Assumptions:
- The setting is a large public university which emphasizes both research and teaching
- The university values technology as a means to improving learning and provides substantial resources and support personnel for faculty who utilize technology.
- The university culture is such that faculty and students generally embrace the use of technology as an integral part of education.
- The university has robust fully online and hybrid (reduced seat time) courses.
- Most faculty utilize the current CMS (course management system) to at least “Web enhance” their face to face courses.
- The term “Next Generations CMS” refers to more than just the installation of a particular CMS package. It refers to the CMS application as well as the CMS’s connection and interaction with other campus applications and databases (present and future).

Context:
- An English department where many of its faculty utilize the current CMS to deliver fully online, hybrid or Web enhanced (no reduction in seat time) courses.
- This department’s faculty are cautious about sharing their course materials with each other, but realize the potential for efficiencies and improved quality if they did.
- This department has two GEP courses that employ many adjuncts to deliver the large number of offerings required. Many of these adjuncts are new to teaching and struggle with how to teach the course.

Scenario:

Bob Thornthwaite has been the chair of the English Department at the University of Anystate for over 5 years. He witnessed his department’s slow acceptance and eventual embrace of the current CMS. While most students and faculty now support and even demand the use of Web technologies in the delivery of courses, he is also acutely aware of the issues faculty and students continually complain about…

o The desire for more functionality in the current CMS
o The steep learning curve to learning and utilizing the current CMS
o The lack of integration between the CMS and other campus systems

When the CIO announces the upcoming adoption of a major new initiative that involves the upgrade to what the CIO terms a “next generation CMS” as well as the integration of many university systems including the CMS, portal, student data system, and a few home-grown applications, Bob meets the news with mixed feelings. He hopes the new initiative will solve shortcomings of the current system and hopefully open new possibilities of efficiency and quality. However, in light of the university’s recent adoption of a new ERP he is also acutely aware how controversial such an initiative can be.

The following six months of converting to the new CMS and integration of campus systems consist of a great amount of work and some frustration, but the greater functionality and benefits of new efficiencies are becoming clear and are creating great excitement.

By a simple click of a button, Bob’s faculty are able to make any of their course modules and assignments visible through the campus ePortfolio system to any or all of the following – other department faculty, the department chair, other university faculty, or other non-university faculty.

The creation of a non-threatening peer feedback process has encouraged faculty in Bob’s department to give each other feedback and collaborate on developing course materials, activities and assignments. Faculty and adjuncts new to teaching are able to learn from those experienced in teaching by reviewing, copying and modifying their course modules and assignments. Faculty are rewarded and recognized for sharing materials, activities and assignments with other department faculty.

When it comes time for Bob to evaluate his department’s faculty, he reviews their annual reports electronically through the portal. After getting his morning cup of coffee, he logs-on to the portal and sees that the personnel committee’s review of Chandra Taylor’s annual report is ready for his review. After reviewing her report and the committee’s comments, Bob would like to know how Chandra’s “student perception of instruction” evaluations for the courses she taught this year compare to other faculty who delivered the same courses. This query indicates her classes have significantly lower student evaluations compared to those of her peers. He types some notes and utilizes the campus calendar system to schedule a time to meet with her.

One of the new tools recently unveiled with the next generation CMS is termed “Reading the Tea Leaves” (RTL). Bob prides himself on his ability to read the pulse of the campus. He hopes this new tool will help him do this even more efficiently. The experimental RTL tool is designed to search various campus databases, online newsletters, help desk submissions, as well as student blogs to search, analyze, and report possible “hot topics.” Scrolling through the results, Bob notices something called “Action Jack.” Selecting this item reveals a synthesis of over 40 student references to a new multi-player live Internet game titled “Action Jack.”

When Bob views the “Action Jack” web site, he learns the game can communicate with the campus’s CMS to enable the creation of simulated learning environments. To find out whether any of his faculty are utilizing this potential avenue for simulated learning and to encourage discussion on the subject, Bob posts a question regarding the game to the department discussion board. As faculty access the university portal, they will see Bob’s posting and can respond to it. Since this discussion occurs in the portal’s discussion board, only the English Department faculty will see the ensuing discussion.

On his way to his car at the end of the day, Bob notices a student on a bench near the campus fountain playing what appears to be “Action Jack.” Bob strikes up a conversation with the student to learn why the student likes the game. To his dismay, Bob learns the student is using the game to review concepts for a Physics exam later that week.