Academic.

Professional Standards 2009 Suzanne Scott, Ph.D., IDEC, ASID, Megan Scanlan, Director of Accreditation,

Implementing ePortfolios in 6 Months Through an Open Source Solution NERCOMP SIG Ravi Ravishanker Beth Gordon Klingner Samantha Egan September 20, 2010.

1 EDUCUASE Live: Selecting & Implementing a Course Management System for Your Campus Implmenting Moodle at SUNY Delhi Patrick Masson Chief Information.

1. 2 Why is the Core important? To set high expectations –for all students –for educators To attend to the learning needs of students To break through.

Managerial Role – Setting the Stage Lesson 6 Jeneen T. Chapman John Madden Facilitators.

Christopher Wills ITEC77436 – Distance Education LMS Selection: Benefits, Drawbacks, and Implementation Considerations.

HIDALGO COUNTY ASSET MAPPING AND STRATEGIC PLANNING PROJECT Kickoff Meeting

VISIONING SESSION May 29, NWD Planning Grant  One year planning grant, started October 1, 2014; draft plan by September 30, 2015; final plan by.

Academic Assessment Task Force Report August 15, 2013 Lori Escallier, Co-Chair Keith Sheppard, Co-Chair Chuck Taber, Co-Chair.

Honors Level Course Implementation Webinar Honors Rubric and Portfolio Review Process October 7, 2013.

1:1 Computing Initiative RttT Fidelity Check Spring 2013.

TEAM-Math Teacher Leader Meeting October 28, 2004.

Accelerating Business Analysis SWOT.

Planning for Successful Simulation Simulation Planning Guide - A Guided Discussion.

Copyright © 2011– World Customs Organization Copyright © WCO-OMD 2011 WCO Leadership and Management Development Workshop Advisory Group Meeting October,

Professionalizing Mobility Management: Developing Standards and Competencies Julie Dupree, Easter Seals Association of Travel Instruction Conference August.

Assessment of Portal Options Presented to: Technology Committee UMS Board of Trustees May 18, 2010.

Lawrence M. Paska, Ph.D. Coordinator of Technology Policy Educational Design and Technology Updates.

Jackson County Public Schools Technology Plan Kimberly Body and Elizabeth Perin Liberty University Education 639.

Emergency Management Training and Education System Protection and National Preparedness National Preparedness Directorate National Training and Education.

Los Angeles Southwest College LACCD Trustee Accreditation Subcommittee Self-Study Overview December 14, 2005.

Professional Development Opportunities for the New Math Standards.

George Fitchett (Rush) & Lex Tartaglia (VCU) Teaching Research Literacy In CPE.

School Accreditation School Improvement Planning.

State Advisory Council Community Support Grant Summary Presentation for Policy Committee Meeting December 3, 2012.

Capabilities Analysis Briefing for Chancellor and Senior Leaders.

L21 Project Steering Committee Meeting February 1, 2013.

SPC Advisory Committee Training - TAC Fall 2015 Institutional Research President’s Office 1 Abridged from the SPC Advisory Committee Training on October.

SPC Advisory Committee Training Fall 2015 Institutional Research President’s Office SPC 10/9/20151.

United Way of Racine County Collectively Building an Educated Workforce.

Gordon State College Office of Institutional Effectiveness Faculty Meeting August 5, 2015.

Greta Smith, P.E. Associate Program Director, Project Delivery AASHTO Subcommittee on Design June 5, 2013.

Free Powerpoint Templates 1 The Right Fit: Finding a Learning Management System for Professional Development by Cari Murphy, PhD University of Idaho, Center.

Using NROC Content Getting Started with NROC Course Content Syllabi, Media Lessons, Assignments, Assessments, Instructor Guides and more… Module 3, Part.

Learning Management System Selection Framework Learning Management System Selection Committee Prepared by the Process Advisory Committee.

South High School CSC Meeting Succession Principal Selection Process September 9, 2015.

Choosing The Learning Management System for Miami University PROJECT UPDATE.

1 Oxford Professional Education Group Ltd Mastering Metrics An Introduction.

Strategic Program Subgroup Meeting December 8, 2016

The Role of Students in Program and Course Evaluation

CPE Rubric Applied to Government Agency

Harvesting the Benefits of QM Culture for Institutional Accreditation

How an Assessment Framework helped revitalize Program Review at JCCC

District of Innovation Update: International School Development

Center for Teaching & Learning at UNC Charlotte

A Story of Openness: The Transition From Blackboard Vista to Moodle

Overview of the FEPAC Accreditation Process

Foothill College Accreditation Self-Study Update

Post-Session Assignment

Delivering the SQE: next steps in implementation 18 December 2018

‘BOAT CHART’ PROJECT WORKPLAN

Presentation transcript:

Sara Kim, PhD, Director, Associate Professor Instructional Design and Technology Unit, UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine Katherine Wigan, BS, MBA, Senior Computer Programmer Instructional Design and Technology Unit, UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine March 6, 2012 International Association of Medical Science Educators Strategies for Selecting a Learning Management System: An Experience at the UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine

Introduction to Webinar Session  Learning Management Systems (LMS) serve as a backbone in medical schools for curriculum delivery, exam administration, and accreditation requirements.  LMS market offers 4 solutions: Commercial, Open- Source, Open-Source/Commercial, and Homegrown Products.  Today’s webinar presents the ongoing experiences at the UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine in our LMS review processes.

