Author Archives: actteam

ACTT Notes: Canvas Evaluation Review

Announcements / Updates:

Request to add “UDOIT” to Canvas: Accessibility LTI that generates a report on a Canvas site to let faculty know when accessibility issues are present in a course. Joe will meet with the faculty to determine what the implementation is for, and whether this should become a project.

No ACTT meeting next week as we’ll be meeting as IT-GOV-ATDL.

A couple of requests to add “Poll Everywhere” to Canvas. Allows for polls to be administered directly through Canvas in a synchronous / on-ground classroom.

 

Canvas Data Evaluation

How useful is the information? What can / should we use? What do we not need? And what is missing?

We have Canvas for three years. We need to be able to evaluate its use in order to determine whether Canvas (or any LMS) is a good technological choice for Middlebury.

Is there a reliable connection between statistics and “engagement” or “quality” of learning?

Numbers are not enough to say that “Canvas is improving teaching and learning at Middlebury.”

Biggest use at Monterey is for class resource web sites and for flipped instruction models. Monterey has very few purely online courses. There’s a certificate program with several online courses, but is blended with on-ground courses.

The College does not have online courses. The Hebrew School is “hybrid” but also fully online part of the year.

Can we define Canvas as a learning space–as more than a platform for distribution and submission? Should it / can it be used for more than file sharing? Or should we be looking at implementation of other technologies that accomplish the same thing?

What kinds of functions can we look at to determine if Canvas is being used well for teaching and learning? How do we measure those functions?

How do we apply an analytic to determine good pedagogy or successful teaching and learning? We can’t really understand what’s happening in classes without talking to students and teachers.

Should we figure out a way to do some qualitative research with teachers and students across Middlebury to determine how Canvas is being used? What works? What doesn’t work? What does teaching with technology look like at Middlebury?

We could try to align Canvas data with our findings from doing qualitative research. Start with “power users” to begin developing stories about how Canvas is being used. Expand the view out by looking at teachers who are using other digital tools in teaching and collect those stories — all to support an analysis of what tools are best for Middlebury.

Look for faculty from different programs to talk about use of Canvas.

Possible plan:

  1. Invite Canvas “power users” to discuss use of Canvas for later in this fall.
  2. Align findings with Canvas data.
  3. Expand that discussion to include other technologies.
  4. Begin larger discussion about use of digital technologies for learning and teaching in Canvas.

This could provide a model for qualitative research for future tech evaluations.

Open – Academic Cyberinfrastructure Transformation Team 2017-08-18 15:34:11

The ACTT has been evaluating MIddlebury’s services for video streaming. This summer, Middlebury has adopted Panopto, a service to manage and distribute video in a private space, as part of the solution. Panopto provides Middlebury faculty, students, and staff with a space to upload and sort their media, and share with their colleagues and classes. Panopto not only provides flexibility for who can see a video, it also includes a variety of sharing options. Some of these options include the ability to sync with presentations and other media, and providing a space to discuss video.

[piktochart src="https://magic.piktochart.com/embed/23805573-panopto-migration" width="550" height="1007"]

 

Also a Recording Service

In addition to the media management features, Panopto also provides services for capturing media directly from your computer or mobile device, with a direct upload to your Panopto space. Panopto has features that allow you to record and sync presentations (PowerPoint, KeyNote), screen captures, video and audio. Some possible use cases include: students assigned to record themselves as they practice presentations with slides, then and sharing these recordings to a class-only folder for peer feedback; creating brief instructional or tutorial videos based on tasks using specialized software recorded directly from your screen to be shared with students and colleagues.

We have created a welcome page with links to curated Panopto resources, such as a quick start guide, at http://go.middlebury.edu/panoptohelp. Panopto also provides extensive documentation, with written instructions and video demonstrations.

 

On the Horizon

We have already implemented integrations between Panopto and the Course Hub, Canvas, WordPress and Drupal that allow for the embedding of single videos and playlists. Panopto has recently developed deeper integrations with Canvas that will allow students to submit Panopto media as an Assignment Submission, and allow you to provide feedback to students using the SpeedGrader. Look for announcements in Canvas as these features become available.

