MDE 610 Assignment 4
Durham College Innovation Proposal
“ChimeIn”
Mobile Learning Student Response Tool for
Polling with Data Aggregation, Manipulation and Display.
Iain McPherson
Athabasca University
Durham College Innovation Fund, Spring 2013
April 14, 2013
Innovation Fund
Research Department
Durham College
2000 Simcoe St. N
Oshawa, Ontario L1H 7L7
Dear Sir / Madame,
Please find enclosed my proposal for the adoption of the cloud-based mobile learning student
response software tool, “ChimeIn.”
ChimeIn provides an exceptionally cost-effective tool which is flexible, pedagogically sound, and
extremely simple-to-use. The adoption of such a tool will help Durham College meet the growing
demand for interactive mobile teaching and learning environments, thus furthering the school’s
efforts to ensure that “the student experience comes first.” Chime-in is also a radical improvement
over the out-dated and limited student response system currently provided for student/instructor use
by the college.
I look forward to the opportunity to discuss the details of this proposal in person and respectfully
await your reply.
Kindest regards,
Iain Mc Pherson
Professor,
Durham College,
Oshawa, Ontario
Revised - 3/14/2016
Page #2 of 20
Durham College Innovation Fund, Spring 2013
Formatting note: As per the MDE 610 (W13-B) Assignment Four instructions, the following
proposal is formatted as per the technology innovation proposal documentation used by the
author’s college. Some slight modifications have been made to the original format in order to
satisfy the assignment brief.
Introduction
The following proposes the adoption and use of the cloud-based mobile learning student
response software tool, “ChimeIn,” developed by the University of Minnesota in 2010. (Higdon,
Reyerson, & McFadden, 2011; University of Minnesota, 2010). It is suggested that the use of
ChimeIn will provide a pedagogically sound, simple-to-use and cost-effective tool to help meet
the growing demand for interactive mobile teaching and learning environments. In so doing it is
also suggested that ChimeIn will meet not just two but all three of Harapnuik’s criteria for
innovation, namely “good, fast and cheap” (2013b).
Revised - 3/14/2016
Page #3 of 20
Durham College Innovation Fund, Spring 2013
Proposal Details
Title of the Project
Adoption and implementation of “ChimeIn.”
Date of submission
April, 2013
Project lead & other participants including school and program name.
Iain McPherson
CAFÉ, General Education and Music Business
Management programs
Semester(s) during which the project will occur.
Fall 2013 (test), Winter 2014 onwards (college-wide release)
Executive summary.
“ChimeIn” is a cloud-based mobile learning student response software tool providing
instructors and students with an all-in-one software solution for secure authenticated polling
from mobile devices. The software provides instructors with convenient and seamless data
aggregation and manipulation resulting in the dynamic graphic display of survey results.
ChimeIn is simple to learn, easy to use, fast and available at little to no cost to the institution
and students. Use of the software supports learner engagement and may be used for either
Revised - 3/14/2016
Page #4 of 20
Durham College Innovation Fund, Spring 2013
behaviourist evaluation and / or collaborative and constructivist learning activities. ChimeIn
may be used effectively in face-to-face (F2F), hybrid and a/synchronous distance learning
environments.
Proposal Description
Problem(s) to be solved or investigated
The ChimeIn tool is proposed as a solution to two main areas of concern: effective
teaching/learning practices and the growing need to use mobile learning technology.
The college’s current student response system relies upon expensive in-class hand-held
devices from Turning Technologies Canada that do not allow for open format responses
