Jodie's_PII

**Eliminating eCourse Production Errors** **XYZ Campus** **Problem Summary** XYZ Campus (XYZ) is a fully online university, hosting undergraduate completion and graduate programs for adult learners in the state of X and beyond. The university experienced an initial start-up with minimal course development planning; subsequently courses were developed and produced rapidly. Many of the original 100 courses contained typos and broken url links, some even contain academic issues, such as mismatched course names and course objectives. Since March 2010, the Instructional Design team has worked diligently to clean up these issues. They have implemented quality assurance processes, a project management tool, and hired a quality assurance assistant in September 2010. Errors persist in courses delivered to the learning platform, as identified by end-users, students and faculty. A performance improvement intervention will eliminate the remaining errors. **Background of Organization** XYZ was founded August 24, 2007 by State University System’s Board of Governors and an eighteen million dollar line of credit, with courses opening in September 2008. The purpose of its inception was offering affordable, accessible, quality education to adult learners aged 26-65 in X and beyond. Undergraduate degree completion and graduate programs are offered through the online learning management system, Blackboard. Course development scripts are useful to understanding the initial course development and production process. This documentation is available in course design and development documents, academic meeting minutes, and accreditation documentation. Interviews with employees that participated in the process are also extremely informative. The campus url is XYZ.org and is currently under revision. The campus website has undergone no less than four facelifts to adapt to the changing needs of its market. The public url is used for marketing and general information, while the university has a student portal and learning management system to support student information and academic needs. The student portal is available at mycampus.xyz.org. Due to the use of single sign on, students do not have a direct Blackboard login. Students log into their portal and from there, they access their courses through a “Go to class” link. Due to the nature of being a public university going through the accreditation process, most documentation is freely available in the office and archived in the work public server. The majority of Board of Governor meetings notes, annual reports, and other public relations materials are publically available on the XYZ System website, http://www.XYZ.edu/. **Stakeholders and Decision-Makers.** Those who will be affected by the performance improvement intervention are all end users, as well as students and faculty, the instructional development team, including the instructional design manager, instructional designers, instructional technology support, and eLearning web designers, and the Help Desk. From course development to the course end-user, this intervention will change the design and user experience. The Instructional Technology Manager oversees production and sets the standard for instructional design as it comes into the production process. Therefore, the ITM will be the one to make the decision to implement the plan once it is developed. There are numerous personnel in the organization that can provide me with insights into the performance problem: Instructional Development team members: XYZ, Instructional Technology Support; XYZ, Multimedia Designer; XYZ, librarian; XYZ, Instructional Development Manager; Program Faculty (various); XYZ, VP Institutional Planning and Assessment **Performance Gap:** **Cause Analysis.** The instructional development and production process currently creates courses with identifiable errors. These errors include typos, unclear assignment directions, and broken urls. Given the multilayered quality assurance system that involves no less than six people, courses should be delivered error-free. Identified cause of errors: course production is rushed, multiple tasks are quickly rather than thoroughly reviewed, failure to use Web2Project by the IDM, documents not uploaded to the shared folder after QA processes, no pre-QA document, constant distractions of open workspace environment, verbal communication used rather than process protocol, lack of understanding of role and expectations. **Actual Current Performance.** Under the supervision of an instructional designer and project manager, content experts produce eight modules of content, learning objectives, critical thinking activities, quizzes, and a portfolio assignment in alignment with a curriculum committee stated course objectives. This documentation is then submitted to an external copy editor and thoroughly reviewed by the Instructional Technology Manager (ITM) before it moves to production. Once in production, the Instructional Technology Support (ITS) completes a pre-quality assurance (pre-QA) check, verifying that all documentation is present, sending videos off for transcription, reviewing documentation for obvious typos, and formatting quizzes for production. After the module content has had pre-QA, the librarian reviews content for proper APA citation. All documents are kept in a limited access folder on the public server at the office. Only those involved in the development and production of courses have access to the server. Throughout the development and production process, transparent tracking is available through the Web2Project project management software hosted on a server at the office, accessible online only to those involved in the projects. At each step, the individual responsible for a task checks it off as complete. An email is sent to everyone associated with the project, alerting them as to the progress of the project. Once the ITS and librarian finish their review, the Instructional Technology Manager (ITM) reviews the content for