Context & Common Issues

- Quality Control- Dissemination- Sustainability

• Institutions invest in developing instructional software without provisions for:

• Lack of quality, interactive, web-based learning materials

• Faculty often work in isolation while developing online courses

M E R L O T

Multimedia Educational Resource for Learning and Online Teaching

What is ?

MERLOT’s mission is to improve the effectiveness of teaching and learning by expanding the quantity and quality

of peer-reviewed online learning materials that can be easily incorporated

into faculty designed courses.

M E R L O T

• Faculty are, and should remain, in control of the teaching/learning process.

• Faculty-led peer review processes are the key to expanding the use and effectiveness of digital learning materials.

AssumptionsM E R L O T

• States, systems, consortia, and individual institutions can collectively learn and share with each other, thus maximizing their investments in instructional IT.

• Faculty want and deserve better mechanisms to document their contributions to teaching and learning.

Major Activities

Result • High Quality Learning Components • Support for Faculty Development

M E R L O T

Track & Assess Usage

Develop Discipline

Communities

Post/Host Learning

Components

Review & Assess

Learning Components

Solicit Learning Components

A Taste of M E R L O T

• Educators

• Authors

• Reviewers

• Faculty Support

M E R L O T Perspectives

Scenario 1:

Intro physics class is in 20 minutes

Topic: Random motion of gas atoms Temperature and pressure

Need: Visual demonstration of topic

Bonus: Student access to demo

Scenario 2:

Preparation for Fall Semester Course

Topics: Classical mechanics, fluids Waves and oscillations

Needs: Class demonstrations Interactive homework Advanced topics & readings Supplemental material

Solutions

http://www.merlot.org

Users’ Needs

Ease of Use

• Quick, reliable, efficient searches

• Standard topic organization

Added Value

• One-stop shopping

• Testing and reviews of material

• Examples of material use

Feedback

• Contact with authors, reviewers, users

Authors’ Perspective

Scholarly Recognition

• Basis for tenure/promotion/retention

• Standards and quality control

• Advertisements, break the “N. I. H.” syndrome

Feedback

• Correct existing errors

• Recommendations for upgraded material

• New ideas

Authors’ Comments

“...so I think the MERLOT approach is great, no matter how cumbersome the initial steps are…”

“I have been on a crusade for 3 years with the professional societies to host a peer reviewed curriculum web server but alas, they a) didn't grok and b) didn't care…”

“I am interested in MERLOT. What you are doing looks great.”

“… I think the site is a very valuable resource for science educators. I look forward to benefiting from and contributing to the site as a member.”

Reviewers’ Perspective

Dread• So much to do, so few people• MERLOT is premature

Enthusiasm• Developing standards where none exist• Recognizing areas of need• Providing feedback to authors

Building Discipline Communities

USERS REVIEWERS

AUTHORS

Professional Societies

Faculty Development/Support

A way to reach the “other 80%”– Ease of use– Reduce time commitment– Lessen the demands on local support

staff

MERLOT Software Overview

• Online Community Starter Kit (OCSK)

• Continuous Improvement Process

• Development Team

• Future Directions

Online Community Starter Kit

• Allows groups to build their own “online communities”• Provides for connecting “communities”

• Runs on a variety of platforms• Can handle heavy traffic

• Relatively easy to start up• Is modifiable, given the right expertise

Robust & Scaleable Technology

• Multiple OCSKs on one server

• Category scheme unifies separate sites

• Automated link checking

Based on Open Standards

• Library of Congress categories

• IMS metadata

• Java Servlets, HTML, JavaScript

• Database: SQL, JDBC

• OS: Unix, NT, Mac OSX

Continuous Improvement Process

• Dialog with individuals/groups to clarify needs, possible options

• Prototype/test solutions offline

• Usability testing

• Monitor discipline groups and MERLOT “feedback” link for user needs/issues

OCSK Development Team

• Manager

• Programmer

• Designer

• Librarian

• Center for Usability in Design and Assessment

Future Directions

• Bring up the discipline sites

• Improve browsing by subject

• Allow for multiple categorization

of materials

• Simplify the home page design

• Expand the number of item types

More Than a Collection of URLsM E R L O T

• Engaging Faculty in Discipline-Based Evaluation & Use of Online Learning Materials

• Providing Tools and Processes to EnsureTeaching-Learning Success

• Managing Our Collaboration

Schedule of Participant Activities

Meetings Date Location

Project Directors Meeting July 17-18, 2000 Denver

Discipline Leader Training August 22-23, 2000 Salt Lake

Discipline Group Faculty September 14-16, 2000 Nashville Faculty Developers November, 2000 Ann Arbor

All Advisory Boards January 30-31, 2001 New Orleans

MERLOT National Conference August, 8-11, 2001 Tampa

All Advisory Boards January, 26-28, 2002 San Diego

MERLOT National Conference September, 26-30, 2002 Atlanta

Conducting Peer Reviews

September workshop for faculty learning how to perform peer reviews:

• Adopting evaluation standards- quality of content- potential effectiveness for teaching-learning- ease of use