(Turning Technologies Canada, 2011). A student response system that provides for 1) the
creation of collaborative (‘active’) teaching and learning activities while 2) responding to the
growing expectation amongst students for mobile learning environments is required.
Teaching and Learning. Support for ‘active’ learning by students is shared by learning
theorists, instructional designers and college administration alike (Schunk, 2012; Smith &
Ragan, 2005; Durham College, 2013a). Naturally such activities need be designed in accordance
with appropriate pedagogical practices in mind. Constructivist learning theory suggests that not
only do students need to be active as a method of engagement, but that participatory learning is
essential to the construction of knowledge (Schunk, 2012). A tool which meets both the goals of
Revised - 3/14/2016
Page #5 of 20
Durham College Innovation Fund, Spring 2013
student engagement and knowledge construction could, thus, prove to be very valuable indeed.
The student response clickers currently owned by the school (Turning Technologies Canada,
2011) only allow responses to True/False and multiple choice format. Thus they do not meet the
needs for truly constructivist knowledge creation.
Mobile learning expectations. Instructors need to make use of appropriate mobile
teaching and learning technologies. Recent studies reveal that, not only are students more
connected than ever before, but that they expect their instructors to leverage such connectivity
(Harapnuik, 2013a). The 2012 Horizon Report observed that students “expect to be able to
work, learn, and study whenever and wherever they want... (P)eople want easy and timely
access... to tools, resources, and up to-the moment analysis and commentary” and that such
‘needs’ have “have risen to the level of expectations” (as cited in Harapnuik, 2013a). In defining
the attributes which contribute to the generational divide, ‘millennial’ students cite that the
biggest difference between them and the previous generation is the use of technology (Abacus,
2013). It would seem vital that instructors wishing to provide relevant learning experiences and,
thus, ‘connect’ with their students, need to respond to the student preferences which are so
“crucial to their motivation and attention to their academic work” (Dahlstrom, 2012).
What mobile device(s) to use? While the 2012 ECAR survey notes a rapid increase in
the overall percentage of students who own laptops (86%), such ownership is lower in college
settings than universities (Dahlstrom, 2012). Cell and smartphone ownership, however, is
Revised - 3/14/2016
Page #6 of 20
Durham College Innovation Fund, Spring 2013
predicted to soon exceed 100% in Canada (Trichur, 2012). Anecdotal evidence supports the
observation that virtually every college student owns a cell or smartphone. ChimeIn is
specifically designed to be readily and equally accessible via cell phones (via SMS texting),
smartphones (via SMS and/or mobile device formatted web site) and laptops / tablets (via web
browsers) thus eliminating technological barriers to usage.
Describe the desired outcomes.
ChimeIn can be used by instructors to enhance learner engagement, collaboration and
participation (‘active learning’) through constructivist learning practices. ChimeIn allows
instructors to build a community of learners, assess comprehension and foster further discussion
of key issues (Higdon, Reyerson, & McFadden, 2011). It does so while meeting the growing
demand for mobile learning environments (Dahlstrom, 2012).
Scope of The Project
What is included or excluded. ChimeIn is an open-source software tool developed and
implemented in 2010 by the University of Minnesota (University of Minnesota, 2010).i The
software and code are offered for use by other institutions. Features of the software include:

