Background of the Review
- Current license agreement between the University and Blackboard will end by 30 Nov 2016.
- It is time for the University to conduct a comprehensive review exercise in 2016 to make informed decision of selecting the most suitable LMS for the academic year 2017/18 and after.
Back to top
Objective of the Review
- To recommend the university-wide LMS for the academic year 2017/18 and after.
Back to top
Scope of the Review
Back to top
Terms of Reference
- Management – Subcommittee on Education Technologies of the IT Governance Committee (ITGC-SET)
- To oversee the Review and make recommendation to the University.
- Review Committee – 1 representative from each faculty, each university core subject (ELTU, CLC, GE, IT and PE), Library, ITSC and CLEAR and 2 student representatives
- To represent respective faculty, programme, unit and student body to participate in the review activities.
- To give comment and rating to the proposed systems.
- To participate in ratification of recommendation and final report of the Review
- Sub-teams for functional review and technical review led by CLEAR and ITSC respectively. The two sub-teams also coordinate the Review and provide support for the review activities.
- Teachers, teaching support staff and students can express their views on candidate systems through various review activities and communication channels.
Back to top
Review Activities
- Subcommittee on Education Technologies of IT Governance Committee (ITGC-SET) decided at its 1st meeting on 26 October 2015 to form a Preliminary Task Force on LMS Review.
- The Preliminary Task Force was called to conduct background study for the review and make recommendations (on single/multiple systems, on premise/cloud solution, system to be reviewed and short-term solution) and formulate evaluation plan.
- As discussed in its 1st meeting on 14 December 2015, in which recent developments in the LMS market as well as the advantages of having a cloud-based platform were discussed, Blackboard Learn SaaS and Canvas (cloud) by Instructure were selected by the Task Force to be the two candidate systems. Based on the discussions in the meeting, CLEAR and ITSC then worked out a detailed proposal of the review, including the overall timeline, planned activities and the tender process.
- Approval from the tender board for having shortlisted only two suppliers for the tender and funding support from RAC for the review were sought in April 2016.
- The invitation to tender document was subsequently prepared by ITSC and posted to the two suppliers on April 20 by Business Office. The tender was closed on May 12.
- The Review Committee:
- Chairperson: Prof. Poon Wai Yin, Pro-Vice Chancellor
- Members
- Prof. Ian Morley, Faculty of Art
- Dr. Anna Tsui, Assistant Dean (Teaching and Learning), Faculty of Business Administration
- Prof. Morris Jong, Faculty of Education
- Prof. Anthony So, Assistant Dean (Student Affairs), Faculty of Engineering
- Prof. Michael Lower, Faculty of Law
- Prof. Shekhar Kumta, Assistant Dean (Education), Faculty of Medicine
- Prof. Ronald Lui, Faculty of Science
- Prof. Alan Wong, Faculty of Social Science
- Ms. Miranda Lee, English Language Teaching Unit
- Dr. Pit Shun Lai, Department of Chinese Language and Literature
- Dr. Wing Hung Wong, Associate Programme Director, General Education Foundation Programme
- Mr. Michael Fung, Department of Computer Science and Engineering
- Dr. Elean Leung, Physical Education Unit
- Mr. John Bahrij, Head, Learning Support, Library
- Mr. Che Hoo Cheng, Information Technology Services Centre
- Dr. Paula Hodgson, Centre for Learning Enhancement and Research
- Mr. Hung Ho Ming, Horace
- Mr. Tang Hiu Fung, Andy
- Secretary: Ms. Carol Chiu, Information Technology Services Centre
- At its 1st meeting was conducted on 11 Apr 2016, the Review Committee decided the tender evaluation criteria as Cost (50%), Functional (20%), Technical (20%) and Vendor (10%). It is also decided that 8-point scale should be used for rating the three non-Cost criteria.
- The Review Committee also endorsed below tender evaluation process.
- While keeping the price proposal in sealed:
- Review solution proposals and supplementary information provided by the tenderers in tenders timely received.
- Arrange the following activities to collect feedback from additional stakeholders of the University:
- Set up testing environments of the solutions for the following:
- For members of the tender evaluation committee to try the solutions.
- For general staff and students of the University to try the solutions and provide feedback.
- For teachers to try using the solutions to support real on-campus class teaching and provide feedback.
- For the functional sub-team and technical sub-team led by CLEAR and ITSC to conduct detailed functional and technical reviews against the solution proposal.
- Allow tenderers an opportunity to meet publicly with general staff and students of the University to provide information of the solutions and provide answers to any questions general staff and students have on the solutions.
- Arrange the following activity to collect feedback from external users of the proposed solutions
- Arrange visits to and/or online conference calls with existing users of the proposed solutions
- Arrange the following activity to allow the tenderers opportunity to present the solutions to the tender evaluation committee:
- Allow tenderers an opportunity to meet privately with the tender evaluation committee to provide information of the solutions and provide answers to any questions the committee have.
- With reference to the solution proposals and supplementary information provided by the tenderers, plus the feedback and supplementary information collected through various activities listed above, the solutions will be scored.
- After the solution proposals have been evaluated and properly scored:
- Review price proposals and evaluate total cost of ownership of the solutions.
- Overall score of the solutions will be calculated.
- Timeline of the review activities:
|
Review Committee |
External References |
Internal -
Real Use Case |
Internal -
Guided Workshop |
Sub-team Assessement |
Vendor |
Tender |
Apr |
4/11
1st Review Committee Meeting |
|
|
|
|
|
4/20
Issue tender invitation |
May |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5/18
Open tender (Solution Proposal) |
Jun |
Participate in various review activities |
(i) Visits (CityU, PolyU)
(ii) Online conference calls |
(i) Real Case Testing
(ii) Feedback collection from real users |
(i) Guided Workshops for Teachers, Teaching Support Staff, TA (Jul 22, Aug 8 & 24, Sept 8 & 9) and Students (Jul 28, Aug 16 ,Sept 12 & 14)
(ii) Two-month trial
|
(i) Functional review
(ii) Technical review |
|
Jul |
Aug |
Sept |
Information session (open-to-all) |
Oct |
Attend summary and vendor presentations |
Summary presentation |
Summary presentation |
Summary presentation |
Summary presentation |
Private Vendor presentation |
Nov |
Decision-making meetings (two enveloped, without price, with price) |
|
|
|
|
|
Dec |
|
|
|
|
|
(i) Open tender (Price Proposal)
(ii) Tender Result |
- System migration timeline from current Blackboard system to the new system over academic years 2016-19 (tentative):
Back to top
Enquiries
For enquiries, please contact Ms. Carol Chiu, Secretary of the Subcommittee on Education Technologies of the IT Governance Committee (ITGC-SET) at email: carol@itsc.cuhk.edu.hk or ITSC eLearning Team at email: elearning@cuhk.edu.hk.
Last updated: Jun 2016
Back to top
