CLSCC Transitional PlanCLSCC Transition/Implementation Committee for D2L
I. Committee members
Name
| Position
| Department
| Ken Adcock
| Professor of Business/Management
| Faculty (RODP contact)
| Spencer Culbreth
| Vice President
| Academic Affairs
| Janet Daniel
| Coordinator of Continuing Education
| Community Services/Continuing Education (ROCE contact)
| Nathan Garner
| Associate Professor of Computers/Information Systems
| Faculty (Faculty Senate President)
| Neil Greenwood
| Professor of History
| Faculty
| Mary Evelyn Lynn
| Director
| Library
| Jennifer Minutolo
| Assistant Professor of Mathematics
| Faculty (Distance Learning Committee Chair)
| *Ron Paige
| Director
| Instructional Technology
| **Ashley Raburn
| Distance Learning Technician
| Instructional Technology
| Bryan Reed
| Assistant Professor of History
| Faculty
| Bill Stark
| Systems Analyst
| Information Technology (Banner contact)
| Chris Tittle
| Webmaster
| Marketing (Luminis contact)
| Mark Wilson
| Director of ACCESS Center
| Student Services
| Dale Yates
| Associate Professor of Computer/Information Systems
| Faculty
| *CMS Chairperson
| **D2L Administrator
|
II. Campus-wide issues and challenges A. Funding - locating the money needed for implementation including fees, equipment, software, personnel, travel, training materials, etc.
B. Communication - keeping multiple campuses and departments informed of the implementation process; communicating the necessity for implementation
C. WebCT archiving – determining the best strategy for archiving Spring 2007 WebCT courses for data storage and grade challenges
D. WebCT-to-D2L Migration – creating a policy for course migration and, if needed, determining a working migration procedure
E. Technology - identifying network security and bandwidth issues that need to be addressed related to hosting of courses off-campus
F. Banner/Luminis integration – determining the process necessary to manually create D2L classes prior to Banner and Luminis integration; then, determining how to switch from a manual to integrated system after D2L is running
G. Course Evaluations – creating a functional and useful peer-review rubric and process
H. Individualizing uniformity - creating a template that employs features in common with RODP yet provides branding for the school and, if possible, for the various departments
III. Faculty issues and challenges
A. Incentive – will there be any?
B. Training – train a core group of early D2L adopters who will then help in training additional staff throughout the year; provide a variety of D2L training and training review media; create and maintain and on-going and clearly scheduled D2L training program; training in course archiving; negotiating a useful Help Desk for faculty, staff, and students
C. 3rd party software – obtain and distribute information on the availability and/or migration of e-pack courses and other 3rd party software; introduction to and training in the use of a Learning Object Repository
D. Banner integration – avoiding simultaneous trainings for Banner and D2L; attempt to implement Banner training for faculty and staff prior to D2L training; what should be placed in Luminis Course Builder and what should be placed in D2L?
E. Instructional design - understanding aspects of effective online instruction; meeting criteria of new peer-review policy; coming to agreement on common campus-wide features
F. Migration vs. Reconstruction – should all on-line courses and course materials be rebuilt in D2L?
IV. Training Activities and Timeline A. Transition team – create team, adding and subtracting personnel as necessary B. Training scheme – hierarchical methodology with triangulation 1. Train early adopters who will help train other faculty and staff
2. Encourage faculty and staff to participate as trainers for adjuncts, new faculty, and new staff
3. Provide multiple training versions and sessions with various mixes of new and review components
4. Archive training sessions to tape, CD, and the Web as part of a cumulative D2L library 5. Establish a staffed D2L training room where any staff or faculty member can informally “play” with D2L features
C. Timeline 1. January 2007: General introduction of D2L to all faculty during Spring Semester Faculty Development Day; revise Implementation Plan; identify early adopters for initial trainings; begin development of peer review policy
2. February 2007: TBR-training of D2L trainers; post first draft of early adopter training schedule; continue with development of peer review policy
3. March 2007: post first draft of general faculty, staff, and adjunct training schedules and materials; identify Summer 2007 D2L pilot courses; complete peer review policy
4. April: provide staffed training facility to help instructors recreate on-line courses in D2L format; continue trainings and materials development; based on trainings and feedback, anticipate additional problems associated with Fall 2007 launch of D2L; implement peer review policy
5. May 2007: continue as in April; beta test Summer 2007 courses that are ready
6. June 2007: continue as in April; focus on adjunct as much as possible
7. July 2007: maintain contact with Summer course instructors for feedback on D2L implementation; Faculty In-Service specific to Banner and D2L
8. August 2007: “go live” with D2L for all on-line and hybrid courses
V. Anticipated Needs A. Travel budget reimbursement – 325 miles round-trip each meeting
B. Supplies reimbursement – CDs, DVDs, paper, and media personnel labor costs associated with training material production and distribution
C. Professional training – as much on-site, hands-on training with exemplars as possible
| 