production, then the course documentation is ready for the multi-media designer (MMD) to put the documents into the course template, including translating the Word content modules into interactive HTML web pages. After production, the ITS performs post-quality assurance (post-QA), tracking the review in an excel spreadsheet. Errors are noted on the spreadsheet, then the spreadsheet is placed in the folder with the other course documentation and a note is made in Web2Project that post-QA is complete. The ITM reviews the post-QA sheet then activates the post-production fix item in Web2Project as needed. After the multi-media designer completes the fix, the ITM conducts a final course review and activates a review by the IDM, project manager, content expert, and program faculty. Any issues needing redress are tracked using Outlook, as these issues come in via email. Upon completion of any final fixes, the course is designated as ready for delivery and should be error-free. At this time errors have been reported in more than 50% of post-production courses, 40% incorrect usage of Blackboard resulting in dead links, 5% resulting from poorly aligned course objectives, and 5% related to change, change in school policies, change in course material such as a textbook, and change in templates that resulted from template revision errors. **Desired Performance.** The desired performance would involve all members of the Instructional Design team diligently performing their roles. This would begin with the IDM coordinating the information flow of the course description and course objectives thoroughly to the ID and the content expert in the kickoff meeting, attended by the librarian to ensure proper documentation. The IDM would check-off the kickoff meeting in Web2Project and all milestones noted in the project. The content expert would appropriately compose eight modules of content, assignments and mastery exercises that support the course objectives, in alignment with the course description and the project timeline. The ID would carefully organize the information in accordance with instructional design principles and the appropriate format necessary for production before placing the documents in the shared p-drive. The ITS would fully complete pre-QA and coordinate any corrective action, noting task completion in Web2Project and placing edited documents in the shared folder along with the pre-QA spreadsheet. The librarian would clean up the content of any APA errors, save the documents in the shared folder, and note the completed task in Web2Project. The ITM would thoroughly review the content for production and check-off the milestone in Web2Project. The MMD would follow designated steps in placing the documentation in the course template, confirmed with an initial QA review, and noted in Web2Project. The ITS would review the course with a more formal QA review, based on a spreadsheet, place the completed spreadsheet in the shared folder, and then note task completion in Web2Project. The librarian would review the readings formatted in the course and link articles to the article reserve, and mark off the task in Web2Project. The MMD would correct any identified errors and follow up by appropriately noting Web2Project. The ITM would thoroughly review the course and note Web2Project. The IDM, ID, content expert, and program faculty member review the produced course and provide an official signoff of approval, and the IDM notes the final project task in Web2Project. The above current process with every step documented in Web2Project, all documentation maintained in the shared folder including a pre-QA sheet, and procedures implemented with thoroughness is the desired performance. Ultimately, in the 18 months, 61 new courses core to the 2011-2012 new programs, would be delivered error-free, noted at every task in Web2Project with all supporting documentation archived in the shared folder. **Performance Gap.** The difference between actual and desired performance is the full use of Web2Project at every step of design and production, storage of all documents in the shared folder, and thorough review during every step. The quantifiable outcome of this process will be error-free courses and a documented process to identify the source of any resulting errors. **Cause Analysis.** Interviews with the Vice President of Institutional Planning and Assessment and the Instructional Design Manager revealed that the history of the organization, hurried course development and production, and staff turnover have contributed to the course errors. The original development of 100 courses in less than 18 months occurred amid two major organizational restructurings where the administration and more than 30% of the staff were let go. The changing of leadership and scrambling for course design and production led to the errors. Not only was development hurried, the staff hired to produce the courses must have been unaware of how to link course documentation within the Blackboard learning management system; the source of broken links. **Organizational History and Background** **Goals.** The goals of the university include providing affordable, accessible, quality education in a sustainable growth model for adult learners. **History.** XYZ was founded August 24, 2007 by XYZ System’s Board of Governors and an eighteen million dollar line of credit, with courses opening in September 2008. The purpose of its inception was offering affordable, accessible, quality education to adult learners aged 26-65 in X and beyond. Undergraduate degree completion and graduate programs are offered through the online learning management system, Blackboard. **Mission and Vision.