 

Long Term

We will be moving away from a number of media hosting solutions, including MiddMedia and Muskrat, over the next few years. We will share more information as planning for the migration projects proceeds.

ACTT Notes: Canvas LTIs

LTI Review

 

Zoom LTI

  • Was convenient with Adobe Connect
  • Is there a cost?
  • Will there be challenges for SSO? Canvas uses CAS, Zoom uses ADFS.
  • Will bring it up with the Web Conferencing Team

 

GoogleApps and O365 Canvas LTI Evaluations

  • Both LTIs offer enhanced functionality and integration in Canvas
    • Slides and spreadsheets can be used in Collaborations, as well as docs.
    • Files from both services can be submitted for assignments, and evaluated using the SpeedGrader.
    • Access to both services is included in the Rich Text editor (similar to Panopto) in the “external tool” menu
  • Adam and Joe attended a brainstorming meeting for the Course Hub and O365
    • Discussing what a course space in O365 looks like
    • Discussing how to manage the course group
  • LTIs need to be added at the account level, cannot be added to a sub-account or course
  • Will test in https://middlebury.test.instructure.com this week
  • Assuming testing goes well we will pilot in the production instance in the fall, then evaluate.

 

Other Topics

  • Instructure will present a review of Middlebury’s use of Canvas in the first year. This will happen at the ACTT meeting on Aug. 22nd.
  • Joe is working on a launch roadmap for Panopto. Dates have been shared, please send feedback.
  • ACTT Core Group notes will be published to the site.

Notes: March 28th, 2017

Guest: Mike Roy, Dean of Library

Agenda:

  1. Overview of the IT governance process
 (Mike)
  2. The role of the academic portfolio group
 (Mike)
  3. Discussion: Questions we need to answer:
    1. 

what projects would we consider? which are too small? which are too big?
    2. 
how do we ensure that the projects are vetted both in terms of their technical feasibility and their degree of ‘strategicness’?
    3. what should be the relationship between this new group and the ACTT?
    4. what should be the membership of the group to cover the entire institution, and ensure proper vetting (see item b)

1. Overview of the broad governance process

Mike Roy and Jonathan Maddix are overseeing the Academic/Digital Tech & Learning “Portfolio team” which is one of a number of departmental and project groups designed to inform the ITS Advisory and STeering Committee groups within the new governance structure.

External consultant organization, *CIO Sensei helped to prepare new governance framework based on external review process in 2016. Mike referenced a deck of slides outlining the governance structure.

*Some discussion of CIO Sensei findings (not everyone had shared background knowledge)

  • External review of ITS looked into project load, efficiencies, decision-making
  • Create a structure that helps to align stakeholders in needs assessment and infrastructure that can scale across the institution

Proposed ITS Operating Model & Processes are informed by mission aligned strategy:

  • Governance
  • Organization
  • Processes and practices
  • Performance management

…to realize academic mission and create value across the institution

ITS is currently undertaking workforce planning which may influence future staffing and organization.

 

ITS Governance Objectives

  • Customer driven
  • Understand risk
  • Representation across the institution
  • Clarify capacity and resource allocation – “no” as an option
  • Improved communication and transparency
  • Ongoing participatory process
  • Proactive monitoring of demand and challenges
  • Connection between IT and institutional mission and deeper planning process

 

Governance Flow / Levels – bi-directional flow of information and activity

  • ITS Steering Committee
    • High level, priority setting, funding, staffing, risk, evaluation and validation of strategy implementation
  • ITS Advisory Team
    • Cross-institutional, review of portfolio teams, programs, institutional demand, risk balancing
  • Portfolio Teams* Mike and Jon charged with support of one of these teams
    • Determine departmental needs and priorities, anticipate requirements, identify opportunities and risks, approve new projects, review programs, etc…

The role of the academic portfolio group
 vis a vis ACTT

“All Things Digital” Portfolio Team

Questions

a) what projects would we consider? which are too small? which are too big?