Synchronous or asynchronous polls with question formats that include True/False,
multiple choice and open text responses.

Automated dynamic cloud-based data aggregation.
Revised - 3/14/2016
Page #7 of 20
Durham College Innovation Fund, Spring 2013

Immediate visualization of response data via customizable graphical and/or word
cloud display formats.

Integration with SIS thus providing automated student enrolment and authentication.

Ability to respond from a student’s preferred mobile device (SMS or browser-enabled
cell/smartphone, tablet, or laptop)
Not included are any required data servers and / or in-house IT support. It should be
noted that the nature of the data suggests that data bandwidth demands and server storage space
requirements will be relatively small. Also IT Support Services will need to budget for
appropriate time to become familiar with, install and integrate the application. However, the preexisting how-to documentation, open-source and simple-to-use nature of ChimeIn suggests that,
once installed, IT expertise and ongoing tech support needs should be relatively low. While
most students seem to have unlimited or high-volume SMS texting plans, those without such
plans could incur SMS charges depending on their cell-provider plans. Such charges can be
avoided by using other response formats (for ex. a smartphone web-browser via Wi-Fi) or
devices (for ex. laptop). See Appendix 1 for a simple diagram of how ChimeIn (and other online
polling) works.
Other options considered. A SECTIONS Analysis of ChimeIn was conducted as part of
the preliminary review of the software. However, ChimeIn was not the only solution considered.
There are many other software polling options. They were rejected for different reasons. Many
Revised - 3/14/2016
Page #8 of 20
Durham College Innovation Fund, Spring 2013
are commercial applications requiring paid subscriptions or software purchase. A number of free
options are also available. For example an evaluation summary of free tools is currently hosted
on the Athabasca University Centre for Distance Education website (Athabasca University
Centre for Distance Education, 2011). Unfortunately the survey is over ten years old. Options
listed are either no longer available and / or do not offer all the features, functionality, security or
seamless SIS integration available in ChimeIn.
Define the audience. ChimeIn can be used by all faculty and students and in F2F, hybrid
and distance learning environments. Polling may be used in both academic and non-academic
environments to attract feedback on wide variety of questions and issues.
Describe how it would directly benefit students. ChimeIn provides students with a
non-threatening, easy to use and effective way to participate in the collaborative construction of
knowledge in a variety of environments. It leverages the use of devices that students already
own and have at hand, engaging them in the creation of content. The immediate feedback that
ChimeIn provides can also help instructors to modify and direct teaching/learning activities so as
to respond to questions, focus attention on important concepts and/or address issues of
comprehension - all resulting in a more dynamic and responsive learning environment.
How does it link to the Academic Direction. The use of ChimeIn meshes well with the
college’s Academic Direction in a number of ways. The mission statement for the college states.
“The student experience comes first at Durham College” (Durham College, 2013b). to adopt
Revised - 3/14/2016
Page #9 of 20
Durham College Innovation Fund, Spring 2013
such a user-friendly student response system would only help to enhance the student learning
experience. Moreover, as part of an institutional shift to increased online course delivery, the
college Academic Leadership Committee recently proposed an increased emphasis on
appropriate educational technologies as one way to improve such student experience (Hinton,
2012). Finally, it should be acknowledged that a climate of severe spending restraint currently
exists at Durham College. Virtually all expenses not previously budgeted and approved were
recently frozen as controls were put in place for “all spending, including operating and capital
purchase orders” (Gurmen, 2013) until further notice. ChimeIn addresses all of these goals and
fiscal restrains by enhancing student engagement and learning through the use of a pedagogically
robust, flexible and low-to-no-cost technology that is applicable to both F2F and online learning
environments.
Adoption Attributes
As per the method employed by Hansen and Salter (2001), it is recommended that both
adopter-based and developer-based approaches be taken for the adoption and diffusion of the
ChimeIn technology. On one hand the desired adoption of the ChimeIn software by instructors
suggests that an ‘instrumentalist’ adopter micro strategy aimed at product utilization is
appropriate. Such an approach will focus on “the needs and opinions of potential adopters and
characteristics of the adoption site” (Surry, 1997) and, in so doing, address “the perceived needs
of staff in complementing traditional teaching delivery” (Hansen & Salter, 2001, p. 298).
Revised - 3/14/2016
Page #10 of 20
Durham College Innovation Fund, Spring 2013
Concurrently a second ‘prong’ – a ‘determinist’ (developer) macro approach - will be used to
help ensure both organizational support for the adoption, while helping to deliver on the mandate
to provide a positive student experience across all college programs.
Work Plan (aka Adoption Plan)
The following uses Morwick’s (2011) adaptation of John Kotter’s model of change
management as the framework for the proposed process of adoption and support of ChimeIn at
the college. The scope of this assignment limits the discussion to a brief overview of the most
necessary steps.
1) Create a sense of urgency.

Demonstrate the compelling data in support of the rapidly growing need to adapt
instruction techniques to meet the student demand for mobile learning – and to do
so with as little expense (monetary, time) as possible.
2) Form a powerful coalition.

Discuss the potential of the technology with what Rogers (1995) called
‘innovators,’ adventurous potential ‘early adopters’ (as cited in Surry, 1997) and
key / influential decision makers. Address any concerns that may arise.

Ensure stakeholders come from all major areas of the college including
administration (college/student), faculty and IT services.
Revised - 3/14/2016
Page #11 of 20
Durham College Innovation Fund, Spring 2013
3) Create a vision.

Articulate a cogent and compelling narrative that articulates the various strengths,
advantages and possible uses for the technology.
4) Communicate the vision.