** **XYZ Campus Vision Statement:** XYZ Campus is the premier provider of innovative, higher learning opportunities for nontraditional students in X and beyond. **XYZ Campus Mission Statement:** XYZ Campus is committed to advancing student success in a global society, investing in human capital, expanding the state economy, and enhancing the quality of life for citizens in the state of X and beyond by providing access to dynamic degree programs characterized by academic excellence, innovative delivery technologies, and strong stakeholder engagement. **XYZ Campus Values:** XYZ Campus utilizes the XYZ System Board of Governors’ set of values to formulate actions, direct decision-making and lead employees in pursuit of its mission. **Three Intervention Strategies** The three intervention strategies range from stretching existing resources to creating an entire team for course quality insurance. **Low end intervention.** The low-cost strategy involves using the current resources to fully QA three courses per week and schedule production fixes as needed in Web2Project. This would stretch current resources**,** including the time and energy of the ITS, ITM and MMD personnel, prohibiting the team from investigating and implementing instructional technologies that could improve the courses. This is a slow solution, as it would take at least one year to complete this task and implement the fixes. This strategy would incur no costs as it would be added to the current duties of the team. The difficulty with this course of action is trying to measure the potential improvement of additional technologies versus eliminating errors and inconsistencies. **Middle end intervention.** The medium-cost strategy involves hiring a temporary employee to fully QA the current 100 courses and schedule the production fixes as needed in Web2Project. This would not affect the current resources of the ITS, though the ITM and MMD would still incur the resource drain as they would be responsible for fixing found errors. This strategy would cost approximately $10,000. This option decreases the QA time, and minor errors could be fixed by ITS, thus a majority of errors would be fixed as quickly as they were reported. Inconsistencies related to course design would require collaboration with CEs and IDs and the IDM, and some errors would need the multi-media expertise of the MMD; resolution of these errors will be more time consuming and be implemented as time permits. **High end intervention.** The high-cost strategy would involve hiring a separate quality assurance team of an IDM, ITM, MMD, and ITS to review, fix, and maintain all current courses. This team would fully QA courses and implement fixes. They would work closely with the current team and take over revisions of new courses once they were put into production. This strategy would cost approximately $200,000 per year. This option ensures high quality, error-free courses at all times. The cost is prohibitive for a state, cash based school that receives no public funding. **Justification for Intervention Strategy** At this time, the intervention recommended is the low end intervention. This would keep the team focused on improving the current process to avoid future fixes of new course production. With the constant course review, the team will be motivated to produce error-free courses. The limitation of this intervention is the stretch of current resources. There is a possibility that the taxing of current resources could lead to burnout. This strategy resolves the current problem with the existing team member and is a better solution than hiring and training additional members. As noted above, this strategy also keeps the team focused on the importance of thorough, quality performance to avoid course errors. The IDM noted the difficulty in hiring and training a maintenance team, and the VP noted the difficulty in making a case for an entire team to focus on fixes and revisions, rather than focusing current resources on improving performance and removing course errors. The IDM and VP also noted the difficulty in fixing courses if a temporary employee were to quickly provide a review of the 100 existing courses, as the production schedule would be unable to keep up with the fixes. **The Manager’s Many Roles** The Instructional Technology Manager has dual roles within implementation of the PII. As the project manager, the ITM needs to monitor progress with dedication to the project in an unbiased way that allows the team to function according to the intervention strategy. The additional QA role within the process needs to be carried out with dedication and focus expected of the whole team. Web2Project, an open source project management tool, tracks progression and communicates the varied task completion to the team and project manager. The team is investigating bug-tracking options within Web2Project to track post production errors. The organization is moving from an exchange server to Google for gmail, thus Google marketplace project management solutions are being investigated for a single solution for project management, document storage and bug tracking. Currently all documentation is housed in the team p-drive, organized per the team's suggestions throughout the past six months. This collaborative effort improved consistent naming and location of files in a folder template structure. Weekly team meetings and a formalized process based on the PII in the form of a manual will document information management. **The Manager as Change Agent** Financial and Budget Information. Using current resources, the low-cost intervention strategy will be enacted with no financial burden to the organization. As noted throughout the PII, current project management, Web2Project, and shared storage drive, the P drive, will be used to track project progression and manage document storage. Personnel will use familiar resources and processes, thus no training will be necessary.
 * Here's the 1/30/11 submission of my PI, please feel free to post comments throughout.**
 * Be accountable
 * Promote civic responsibility
 * Employ a customer focus
 * Promote freedom of expression
 * Demonstrate inclusiveness and diversity
 * Encourage and reward innovation
 * Act with integrity and mutual respect
 * Provide opportunity and access
 * Support excellence in teaching and research