  • Example projects discussed as cases for review; e.g. Canvas, Zoom, Panopto, current review of WordPress MU instances (Middlebury, MIIS)

b) how do we ensure that the projects are vetted both in terms of their technical feasibility and their degree of ‘strategicness’?

  • Suggestion that ACTT could serve as the recommender for the portfolio team
  1. c) what should be the relationship between this new group and the ACTT?
  • Is this portfolio team a distinct group or is it a slight expansion of the current ACTT model; need to articulate the key roles of the two groups and determine whether the roles are distinctive or overlap within the new governance structure [unresolved]
  • Strategic goals and cross-institutional planning may help to make the relationships between portfolio team and upper levels of governance [Mike suggested he would bring this back to Advisory Team for clarification]

 

Additional Discussion

Potential scenarios for portfolio and ACTT:

  • Continue as two separate teams (ACTT and a Portfolio team)
  • Integrate of ACTT and portfolio team into dual purpose group
  • Disband ACTT, take best of and bring to portfolio team

ACTT currently serves a particular purpose in reviewing cyberinfrastructure systems and platforms. It seems a Portfolio team would have a more governance focused role; the way it works now, is stakeholders present a need, and ACTT tests it out and helps to draft a recommendation…

Middlebury Space / Facilities Committee might offer a model for Portfolio team – this committee convenes people together at certain times during the academic year to share needs, projects so that there is awareness of what people are looking to accomplish; the committee then initiates process of prioritizing needs to draft recommendations and potential impact on budget

In this model, the separate Portfolio Team would engage programs to understand directions and needs; refer cyberinfrastructure projects to ACTT for research, review, recommend – help upper levels prioritize based on strategy

 

Concerns

Current ACTT Core members are on numerous teams and committees – it would be difficult to be called to participate on an additional committee

  1. d) what should be the membership of the group to cover the entire institution, and ensure proper vetting (see item b) [unresolved]

Additional questions

  • How does portfolio team’s project review work connect with the budget planning process? [unresolved]
  • Frequency of meeting (suggested bi-weekly)? [unresolved]

 

Action Items

 

  • Clarification and decision on unresolved questions, especially whether the discussed Portfolio team is a distinct group or whether there is clear overlap of ACTT and Portfolio group purpose [Mike and Jon – Portfolio Team Conveners]

ACTT Proposal for the Adoption of Panopto

Why

The ACTT recommended a fall 2016 Panopto Pilot, following the spring 2016 evaluation of streaming media and video asset management services. 10 Undergraduate and 8 MIIS courses used Panopto for video streaming. Students that also used Canvas in their courses could access video from Panopto, however they had to log in again. Some faculty at MIIS also used the webcasting feature successfully, including interactive discussion and note-taking features. Sharing videos via Canvas site embedding and through a link has resulted in a good user experience, however it currently requires separate logins to Canvas and Panopto platforms.

Panopto has indicated that it would add the following features to the video streaming service by December 17th:

  • Quizzing — Instructors can add multiple choice, multi-select, and true/false questions into any video using the Panopto editor. Viewers can take quizzes in the interactive player, and instructors can access real-time reports of all responses.
  • Captions — Users can access Panopto’s machine-generated speech-to-text captions and modify them in the video editor. In addition, users can customize the color, size, and position of captions during playback.
  • Primary Video Switching — For multi-camera recordings, video creators can switch between primary video feeds using the Panopto editor.
  • Enhanced Editing — Adding the ability to upload custom thumbnails, and to upload and manage slides within the video timeline.

A shortcode plugin for WordPress has been added to sites.middlebury.edu/sites.miis.edu. Currently it is not possible to add a Panopto video to Drupal, but other schools have solutions for embedding in Drupal that they are willing to share.

Feedback on Panopto has been generally good, and it has been useful for the classes that did use it. Departments are interested in the service that Panopto provides.

