Kathy FernandesDirector of System-wide LMS Initiatives

LMS RFP ResultsMarch 30, 2008

Agenda

Master Enabling Agreements Accessibility Product Overviews Scoring Summary Campus Surveys RFP Results Pricing What’s Next?

Master Enabling Agreements MEAs are a set of options; not the only options!! RFP Process provides documented information of

systems– Campuses can use this info in their process to make

informed decisions– Campuses perform their own evaluation and demos for

selection

Campuses can procure from the CSU MEA – Request quote from vendors based on CSU MEA– Procure with a purchase order referencing CSU MEA

Accessibility

VPAT RFP Accessibility Answers LMS Vendor Demos Rubric – Sandbox testing

Accessibility Moodle the most accessible Blackboard (both products) least accessible Accessibility is not about “adding features” Take accessibility seriously now –

– In 2 years accountability has to take hold What impact does this have on work in the future? CSU is being looked at as a leader in Accessibility

– Apple Computers– State of California– Other Universities and State Systems are

watching

Angel Windows Architecture Simple Interface Learning Object Repository (LOR) w/ the system Web 2.0 (Wiki, Blogs, RSS Feeds) Same Instance – Multiple Branding Can customize help system content Offers ASP service Can import and export IMS packaged content Published database schema and fully supports Dublin

Core metadata standard User can set Accessibility Profile

Angel (con’t)

SUNY System – large system (70k to 100k users?) Scalability – looking into issues – SQL*Server?

Median response time for urgent needs– 2.1 Hrs for the Initial Response

– 2.26 Hrs for Follow up/Resolution

– 13 Support reps supporting 26 clients each

Desire2Learn Windows Architecture Many Large Consortium Customers Easy to Use – Good Interface Data warehouse comes with system Claims fewest help desk calls (75% users dive in – no

training) Real-time Peoplesoft Integration with Tennessee Regents Tight integration with Google and Outlook ASP - host 80% of their clients Scalability at 150,000 users – issues w/ SQL*Server? Building APIs now (no BldgBlocks/Powerlinks) No way to archive courses

Desire2Learn (con’t)

UofW faculty happy w/ product across campuses– 150,000 users, one instance– 80% of faculty using the system– Migrated quickly from both Bb systems– 12.5 FTE technical staff to run whole system

Average response time for urgent needs– 21.62 seconds for the Initial Response– 192 average Hrs for all levels of tickets– 12 Support reps

Moodle and MoodleRooms

Supports Linux, Solaris, and Windows Flexible Handles browser-based commands (forward, back,

refresh, font increase/decrease) MoodleRooms provides related services, but you can

host your own instance of the open source Moodle software with them

MoodleRooms created a tool to migrate content from Blackboard

MoodleRooms (con’t)

– U of Louisiana getting up

– Average response time for urgent needs 1.19 Hrs for the Initial Response 5.73 Hrs for Follow up/Resolution 10 Support reps never supporting more than

10 clients each

Blackboard

Multiple Operating Systems/hardware platforms Full featured – multiple products Discuss Migration to NG Challenging Support

– Average response time for urgent needs 12.64 Hrs for the Initial Response 29.35 Hrs for Follow up/Resolution 57 TSMS supporting 69 clients each

– Evidence of Improved Commitment to Resources in this area

Strengths

Blackboard - multiple OS' and ORACLE database; multiple products: ePortfolio, Content Mgmt System

D2L - lots of large system institutions; Simple interface with high faculty satisfaction according to client reference

Angel - Simple interface; some large system institutions; APIs; ePortfolio, LOR

MoodleRooms - No licensing and most flexibility

Weaknesses

Blackboard - client relationships and support; ASP problems; unclear direction for their product except to migrate to common platform

D2L and Angel run ONLY on Windows; D2L No archiving capability; just now creating APIs for

their product Windows Systems are having SQL*Server issues but

with over 100,000 users on one instance MoodleRooms - still looking for more examples of

large scalability (how large?); How many programmers do you really need?

Scoring

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Angel

Bb LS

Bb Vist

a/CE

Moo

dleR

oom

s

Desire

2Learn

Possib

le S

core

Po

ints

As

sig

ne

d

Services

Scalability

Roadmap

Monitoring

Integration

Features

Business

Architecture

The following slides are results from the survey given to LMS RFP Campus Coordinators on

March 5 after the LMS Vendor Demos in

Long Beach.