Guiding Principles of LMS Selection Technology Process People

UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine: Curriculum Context Act 1: People Needs Assessment, Leadership Buy In, Stakeholder Identification Act 2: Technology LMS Core Features, Available LMS Solutions for Review Act 3: Process LMS Review, Consensus Building, Follow up Activities Wrap Up: Lessons Learned Outline of Webinar Session 5

UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine Curriculum Map

ANGEL Learning Management System Ilios CMS Homegrown Patient Log CourseEval

Technology Resources at David Geffen School of Medicine Technology- Based Curriculum Support Online Educational Tool Development Online Educational Tool Development Research and Grant Writing

Timeline of LMS Adoption at David Geffen School of Medicine Adoption of ANGEL LMS  Purchased ANGEL in 2003  Local Hosting Option  2,000 Active Licenses = $20,000 per year

Timeline of LMS Adoption at David Geffen School of Medicine March 2011July 2012 December 2011 July 2014April 2015 October 2014 Formed LMS Advisory Committee Committee meeting with leadership Last ANGEL update to version 8.0 Deadline for fully launching the new LMS ANGEL support discontinued Via Blackboard ANGEL no longer available Via Blackboard Timeline of LMS Replacement Process Adoption of ANGEL LMS  Purchased ANGEL in 2003  Local Hosting Option  2,000 Active Licenses = $20,000 per year

Guiding Principles of LMS Selection Technology Process People

Institutional Needs Assessment Leadership Buy In Identifying Stakeholders LMS Review Process Act 1: People LMS Review Process Act 1: People

Institutional Needs Assessment Focus Groups: Curriculum Coordinators Survey: Medical Students a. Assessment of ANGEL Features b. Recommendations for Features in Future LMS Determining Factors for Identifying Core LMS Features

Institutional Needs Assessment National Surveys Medical School Website Searches Peer Institution Interviews

Institutional Needs Assessment National Surveys Medical School Website Searches Peer Institution Interviews Compilation of LMS by Peer Institutions

Leadership Buy In via Strategic Plan Crafted Strategic Plan Document Sign Off by Leadership

Leadership Buy In via Strategic Plan

Identifying Stakeholders LMS Advisory Committee (n=10) Faculty (Basic Sciences, Clinical) Curriculum Coordinators Medical Student Representatives Health Sciences Schools Representatives

Guiding Principles of LMS Selection Technology Process People

LMS Review Process Act 2: Technology LMS Review Process Act 2: Technology Identifying Core LMS Features Identifying LMS Options

Needs Assessment Results + LMS Administrators’ Input A Master List of 100 LMS Features LMS Advisory Committee Voted on 30 Core Features

Sakai (Open-Source/ Commercial) Black- Board (Commercial) Canvas (Open-Source/ Commercial) Entrada (Homegrown/ Open-Source) Desire 2 Learn (Commercial) LCMS+ (Homegrown) TUSK (Homegrown) Moodle (Open-Source/ Commercial)

ProsCons Commercial Dedicated 3 rd party support Requires less in-house programming resources and technical expertise Possibility of getting bought out Per user license fee model, with no control over fee increases Extra charges for system customizations/integrations Open Source Unlimited free licenses Freedom of customization and implementation Availability of user community No dedicated 3 rd party support Requires in-house programming resources and technical expertise

Guiding Principles of LMS Selection Technology Process People

LMS Demo Sessions + Committee Discussions Preparation of Reports Committee Vote on Top 3 Solutions Usability Testing of Top 3 Solutions LMS Review Process Act 3: Process LMS Review Process Act 3: Process

LMS Demo Sessions + Committee Discussions Preparation of Reports Committee Vote on Top 3 Solutions Usability Testing of Top 3 Solutions LMS Review Process Act 3: Process LMS Review Process Act 3: Process 1.Between April and September, 2011, Committee Participated in a One Hour Demo and One Hour Discussion per LMS 2.Each Demo Session Podcast for Review 3.Based on Committee’s Requests, Sought Follow Up Information from Vendors

LMS Demo Sessions + Committee Discussions Preparation of Reports Committee Vote on Top 3 Solutions Usability Testing of Top 3 Solutions LMS Review Process Act 3: Process LMS Review Process Act 3: Process 1.Requested Vendors to Complete a Detailed Template of Information 2.Conducted a SWOT (Strength, Weakness, Opportunity, Threat) Analysis per System 3.Performed a 5-year Cost Analysis per System

LMS Review Process Act 3: Process LMS Review Process Act 3: Process

LMS Demo Sessions + Committee Discussions Preparation of Reports Committee Vote on Top 3 Solutions Usability Testing of Top 3 Solutions LMS Review Process Act 3: Process LMS Review Process Act 3: Process 1.In November, 2011, Committee Members voted on Top 3 LMS for Future Review 2.Three Solutions Include: Desire2Learn, Sakai/Longsight, Canvas/Instructure 3.In December, 2011, Committee Met with Medical School Leaders for Debrief

LMS Demo Sessions + Committee Discussions Preparation of Reports Committee Vote on Top 3 Solutions Usability Testing of Top 3 Solutions LMS Review Process Act 3: Process LMS Review Process Act 3: Process 1.Completed a pilot of one LMS in a Second Year Course 2.Plan to Conduct Formal Usability Testing this Spring 3.Final Recommendation to Medical School Leadership

Wrap Up: Lessons Learned Examine Your Institutional Needs Understand Internal Decision Making Process Know and Connect With Your Stakeholders Develop an Inclusive and Collaborative Process Allow a Sufficient Timeline for Review & Decisions

Content Push to Users, Social Media Features Integrated Learning Analytic Capability Effective Use of LMS to Support Clinical Training LMS is One Element of Data Warehouse System The Future of LMS?

Sara Kim Katherine Wigan