 

Recommendation Summary

The Academic Cyberinfrastructure Transformation Team recommends adding Panopto to the ITS fiscal year 2018 budget.

  • Middlebury contracts a Panopto enterprise license for 3-5 years
  • Middlebury encourages Panopto to provide better integration with Canvas
  • This will enable the decommissioning of Middmedia, Muskrat, and other video streaming services in a separate project. This should be considered at the end of FY19.

 

 

Implementation Timeline

Most of this work has been accomplished during the Fall 2016 pilot of Panopto. There is some work being done by Panopto technical staff to provide better integration with Canvas, they have let us know it is scheduled to be completed by December 17, 2016.

What Who When
Budget Proposal January 2017
Budget Decision May 2017
Panopto Pilot continues Spring 2017
Test LTI – Pilot Spring 2017
Implement Panopto including SSO and Canvas LTI Media Services and Academic Technology June-July 2017
Train Middlebury and MIIS HelpDesk & Media Services staff June-July 2017

Support

Outline of responsibilities

What Who
Panopto Support available to users 4 authorized contacts may receive support via: phone, email

General users may use chat and web tickets

Pedagogy/Instructional Design-related support Primary: Academic Tech, DLC, DL

Backup Support: Media Services

Administrative-use support (core functions) Primary: Media Services*
Other academic support (creativity & innovation project, student internship w/ or w/out credit, faculty research, symposium) Primary: Media Services

Backup Support: Academic Tech, DLC, DL

Training Media Services, Academic Tech, DLC, DL

 

* Conversations are occurring to identify course-related and administrative department support for the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey.

 

ACTT Proposal for the Adoption of Zoom

Why

We investigated alternative web conferencing services for remote work, collaboration, and online learning. Our Adobe service provider will be discontinuing their education pricing for Adobe Connect licenses, doubling our costs.

A number of services were identified; some of them were also being investigated through the IT Unified Communications project. We first inventoried the features of each service and then identified the top three services to compare with Adobe Connect. 15 people from ACTT Core group and extended ACTT at Middlebury and Monterey groups compared the user experiences of the three services with Adobe Connect and each other.

Zoom was selected because it had the best user experience of the services identified after having tested it in all three categories named above: remote work, collaboration, and online learning. It had a good reputation amongst users and was being successfully implemented in a variety of mission-critical contexts: an online class, in an Envisioning Middlebury community initiated conversation attended by 30 people on the topic of distance collaboration and remote work, in a global virtual nonproliferation education forum coordinated from Monterey, and in a variety of other use cases. The enterprise license cost was also comparatively lower.

Integrated access to reliable, scalable, and flexible web conferencing for all Middlebury students, faculty and staff will be realized by adopting Zoom at the enterprise level (all Middlebury). The potential impact of this investment in shared resources include improved communications, outreach, and teaching innovation.

 

Recommendation Summary

The Academic Cyberinfrastructure Transformation Team recommends adding Zoom to the ITS fiscal year 2018 budget, replacing prior services.

  • Middlebury contracts a Zoom enterprise license for one year
  • Middlebury contracts with CirQ LTI to allow Zoom-based web conferencing for online and hybrid courses to be available through Canvas

 

Cost

Proposed FY 18 Zoom cost: $41,000 annually

Host licenses for all Middlebury users, 470 100 capacity meeting rooms and ten 500 capacity meeting rooms. In addition to offering a web conferencing solution, Zoom has the potential to phase out and replace existing video conferencing services, a significant savings for Middlebury over the next few years.

Comparative cost of Adobe Connect:

Actual FY 17 Adobe Connect Cost: $18,000

Proposed FY 18 Adobe Connect Cost: $36,000

  • (discontinuing educational discount)
  • 80 host licenses and 2 webinar rooms accommodating 500 users

 

Implementation Timeline

Most of this work has been accomplished during the Fall 2016 pilot of Zoom. Also, the pilot license will be extended during Spring 2017 to transition users from Adobe Connect to Zoom.