Create a compelling, intriguing and time-sensitive event (i.e. avoid busy periods
in the academic calendar) and / or avenues (websites, wiki, YouTube video) to
demonstrate the technology. Employ institutional communication tools to invite
all potential interested parties to attend the event or review the materials. One
option may be to pair the demonstration with traditionally well-attended college
academic activities (for ex. the semi-annual College-wide ‘town hall’ meetings.)

Ensure there are avenues for feedback.
5) Remove obstacles.

Ensure appropriate, easy-to-use, flexible support resources are easily and clearly
accessible. (For example, step-by-step instructions, numerous content-area
specific examples for use, etc.)

Obtain feedback on early use.
6) Create short-term wins.
Revised - 3/14/2016
Page #12 of 20
Durham College Innovation Fund, Spring 2013

Designate early success markers.

Publicize best-practice usage.
7) Build on the change.

Encourage continuous feedback on user-experience.

Ascertain what is working, what needs to be adjusted and make improvements as
possible.
8) Embed the change in culture.

Provide training to all new hires / students.

Continue to communicate success stories.
Time Frame
While it is impossible to give a precise timeline for adoption, it is estimated that steps 1-3
may take as much as 3-12 months, while steps 4-6 may require additional 4-8 months. Aspects
of steps 7 and 8 will be ongoing.
Is support required from any other business unit? What actions have you taken to
investigate and secure this support?
The primary departments which will need to provide additional support include IT
Services (infrastructure, tech support), Student Services (student training and support) and the
Revised - 3/14/2016
Page #13 of 20
Durham College Innovation Fund, Spring 2013
CAFÉ (faculty training and learning support). The Director of the CAFÉ has already been
contacted and is in favour of moving forward. He is also a member of the college’s Academic
Leadership Team and thus may prove to be a valuable champion and ally. I have had numerous
interactions with high level members of the IT Services department and the student government
as part of my role as Station Manager and project leader in the development of the student’s
campus ‘visual radio’ station.
Project Adoption Reporting
As per the College technology development and adoption protocols, periodic interim
reports will be filed so as to “indicate the level of success in this project, lessons learned,
limitations encountered, recommendations and next steps” (Durham College, 2012). It is
recommended that such reports be submitted no less than twice a year for the first two years,
with an annual technology review thereafter. Of course more frequent interim meetings amongst
team members with appropriate progress reports will be also necessary. The frequency of these
meetings will vary depending on the stage of the project.
Mixed methods evaluation of the tools will be conducted. Proposed quantitative metrics
to be used in the evaluation include: rates for number of faculty using the tool, persistence of
usage, departmental use, types of questions employed, environments where the tool is used (F2F
vs online), types of devices used to access the software. Qualitative data relating to
instructor/student user-experiences, reasons for using/terminating use, etc will help to complete
Revised - 3/14/2016
Page #14 of 20
Durham College Innovation Fund, Spring 2013
the picture of why people do or don’t use the tool, and how the experience – and thus adoption –
might be improved.
Projected Project Costs
Item
Software
(Open-source)
Projected
Actual
$0.00
n/a
IT: Server space
(Propose that project could make use of available
virtualized server space now on site / or purchase cloudbased server space.)
Unknown
n/a
IT: Staff costs
(Set-up/operational)
Unknown
n/a
Project Management Staff: Project leader (est)
(may be covered by innovation fund research grant)
$5,000.00
n/a
Miscellaneous
(support materials design, etc)
$3,000.00
n/a
Sub-Totals
$8,000.00
n/a
Cost Overrun (Est 30%)
$2,400.00
n/a
$10,400.00
n/a
Est. Project Totals
Revised - 3/14/2016
Page #15 of 20
Durham College Innovation Fund, Spring 2013
Appendix 1. Simple Diagram of ChimeIn Cloud-based Mobile Polling Interactions
