7.1. Deployment Strategy
7.1.1. Where to start
None of the MLEs that have (or are) being deployed so far could be described as complete. This was one of the findings of the JISC Landscape Survey (2003). A common thread running through all is the closer integration of systems in the host institution. However, the starting point for this integration has differed between institutions, dictated by local circumstances and requirements.
Some projects, for example CoMantle, have focussed on the passing of data between the University's student record system and a Virtual Learning Environment. Other MLE developments have taken the form of Web portals. De Montfort University's MLE is aimed primarily at students, giving personalised access to the student data system and other systems through:
'...a personalised electronic environment that supports the student experience. It brings together learning, teaching, student research, support and personal information in a tailored portal that is designed to be simple and effective to use.'
Others were initially aimed at staff, e.g. GIMIS:
'The overall aim of the project is to establish practical methodologies for the dissemination of MIS information throughout the College, expanding and reinforcing its Information Strategy by providing the ability to create intrinsic streams of information flow.'
and INSIDE:
'INSIDE started with three general goals: the development of a sustainable model of the University's information flows and processes based on analyses and formal modelling techniques; the piloting of value-added services based on the analyses of existing processes; and the generation of user-centric portals for staff based on their institutional roles and responsibilities.'
For more information on approaches taken, see 'More Resources' in this section, and the section 'Technology Options - What Projects Have Done'.
7.1.2. The incremental approach - a pragmatic solution
The portal concept supports an incremental approach to MLE development - it may initially only link together a small number of systems, but more systems can be added over time. In many cases, a definite decision has been taken to avoid a 'big bang' approach. For example, the INSIDE project used a 'Model, Analyse, Improve' approach - identifying problem areas, modelling them and then piloting solutions:
'The success of the Model, Analyse, Improve approach has suggested that incremental progress is more effective than big bang approaches, both in terms of cost, and functional fit. Some proper comparisons, and even identifying the parameters for such comparisons, would be interesting. The use of manageable scale pilots for value-added services and new systems works well. Several issues always come to light in a pilot that cannot be anticipated. It is therefore important that the pilot is on a manageable scale and that users are aware of its nature.' (See 'More Resources': INSIDE. Management Report 5, section 'Gathering requirements')
The TISR project also recommends an incremental approach:
'MLE projects should be realistic, if they are to stand a chance of success, and based on simple components. Rather than attempt to build a whole system, we believe it is better to follow the TISR model and build functional components whilst building up understanding of the institution and its requirements. As the MLE itself is developed, it can be founded on these components, rather than being just another application to integrate. In short, integration is at the heart of MLEs, and the soul of all applications should be integrative.' (See More Resources: TISR. Management Report 4)
There is a realisation that the integration of systems at an institutional level is likely to have far-reaching consequences, and that no single person or group can be expected to have the complete and detailed knowledge required to foresee all the potential difficulties. An incremental approach allows the implementation team and the institution to acquire this knowledge and to keep any problems within manageable bounds. (See section 7.2 and also the sections 'Why might you want an MLE?' and 'Understanding your organisation' for related discussions)
Another advantage of the incremental approach is that some of the benefits of an MLE can be demonstrated as they become ready - at an earlier stage in the project. This can be useful as a means of maintaining support for the project in the institution. This is echoed in a recent review of institutional portals:
'...senior institutional stakeholders will want to see working systems rather than the conceptual design required for thorough portal development planning' (Liz Pearce. Institutional Portals - A Review of Outputs. The PORTAL Project, 2003)
A 'big bang' approach would require a very considerable amount of analysis of the institution and its processes before any development could begin.
7.1.3. Importance of the Institutional perspective
The danger of an incremental approach is that it makes it easier to begin developing an MLE without taking account of the requirements of the institution as a whole. If the institutional perspective is lost the MLE becomes simply a collection of piecemeal solutions. It needs to be more than this for it to function effectively at an institutional level and for it to be sustainable in the long term.
Jos Boys, in a JISC Report on MLEs, highlights the drawbacks of a portal-based approach:
'Some form of web-based portal for students (and staff) is increasingly becoming the 'standard' mode of joining up the previously separate components of student data system, VLE and learning support services via an additional connecting layer. Such an approach is extremely pragmatic - organisationally, technically and financially. It is, however, a very limited model for educational or organisational change, since key issues of content and structure can easily become marginalised in decision-making processes, or be treated as additional rather than central to MLE development. It might even be suggested that the portal approach is taking hold precisely because it enables institutions to avoid difficult questions about how they organise themselves.' (Jos Boys. Managed Learning Environments, joined up systems and the problems of organisational change. See Key Resources.)
Boys goes on to argue that
'If the development of MLEs is to be seen as more than a technical adaptation of existing sub-systems, then its strategy and implementation should include:
a 'problem seeking' rather than just a solution driven approach
an explicit model for the management of change, relevant to tertiary education
explicit organisational and educational goals, preferably including some kind of institution-wide business process review
development methodologies which centre on structure and quality of content and processes rather than on technical compatabilities
involvement of students from the outset and a student centred approach to analysing and improving processes
alternative 'visualisations' of what a MLE is, including the learning of lessons from the existing integration across administrative and academic areas of learning support and information services'
The lesson seems to be that deployment has to be carried out as a series of incremental steps, but these need to be planned carefully so that implementation relates closely to institutional goals, and to ensure that processes are integrated, not just the technical systems.
Follow this link for key resources for this section (these open in a new window)
Follow this link for more resources for this section (these open in a new window)