Project Assessment. The project will be assessed based on faculty and student feedback. Current end of course surveys by students and course feedback by faculty, as well as Help Desk reports, will be tracked in a spreadsheet. The QA process is a formative evaluation as it involves the end-users as well as course designers. This PII is focused on improving the quality of courses pertaining to the elimination of course errors including access, course alignment, and consistent messaging. Though an improved learning experience is not explicitly noted here, it certainly is always a goal of XYZ. The summative evaluation involves measuring students' attainment of learning objectives, data collected with the interactive rubric tool, Waypoint. Though numerous factors contribute to student learning, implementation of the PII would be expected to improve student learning, making a positive impact on Waypoint data. Another evaluation of the PII effect would be retention. The emilination of course errors and inconsistencies should improve the overall student experience, thereby increasing retention. All data is collected and analyzed by the Office of Institutional Assessment. Data is reported as available at weekly academic meetings, bimonthly management meetings, monthly Board of Governor meetings, and in the stakeholder newsletter six times/year. Data will then be used to continue to improve the process.

References All references you used to develop your PII should be included in this list. Please remember to use APA 6th formatting for your references. You will also use hanging indentations for your references as shown in this example.

**Appendices** NOTE that you may not need all of the Appendices listed below. Select the ones that are relevant to your project and include that data to support your work. Letter your appendices in the order they are referenced in your document. Each Appendix will begin on a new page. All of you will include Appendices A through E. Select the other topics and include them as relevant. You will letter the Appendices in the order you mention them in your paper, once you decide which ones you will use. Appendix A: Formative Evaluation Instrument Appendix B: Summative Evaluation Instrument Appendix C: Interview Questions Appendix D: Interview Transcripts or Summary Appendix E. Budget

Appendix ?: Detailed and appropriate technical information for implementing your intervention Appendix ?: Layout sketches, if relevant Appendix ?: Specifications of equipment and purchases Appendix ?: Data charts and graphs, as relevant Appendix ?: Resources that support your proposal

Mod 4


 * Document project management techniques: My role is to oversee implementation of the PII, with a detached, unbias review, as much as I can. Also, I have a role within the process that I need to carry out with dedication and focus that I expect of my team.
 * Document resource management techniques: We use Web2Project an open source project management tool. We're still investigating bug-tracking options to track post production errors.
 * Document delivery system management techniques: All documentation is housed in the team p-drive, organized per the team's suggestions throughout the past six months.
 * Document information management techniques: Weekly team meetings, a formalized process based on the PII in the form of a manual.

Removed file, latest version is noted above. Here's the document I submitted for my Mod 3 assignment. Please post your comments here. Thanks!