Revised - 3/14/2016
Page #16 of 20
Durham College Innovation Fund, Spring 2013
References
Abacus. (2013). R U Ready 4 Us? An Introduction to Canadian Millennials. Retrieved April 8,
2013 from Canadian Millenials: http://canadianmillennials.ca
Athabasca University Centre for Distance Education. (2011, June 14). Polling. Retrieved April 2,
2013 from Software Evaluation: http://cde.athabascau.ca/softeval/ratPOL.php
Dahlstrom, E. w. (2012). ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology
(Research Report). From EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research:
http://www.educause.edu/ecar.
Durham College. (2013a). Learning Techniques. Retrieved April 10, 2013 from Centre for
Academic Faculty Enrichment (CAFÉ):
http://enrichment.durhamcollege.ca/index.php/teaching-and-learning/learning-techniques
Durham College. (2013b). Mission, Vision and Values . Retrieved April 12, 2013 from Durham
College: http://www.durhamcollege.ca/about-us/corporate-links/governance/missionvision-and-values
Durham College. (2012, April 5). Research Fund Call For Proposals. Retrieved March 15, 2013
from Durham College Research Services:
https://ice.durhamcollege.ca/ResearchServices/InstitutionalResearchPlanning/Labour%20
Revised - 3/14/2016
Page #17 of 20
Durham College Innovation Fund, Spring 2013
Market%20and%20Research%20Reports/Research-Fund-Call-for-Proposals-May-2010FINAL.docx
Gurmen, N. (2013, March 15). Chief Financial Officer. Oshawa, ON, Canada: Durham College.
Hansen, S., & Salter, G. (2001). The Adoption and Diffusion of Web Technologies into
Mainstream Teaching. Journal of Interactive Learning Research , 12 (2), 281-299.
Harapnuik, D. D. (2013a). Where are we in mLearning: What’s Holding You Back? Adobe
Connect recording.
Harapnuik, D. (2013, March 12). Pick Two – Innovation, Change or Stability. Retrieved April 2,
2013 from It's About Learning: http://www.harapnuik.org/?p=3543
Higdon, J., Reyerson, K., & McFadden, C. (2011, March 29). Twitter, Wordle, and ChimeIn as
Student Response Pedagogies. Retrieved April 3, 2013 from Educause Review Online:
http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/twitter-wordle-and-chimein-student-responsepedagogies
Hinton, C. (2012, September 28). Personal communication. (I. McPherson, Interviewer)
Morwick, J. (2011, December 20). Teleworker Toolkit: The Basics of Change Management.
Retrieved March 30, 2013 from The Virtual Leader:
https://thevirtualleader.wordpress.com/2011/12/
Revised - 3/14/2016
Page #18 of 20
Durham College Innovation Fund, Spring 2013
Salter, G., & Hansen, S. (2001). The Adoption and Diffusion of Web Technologies into
Mainstream Teaching. Journal of Interactive Learning Research , 12 (2), 281-299.
Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning Theories: An Educational Perspective. Toronto, ON, Canada:
Pearson Higher Education.
Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (2005). Instructional Design. Hoboken, New Jersey, United States
of America: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Surry, D. (1997). Diffusion theory and instructional technology. Retrieved March 28, 2013 from
Instructional Technology Research Online:
http://www2.gsu.edu/~wwwitr/docs/diffusion/
Trichur, R. (2012, June 4). Canada on track to pass 100-per-cent wireless penetration rate.
Retrieved April 10, 2013 from The Globe And Mail:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/technology/mobile/canada-on-track-to-pass-100-percent-wireless-penetration-rate/article4230795/
Turning Technologies Canada. (2011). Products. Retrieved April 10, 2013 from Turning
Technologies Canada: http://www.turningtechnologies.ca/portfolio/
University of Minnesota. (2010, October 21). ChimeIn Introduction. Retrieved April 3, 2013
from Media Mill: http://mediamill.cla.umn.edu/mediamill2/html5/78553
Revised - 3/14/2016
Page #19 of 20
Durham College Innovation Fund, Spring 2013
i
At last report the software was still in beta (Higdon, Reyerson, & McFadden, 2011) and thus
is not recommended for use in formal evaluation. However, as it is now in wide use by the
university (University of Minnesota, 2010), it is anticipated that development has now moved to
the release stage. The current stage of development will need to be confirmed.
Revised - 3/14/2016
Page #20 of 20