What Who When
Budget Proposal January 2017
Budget Decision May 2017
Extended Zoom Pilot, Transition people away from Adobe Connect Spring 2017
Test LTI – Pilot Spring 2017
Implement Zoom including SSO and Canvas LTI Media Services, CSNS and Academic Technology June-July 2017
Decommission Adobe Connect January-May 2017
Train Middlebury and Monterey Institute  HelpDesk staff June-July 2017

Support

Outline of responsibilities

What Who
Zoom Support available to users Tier 1 Vendor support via: phone, email, chat
Course-related support Primary: Media Services*

Backup Support: Academic Tech, DLC, DL

Administrative-use support (core functions) Primary: Media Services*
Other academic support (creativity & innovation project, student internship w/ or w/out credit, faculty research, symposium) Primary: Media Services

Backup Support: Academic Tech, DLC, DL

Training Media Services
Academic Consultation Academic Tech, DLC, DL

 

* Conversations are occurring to identify course-related and administrative department support for the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey.

Notes for In-progress Project Presentation for Web Conferencing

Bob C.

Where we are at with the project.

act.middcreate.net/site/projects/web- confercing – service

Adobe Connect has been in Production for a few years. Adobe’s change in pricing structure, created impetus to review options. ITS was looking into options for unified communication with telephone which may have had some options.

Oct 11th, update narrowed selection to Zoom and Blue Jeans. Zoom actively being tested.

Mack P.

Adobe price change caused review. What do we currently get from Adobe connect? Could be tied into replacement of legacy phone system, which had been previously reviewed and recommended, but not funded. Skype for Business was piloted, but determined not to be phone system for Middlebury. ITS Media Services was brought into looking into telephone systems which have some video conf features(presence, chat…).

If new phone system is funded it would have Jabber for video and chat.

Decided to pursue a separate product for academic web conf.

Zoom and Blue Jeans have similar feature set. Zoom is approximately ½ of the price of Blue Jeans, Blue Jeans has some features that Middlebury wouldn’t benefit from(ability to host 500 person meeting). Zoom would lock in price for a term. Blue Jeans would match Zoom for one year only, then increase to approximately $98k. Prior users of Blue Jeans have given negative review of product for meeting use.

Zoom feedback to date has been positive. Easy to start each course.

Joe A.

Reviewed spreadsheet of services we reviewed, initially 10 services. Narrowed to 3-4 offerings. Vidyo was dropped due to cost and inclusion of video conf equipment, older tool without modern feel. Down to 3 services.

ACTT had a “round robin” where over the course of a single meeting, we took a first pass of all the services, 15 mins per service with large group. Zoom, WebX, Blue Jean and Adobe Connect, tracked issues and reminded ourselves why we are departing from Adobe Connect. Follow up meeting identified Zoom and Blue Jeans, as preferred options. Zoom allowed everyone to be visible on the screen, Blue Jeans limited to 9, others would fall off. Blue Jeans prioritized quality to speaker. Zoom quality seemed more consistent. Moved forward with Zoom pilot, one class had already requested Zoom.

Joe A. demo review following Zoom practice. Recorded to test feature in Zoom.

Screen sharing allows option to present slides, but presenter remains in presenter mode for slideshow. May be allowed only with two screens.

Video of call participants can be turn on/off be each participant.

Power, Source, Filter: Vocal production of sound.

Explication of slides.

Played Ted video via Youtube.

Issue with getting video fullscreen, common with other video conf options. Need to share desktop to share full screen, can’t do it via application sharing.

Audio needs to be shared with application. Mack P. knows the tricks.

Video recorded as MP4 file. Pilot saved locally.

Pay version allows for cloud recording.

Dotty, Hebrew Course and Zoom.