**Problem Summary** XYZ is a fully online university, hosting undergraduate completion and graduate programs for adult learners in the state of X and beyond. The university experienced an initial start-up with minimal course development planning; subsequently courses were developed and produced rapidly. Many of the original 100 courses contained typos and broken url links, some even contain academic issues, such as mismatched course names and course objectives. Since March 2010, I have worked diligently to clean up these issues. I have implemented quality assurance processes, a project management tool, and hired a quality assurance assistant in September 2010. Errors persist. I plan to implement a performance improvement intervention to eliminate the remaining errors. What effect have these mismatched courses had on the school? Nichelle 1/12/11 - It causes a lot of last minute running around and fixing. Jodie 1/17/11 Do you need 100 original cousres or can some be eliminated to help reduce the broken url inks and so forth? Keith 1/15/11 - Thankfully, the issues are not so great that the courses should be eliminated. Jodie 1/17/11 **Background of Organization** XYZ was founded August 24, 2007 by XYZ Board of Governors and an eighteen million dollar line of credit, with courses opening in September 2008. The purpose of its inception was offering affordable, accessible, quality education to adult learners aged 26-65 in X and beyond. Undergraduate degree completion and graduate programs are offered through the online learning management system, Blackboard. Course development scripts are useful to understanding the initial course development and production process. This documentation is available in course design and development documents, academic meeting minutes, and accreditation documentation. Interviews with employees that participated in the process are also extremely informative. The campus url is XYZ.org and is currently under revision. The campus website has undergone no less than four face lifts to adapt to the changing needs of its market. The public url is used for marketing and general information, while the university has a student portal and learning management system to support student information and academic needs. The student portal is available at notXYZ.org. Due to the use of single sign on, students do not have a direct Blackboard login. Students log into their portal and from there, they access their courses through a “Go to class” link. Due to the nature of being a public university going through the accreditation process, most documentation is freely available in the office and archived in the work public server. The majority of Board of Governor meetings notes, annual reports, and other public relations materials are publicly available on the XY System website, XY.edu/. **Stakeholders and Decision-Makers.** Those who will be affected by my performance improvement intervention are all end users, as well as students and faculty, the instructional development team, including the instructional design manager, instructional designers, instructional technology support, and eLearning web designers, and the Help Desk. From course development to the course end-user, this intervention will change the design and user experience. As the Instructional Technology Manager, I oversee production and set the standard for instructional design as it comes into the production process. Therefore, I will be the one to make the decision to implement the plan once it is developed. Could a presonal bias exists since you are the one making the final decision to implement the new plan? Keith 1/15/11 There are numerous personnel in the organization that can provide me with insights into the performance problem: Instructional Development team members: AA, Instructional Technology Support; AB, Multimedia Designer; AC, librarian; AD, Instructional Development Manager; Program Faculty (various); AE, VP Institutional Planning and Assessment. **Performance Gap: Cause Analysis** The instructional development and production process currently creates courses with identifiable errors. These errors include typos, unclear assignment directions, and broken urls. Given the multilayered quality assurance system that involves no less than six people, courses should be delivered error-free. **Actual Current Performance.** Under the supervision of an instructional designer and project manager, content experts produce eight modules of content, learning objectives, critical thinking activities, quizzes, and a portfolio assignment in alignment with a curriculum committee stated course objectives. This documentation is then submitted to an external copy editor and thoroughly reviewed by the Instructional Technology Manager (ITM) before it moves to production. Once in production, the Instructional Technology Support (ITS) completes a pre-quality assurance (pre-QA) check, verifying that all documentation is present, sending videos off for transcription, reviewing documentation for obvious typos, and formatting quizzes for production. After the module content has had pre-QA, the librarian reviews content for proper APA citation. All documents are kept in a limited access folder on the public server at the office. Only those involved in the development and production of courses have access to the server. Throughout the development and production process, transparent tracking is available through the Web2Project project management software hosted on a server at the office, accessible online only to those involved in the projects. At each step, the individual responsible for a task checks it off as complete. An email is sent to everyone associated with the project, alerting them as to the progress of the project. Once the ITS and librarian finish their review, the Instructional Technology Manager (ITM) reviews the content for production, then the course documentation is ready for the multi-media designer to put the documents into the course template, including translating the Word content modules into interactive HTML web pages. After production, the ITS performs post-quality assurance (post-QA), tracking the review in an excel spreadsheet. Errors are noted on the spreadsheet, then the spreadsheet is placed in the folder with the other course documentation and a note is made in Web2Project that post-QA is complete. The ITM reviews the post-QA sheet then activates the post-production fix item in Web2Project as needed. After the multi-media designer completes the fix, the ITM conducts a final course review and activates a review by the IDM, project manager, content expert, and program faculty. Any issues needing redress are tracked using Outlook, as these issues come in via email. Upon completion of any final fixes, the course is designated as ready for delivery and should be error-free. Identified cause of errors: course production is rushed, multiple tasks are quickly rather than thoroughly reviewed, failure to use Web2Project by the IDM, documents not uploaded to the shared folder after QA processes, no pre-QA document, constant distractions of open workspace environment, verbal communication used rather than process protocol, lack of understanding of role and expectations. **Desired Performance.** The above current process with the additional elements of every step documented in Web2Project, all documentation maintained in the shared folder including a pre-QA sheet, and procedures implemented with thoroughness. Ultimately, courses would be delivered error-free and all documentation supporting the process would be archived in the shared folder. Would anybody be able to access the shared folder or will it be mananged by an administrator? Keith 1/15/11 - Yes, the shared folder is on our office's public drive, accessible to everyone on the team. Jodie 1/17/11 **Performance Gap.** The difference between actual and desired performance is full transparency through the use of Web2Project, documents stored in the shared folder, and thorough review during every step. The quantifiable outcome, error-free courses.

The low-cost strategy involves using the current resources to fully QA three courses per week and schedule production fixes as needed in Web2Project. This would stretch current resources**,** including the time and energy of the ITS, ITM and MMD personnel. This is a slow solution, as it would take at least one year to complete this task and implement the fixes.
 * Intervention Strategies.**

The medium-cost strategy involves hiring a temporary employee to fully QA the current 100 courses and schedule the production fixes as needed in Web2Project. This would not affect the current resources of the ITS, though the ITM and MMD would still incur the resource drain as they would be responsible for fixing found errors.

The high-cost strategy would involve hiring a separate maintenance team of an IDM, ITM, MMD, and ITS to review, fix, and maintain all current courses. This team would fully QA courses and implement fixes. They would work closely with the current team and take over maintenance of new courses once they were put into production.

How will you assess your implementation. 2/18 Nichelle