ECURE 2004 March 2004
Managing and Archiving
Learning Management Systems
Course Materials and Records
Jeremy Rowe
Robert Spindler
Director, Research, Strategic Planning
and Policy
Information Technology
Arizona State University
jeremy.rowe@asu.edu
Head, Archives and Manuscripts
University Libraries
Arizona State University
robert.spindler@asu.edu
Arizona State University Background:
• 57,000 plus students on four campuses
• Tri University initiative – Arizona Regents
University
• Over 1300 courses currently being delivered via
Blackboard
• No one knows how many courses currently
delivered via other products
• 160,000 Blackboard student accounts,
• 40,000 active accounts Fall 2003
Learning Management Systems Background:
• Initial development as stand alone courses
(html, MacroMedia Director and others)
• Blackboard implemented as “standard”1995 in
version 3.0
• BB upgrades through 3.0, 4.0, 5.0 and various
versions
• Though still used by some faculty, Version 4
no longer supported
• Content migrated to new versions (or
recreated)
•
What are Course Materials?
• Course administration-syllabus, calendar, grade
books, exam records, etc.
• Locally produced content
Instruction - notes/presentations, graphics,
models/simulations, etc.
Student discussions, projects, exams, etc.
• Imported/3rd party produced content - articles,
research materials, etc.
• Include a variety of potential resources
Courses and learning objects
Institutional records
•
Statement of the challenge:
• Exponential increases in file volume
• Faculty asking ownership questions – little
policy clarification
• Institution requires documentation for grades,
appeals etc.
• Interest in learning object management
• "Permanent" student portfolios marketed by
two colleges
• Archives interested in documenting this
"revolution" in pedagogy
Policy Questions:
• Unresolved authority issues for permission to
edit, reuse, redistribute content
• Faculty request retention for:
• Reuse of all or portions of previous
content (examples)
• Support of grade appeals processes
• Tenure/promotion portfolio's
• Students work products portfolios
•
Policy Issues (ctd.):
• Student/Faculty/University
Embedded material IP
Public records
• Content issues:
Identification and extraction issues
• Accessibility issues (obsolete software
required to access some content, ADA, etc.)
• Migration
• Scalability – storage, management, access
•
General Counsel Work Group November, 2002:
• Representation: IT, Archives, Counsel,
• Extended Education, two faculty
• Identified scope and issues
• Started by developing a matrix or taxonomy of
content types
• Attempted to establish criteria for retention
goals for each content type
• Developed a model for moving and retaining
content
• Developed a process map outlining process
Model Development - Goals:
• Effectively manage active and inactive course
content
• Collaborative, distributed decision making
• Support institutional uses (P&T, grades,
appeals, portfolios, etc.)
• Improve storage/back-up processes
• Include metadata to automate
management/decision making
• Enable reuse of content
• Support archival course content
•
Assumptions:
• University ownership/license
• Content “Owner” identified for each course
• “Host” identified for each course
• Retention for
University and faculty use
Permit student portfolio retention
• Active, near term, and long term storage
Active Course
•Determine responsibility for Content
(faculty, department, etc. - identify
“owner”
•Determine responsibility for Hosting
“bits” (college, IT, DLT, etc.)
•Determine re-use
schedule/determine reuse status (is
the course to be re-offered?
•Add metadata to course record and
send to temporary storage facility
(along with permissions
documentation and collateral
information)
•Move to temporary storage
•
Active Course
•Determine responsibility for Content
(faculty, department, etc. - identify
“owner”
•Determine responsibility for Hosting
“bits” (college, IT, DLT, etc.)
Inactive Course Content
•At temporary holding facility
•Retained in LMS software
•Content “Owner” selects
reusable course/content
•Archivist selects archival
course/content
•Course record updated
•Determine re-use schedule/determine
reuse status (is the course to be reoffered?
•Add metadata to course record and
send to temporary storage facility
(along with permissions documentation
and collateral information)
•Move to temporary storage
Active Course
•Determine responsibility for Content
(faculty, department, etc. - identify
“owner”
•Determine responsibility for Hosting
“bits” (college, IT, DLT, etc.)
Inactive Course Content
•At temporary holding facility
•Retained in LMS software
•Content “Owner” selects
reusable course/content
•Archivist selects archival
course/content
•Course record updated
•Determine re-use schedule/determine
reuse status (is the course to be reoffered?
•Add metadata to course record and
send to temporary storage facility
(along with permissions documentation
and collateral information)
•Move to temporary storage
Reusable Course Content
•Migrate to new/current LMS
software as needed to re-offer
•
Inactive Course Content
•At temporary holding facility
•Retained in LMS software
•Content “Owner” selects
reusable course/content
•Archivist selects archival
course/content
•Course record updated
Reusable Course Content
•Migrate to new/current LMS
software as needed to re-offer
Non-Archival Course Content
•Hold in temporary storage
•IT deletes per schedule (3 years from
Fall Semester prior to last offering
•
Inactive Course Content
•At temporary holding facility
•Retained in LMS software
•Content “Owner” selects
reusable course/content
•Archivist selects archival
course/content
•Course record updated
Reusable Course Content
•Migrate to new/current LMS
software as needed to re-offer
Archival Course/Content
•Migrate to Archival Format
•Move to long term storage
•Update course record
Non-Archival Course Content
•Hold in temporary storage
•IT deletes per schedule (3 years from
Fall Semester prior to last offering
Maintenance, quality control
Describe and integrate into
permanent collection
Learning Management System Record Taxonomy
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (LZW) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
Next Steps:
• Advocate Vendors for non-proprietary formats,
archiving and export capabilities
• Establish work flows and storage facilities for
different materials
• Continue discussion about software issues
• Explore potential standards to control retention
costs
• Train faculty and students in information policy
issues
• Resolve ownership and access issues through
collaborative policy development
•