  • Prefer freedom to do what they want with recordings. Exported out of Adobe Connect.
  • Improved entrance for students.
  • Less issues with bandwidth for international students.
  • Adobe Connect frequently had issues with Flash
  • Has been using Zoom in the ‘democratized’ format with similar size videos

Mack P. Review:

  • Mack P. has better success getting people up and running during meetings. 100% self starting
  • Been working well with Polycom room systems.
  • Polycom client often been blocked by firewalls of travelers.
  • Built in phone line has allowed people to call into sessions.

Sean M.:

  • Been testing Zoom during meetings
  • Preferred over Google Hangouts
  • Testing Friday with large meeting

Bob C.

  • Plans to test Zoom with Critical Issues Forum that previously used Adobe Connect, connecting with High School Teachers
  • This use case involves recording for viewing later, wants to pull prior videos from Adobe Connect
  • Did a test with Zoom recording which was positive.

Question how to view the suite of people of people coming into session, when something is being shared.

Option to raise hand is not readily visible.

Can make the active speaker large.

Need to develop best practices and training to go along with the tools.

Zoom does have a webinar format, which may have more participant functions.

How long to we envision best of breed for variety of use cases?

Polycom room equipment needed in room. Polycom servers contracted for 2 more years, Zoom maybe able to replace some of that functions.

Zoom Webinar has more options.

Notes for In-progress Project Presentation for Panopto Pilot

  • Panopto status update
  • Recap of original charge and proposal, history of project including Media Core process and funding. General consensus that Pantopo isn’t perfect but is pretty good, and definitely the best of all available options. The goal is to make a proposal for FY18 by January. Current Panopto contract runs through June.
  • Q:Will legacy streaming platforms, MiddMedia, archived items be a part of this process?
    • A:Not during this initial phase; with the decline in available data space, eventually we’ll need to examine those assets.
  • Rate of video storage has increased x20.
  • Most Panopto views are administrative, with some faculty using it for courses as well.
  • Students don’t have to leave Canvas to view videos in Panopto, but do have to log in again. Panopto creates a new user using single sign-on credentials. A Panopto viewer window embedded in Canvas will popup a login window; the issue is with what Canvas passes to Panopto. This issue is on Panopto’s development timeline, tentatively for late fall or winter. We’re meeting with them as well, working on code.
  • Embedding in WordPress doesn’t work, trying to write some code for that. We should be able to turn on a Panopto plugin for WordPress.
  • Some faculty are using Panopto at MIIS, have also used the webcasting feature successfully, including interactive and note-taking features. Sharing videos through a link has resulted in a good user experience. This is the legacy of Panopto as a lecture capture platform; perhaps we should talk about that while we’re talking about video conferencing. Should remember that Panopto charged based on views.
  • Q:Heather has asked whether we can embed Panopto on Sharepoint pages
    • A: not at present.
  • Thoughts on recent training? Seems pretty straightforward. We have two hours of training left, most topics are also available through support documentation and video.
  • Windows version of Panopto software has many more features than the Mac version (e.g., the focus feature); we may get questions related to that difference.
  • Panopto rep did send statistics on first training session; the analytics are very thorough with very specific usage info. Panopto may have applications for original research.
  • Panopto is currently not embeddable in Drupal because of the way Drupal filters code, but other schools have solved this issue; may take some work to make it possible.
  • Searchability is limited to English only, users will need to upload a caption file for other languages. Users can also supply keywords to make videos more searchable.
  • Q: If we do additional training, can we focus on other features?
    • A: Potential for more creative uses than simply streaming video.
  • Lecture capture is a non-starter at Middlebury; faculty don’t want it and the costs were prohibitive. MIIS can still use it that way. May be useful for making guest speakers/special lecturers available to students abroad.
  • Part of the proposal to continue Panopto would be a 3-5 year commitment to encourage user investment in the platform.
  • Media workload at MIIS is increasing, so we’re looking to Panopto as a possible assist in that regard. The goal is for self-service, self-empowerment. Lots of need to cover recurring classes, to record and make available later, which has been difficult to staff and organize. There may be some capacity to use Panopto to automate some of that process, but it would require upgrading a space to achieve it.
  • Feedback on Panopto has been generally good, and good enough to go forward.