• Developing their peer review process

• Understanding their roles and responsibilities as MERLOT reviewers

Bringing MERLOT Home

November workshop for your faculty development personnel:

• How to use MERLOT to achieve your institution’sacademic technology goals

- peer review processes- guidelines for online learning assignments- guidelines for online communications- guidelines for engaging faculty with MERLOT

Continuous Improvement

Advisory meetings of project directors and discipline co-leaders at EDUCAUSE/NLII in January:

• Progress reports• Continued planning• Issues resolution

National MERLOT Meeting

Sharing lessons learned and inviting more faculty to learn about MERLOT. Reports from:

• MERLOT administrative group• MERLOT project directors • Discipline communities• Individual faculty reviewers

The Vision

MERLOT will be the place

where faculty from around the world

will share

learning materials and pedagogy

Organizing Principles

• The MERLOT community will be built upon the principle of open exchange of ideas.

• The goal will be to develop a sustainable business model that will maintain free or low-cost access to end-users.

MERLOT “Ecosystem”

Legend

Existing membersPotential members

Grant-Making Organisations

University Systems

Sponsors

Partners

Advertisers

Professional organizations

Faculty members

Individual institutions

Students

M E R L O T

Staff

Critical Success Factors

• Conducting peer reviews that are credible and add value

• Maintaining free or low-cost access to end-users

• Sustaining in-kind contributions from participants

• Using grants and sponsorships to expand scope(The “NPR” Model)

• Making connections to discipline associations

.’s Evolution: 3 Stages

• To create a governing board• To hire a CEO • To recruit 16 new members• To secure start-up funds

Phase 1: Start-up

Characteristics

• MERLOT is moving to an independent status

• Employees will play multiple roles until Merlot is fully staffed

• Reliant on founding organizations for support

Objectives

Timeframe

• Present - Early 2001

• To elevate user base to higher volumes

• To circulate credible peer reviews

• To attract new customers & build brand recognition

• To broaden membership base and host content

Characteristics

• MERLOT develops strong marketing presence

• Aggressively recruit staff, including management

• Structure is established and employee roles are defined

Objectives

Phase 2: Development

Timeframe

• 2001-2002

• To generate a substantial amount of traffic

• To attract revenues from advertisers, including corporate entities

• To enable users to access a range of products and services via MERLOT’s ecosystem

Characteristics

• MERLOT is “the place” for faculty who care about teaching and learning.

• Greater organizational self-sufficiency

Objectives

Phase 3: Self-Sufficiency

Timeframe

• 2003 - Beyond

Source: MERLOT data, PwC Analysis.

M E R L O T

Funding sources that could potentially consider ….

Philanthropic and corporate grants represent a natural starting point for not-for-profit funding

Summary Conclusions

Leverage founding member contributions and enable individual faculty to contribute content

Provide revenue, but may not cover costs Scalable, and facilitate projection of revenues; may extend to faculty and students

High traffic volume will drive substantial revenues

Allows differentiation from rivals, but may lead MERLOT away from core mission

6) Value-added services (e.g. training, consulting)

1) Philanthropic and corporate grants

Potential Funding Sources

2) In-kind contributions

3) Meetings and conferences

4) Memberships

5) Advertising & Sponsorships

M E R L O T

Organization & Staffing ModelPhase II: “Development”

• Early 2001Board of DirectorsBoard of Directors

Administrative Advisory Group

Administrative Advisory Group

Executive AssistantExecutive Assistant

AdministrationAdministration External Relations

External Relations ProgramsPrograms ITIT

• budget, G/L• HR• financial

reporting

• member relations• strategic alliances• marketing

• coordination of review panels• faculty

development• content mgmt &

development

• programming• design• maintenance

M E R L O T

CEOCEO

Faculty Advisory Group

Faculty Advisory Group

MERLOT Discipline Groups

BiologyPhysics

Teacher Ed

Business

InformationTechnology

ChemistryPsychology

Health SciencesHistory

LanguagesMath

Music Engineering

Participation Agreement

Faculty Compensation

• Suggest 3 units of reassigned time or stipend for

7 group members

• Suggest 1/2 time reassigned time for 1 co-leader

• Travel expenses to MERLOT events

(see schedule of activities)

Participation Agreement

Intellectual Property

• Rights to learning materials remain with theirowners

• Rights to use ratings, reviews, and assignments assigned to MERLOT

• Participant must secure consent from faculty for MERLOT to use the ratings, reviews, and assignments

Participant Selection Criteria

• Demonstration of clear commitment to the project

• Alignment with system or institutional priorities

• Plans to integrate MERLOT within existing initiatives

• Diversity of organizational type and size

Applicants in excess of slots will be phased in at later date

Key Benefits to Participation

Your MERLOT: Participants maximize MERLOT’s benefits by shaping it to fit their needs

Faculty Development: Provides faculty with powerful instructional technology resource and documents contributions to teaching

Online Teaching and Learning: Increases institutional focus on online teaching and learning

Key Benefits to Participation

Leveraging Resources: By joining a collaborative environment, participants benefit from the work of many faculty

IT Investments: Provides guidelines to institutions for their instructional technology investments