Historique de la page

Sources could be:

• Instructor or TLS staff presents an idea, problem, or challenge

• Pedagogical and Technology Trends in Higher Education and Classroom Technology (through proactive, cyclical initiatives)

•  A routine needs assessment that includes both faculty and student input which is done to determine if an effort to explore or pilot is worthwhile. With regard to student input, could/should these be student government,  academic services, or other advocacy groups for students or student organizations. 

•  Small Scale: A small cohort of faculty within a department (i.e., small scale; <=10 individuals; TLS funds when they can or faculty seeks funding from dept.; at minimum TLS might provide support in exploring the tool)

• Moderate Scale: Department-wide and possibly discipline-centric use; TLS might partner with department for initial funding if initial pilot is considered

• Large Scale: Multi-College or Campus-wide: College(s) may partner, if campus-wide may need to get funds to support; ITS will also need to be included

See the Technology Evaluation Criteria example. In addition to using this for a pilot, these same criteria could potentially be used for In-Operation Needs & Scope Analysis.  In this way, it could be applied for reiterative evaluation over time as the tool is implemented and supported. This cycle of evaluation would depend on things like length of contract, license, or other). 

Large scale vs. Small Scale

• Whether or not the tool itself can support the size of scope or need
• Cost, licensing, & support infrastructure explored based on scale of need

• Faculty Students, Support staff (across teams – Instructional tech, support staff, instructional designers); Server Administrators

• Staff representatives from Academic Tech, Tech Support Services, and Class Tech that act as a central group brining in others (faculty and staff when needed). 

• How will ‘success’ be defined across all stakeholders?
• How will ‘success’ be measured?
• If a certain level of success and demand is met and criteria is met, decision is made to either a) continue pilot or b) roll-out as a TLS-supported tool or beyond?

• “Exploratory” or smaller-scale pilots seems to be more frequent (lower-stakes).
• Larger-scale pilots are not as frequent (higher-stakes)
• Larger-scale pilots take longer to transition (i.e., Adobe Connect, D2L)

• Blog posts
• Web Resources centered on innovation and emerging tech processes
• Showcases 

Groups Representative of:

• Faculty & students (always need voices at the table regardless of pilot)
• Instructional tech
• Classroom Engineers/Support
• Tech support
• Server Admin
• Managerial/Directorial
• ITS (depending on the scale and if there are plans for them to ultimately take on support in some capacity)?       

Large scale vs. Small Scale

• Whether or not the tool itself can support the size of scope or need
• Cost, licensing, & support infrastructure explored based on scale of need

• Are the "Roll-out" team and the "Pilot Team" one in the same, different, or a cross-section of new members and existing pilot team members.

What if it is partially ILI-Supported/RIT-Supported and if so, what does that mean?

• • Scale Examples:
    • Campus-Wide/Enterprise Wide:
      • Qualtrics?
      • BlueJeans? 

• What are the Hand-off"s Between Roll-out Team and Operational, Academic Support

Sources could be:

• Instructor presents an idea, problem, or challenge (through proactive cyclical initiatives or as a reaction to unsolicited input from faculty)

• Pedagogical and Technology Trends in Higher Education and Classroom Technology (through proactive, cyclical initiatives)

•  A routine needs assessment that includes both faculty and student input is done to determine if an effort to pilot is worthwhile. With regard to student input, could/should these be student government,  academic services, or other advocacy groups for students or student organizations. 

•  Small Scale: A small cohort of faculty within a department (i.e., small scale; <=10; TLS fund when they can or faculty seeks funding from dept.)

• Moderate Scale: Department-wide and possibly discipline-centric use; TLS partners with department for initial funding for initial pilot

• Large Scale: Multi-College or Campus-wide: College(s) may partner, if campus-wide may need to get funds to support; ITS will also need to be included?

Large scale vs. Small Scale

• Whether or not the tool itself can support the size of scope or need
• Cost, licensing, & support infrastructure explored based on scale of need

• For smaller-scale technology use, TLS may not ultimately take on the role of support. So, in this case, the End-of-Life is probably more at the discretion of the faculty or department.

• For larger-scale technology use, have stakeholders involved, similar to those involved with pilots, in the decision; they can also be leveraged for the planning as well:

 Groups Representative of:

•  Faculty & students (always have a voice regardless of pilot)
• Instructional technologist and designers
• Classroom Engineers/Support
• Tech support
• Server Admins
• Managerial/Directorial
• ITS (depending on the scale and if there are plans for them to ultimately take on support in some capacity)?