As Campuses Discuss Options…

Interest in CSU Collaborations for– LMS Infrastructure/ASP? 4– LMS Migrations? 7– LMS Training? 5– LMS Consulting? 4– LMS Support? 1– LMS Reporting? 1– LMS Best Practices? (added later)

Summary of LMS Interests/Considerations

Moodle = 11 Angel = 8 D2L = 7 BB LS = 8 BB Vista = 3 Sakai = 3

Campus Directions – Those Staying for Now

WebCT CE Bakersfield Maritime Sacramento San Jose San Marcos Sonoma Chico Vista

Blackboard Channel Islands Dominguez Hills East Bay Fresno Fullerton Pomona San Diego San Luis Obispo

Campus Directions – Those Actively Shopping

Long Beach - Bb 6.3 ASP Los Angeles - CE 6.2 Northridge - CE, Bb 7.1, Moodle San Bernardino - Bb 7.1 Stanislaus - Bb 7.3, eColleges

Campus Directions – Those Going or Gone

Humboldt Moodle Monterey Bay Moodle SFSU Moodle

The Only Group Actually Doing LMS Collaboration

Responses From Angel Learning Blackboard (Vista/CE) Blackboard (Learning System) Campus Management CollegeBrain Desire2Learn Ecollege Embanet (Moodle) Embanet (Sakai) IBM (Sakai) Moodlerooms (Moodle) SumtotalUnicon (Sakai)

After Phase I

Angel LearningBlackboard (Vista/CE)Blackboard (Learning System)Desire2LearnMoodlerooms (Moodle)

Discoveries

Desire2Learn—Detailed accessibility evaluation found that Desire2Learn’s system fails to meet minimum requirements. Gaps are few and may be repairable. In addition, the proposed version of Desire2Learn, 8.2.2, was found to be infringing on a current US patent.

Discoveries

Blackboard did not submit ANY pricing for hosting Blackboard Learning System (LS)—Detailed

accessibility evaluation found that Bb LS fails to meet minimum requirements. Barriers to accessibility are serious and distributed densely across the entire application.

Blackboard Vista/CE—Detailed accessibility evaluation found that Vista/CE fails to meet minimum requirements. Equally effective access to people with disabilities is not provided in the system.

Final Vendor Selections

Angel LearningMoodlerooms

What Does This Mean?

MEAs are options not your only options CSU needs a more competitive selection Vendors can cure their ills later (timing TBD) Transition time (2-years?) Negotiate an extension of current contract with

Blackboard If Bb doesn’t cure their ills, campuses might be at

legal risk or need more accommodations D2L version 8.3 perhaps cures their ills?

Summary of Pricing

For full list of licensing and service costs, consult each companies’ Pricing Proposal

Small Campus LMS License Pricingwith Support (1st Year)

Angel $17,500-38,000 1,000-10,000 FTE

Bb (LS and CE) $33,500-51,900 1-8000 FTE

Bb (Vista Only) $72,200-111,500 1-8000 FTE

D2L $29,000-$85,500 1,000-10,000 FTE

Moodle/Rooms $0 - $21,250 Support up to 10,000 FTE

Medium-size Campus LMS License Pricingwith Support (1st Year)

Angel $56,000-72,000 15,000-20,000 FTE

Bb (LS & CE) $63,400

$72,500

8001-15,000 FTE

15,001-25,000 FTE

Bb (Vista Only) $131,200

$157,500

8001-15,000 FTE

15,001-25,000 FTE

D2L $96,875-126,000 10,000-20,000 FTE

Moodle/Rooms $0 - $35,000 Support up to 20,000 FTE

Large Campus LMS License Pricingwith Support (1st Year)

Angel $85,000-155,000 25,000-50,000 FTE

Bb (LS & CE) $82,300 25,000-50,000 FTE

Bb (Vista Only) $183,700 25,000-50,000FTE

D2L $137,500-175,000 20,000-35,000 FTE

Moodle/Rooms $0 - $61,250 Support 20,000 -30,000 FTE

2nd Year LMS Licensing

Angel– Up $2k to $5k depending on size

Bb– 5% increase from first year

D2L– No change from first year

Moodle/Rooms– No change from first year

3rd Year LMS Licensing

Angel– Up $2k to $10k from first year depending on size

Bb– 10% increase from first year

D2L– No change from first year

Moodle/Rooms– No change from first year

Sample ASP/Hosting Prices

Angel 70% to 145% of license fee

Silver or Gold?

System Specs?

Bb (LS & CE) No Submission No Submission

Bb (Vista Only) No Submission No Submission

D2L $100,000 20,000 FTE

Moodle/Rooms $1 per user per year

$21,000 maximum

10,000 to 20,000 FTE

Need More Information?

At dat.cdl.edu under CSU LMS Initiatives– Contains LMS RFI and RFP

– RFP Results

– RFP Responses

– Pricing Proposals Kathy Fernandes – kfernandes@csuchico.edu

What’s Next? Negotiate Bb Extension of Current Contract (for 2yrs?) Put MEAs in place Handoff to Campuses to do Local Evaluation

– Go Deeper Into Product Evaluations– Campus Review of CSU RFPs & Summary Results– Campus Determine Local Criteria for LMS– Put the LMS on Meeting Agendas now– Campus Conversations, Committees, Processes– Product Demonstrations– Deeper Reference Checking of other Customers

Strategic and Project Planning Transition? Migration?