Campus Technology Research White Paper: Integration: The "Behind the Scenes" Key Enabler of Blended Learning

Integration: The “Behind the Scenes” Key Enabler of Blended Learning

WHITEPAPER

Integration: The
“Behind the Scenes”
Key Enabler of
Blended Learning

Approaches to and Benefits
of Integrating Virtual
Classrooms and Learning
Management Systems Alan D. Greenberg
Andy Nilssen

March 2012
Study sponsored by:

Copyright © 2012 Wainhouse Research, LLC Page 1


Contents

Contents
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 1
Methodology........................................................................................................................................... 2
Blended Learning and Integration Defined............................................................................................... 2
The Benefits of Integration ...................................................................................................................... 4
Benefits for Instructors ........................................................................................................................ 4
Benefits for Learners ........................................................................................................................... 6
Benefits for Administrators – and the Institution ................................................................................. 7
Integration Width and Depth – and Why it’s Key ................................................................................. 9
Implementing an integrated solution – What to look for.................................................................... 12
Blackboard’s Approach to Integration.................................................................................................... 14
Conclusion............................................................................................................................................. 15
About the Authors ............................................................................................................................. 16
About Wainhouse Research ............................................................................................................... 16
About Blackboard, Inc. ....................................................................................................................... 16

WR Paper: Integration: The “Behind the Scenes,” Key Enabler of Blended Learning
Copyright © 2012 Wainhouse Research. All rights reserved.



Executive Summary
The diversity of technological platforms and tools available to educational institutions is staggering. Any
program – whether brick-and-mortar or online or blended – starts with the Learning Management
System (LMS), the essential basis for creating and disseminating information on courses, course content,
online learning, class rosters, schedules, assignments, tests, and grades. Yet most LMS platforms were
designed to be on demand repositories of information, and are only part of the solution to blended
learning program delivery. The other key element relates to live engagement – the ability to foster rich
collaboration and communication between learners, educators, and administrators. A variety of
collaboration tools support live engagement, but using them efficiently and maximizing the return on
investment can call for identifying new ways of using those tools with on demand tools like the LMS.

Fortunately the vendor community is well aware that the sum of a learning solution often is greater than
its parts. They also understand that because no single vendor can address all of an institution’s needs, it
serves them well to cooperate with other vendors to make platforms that work well within an
integrated ecosystem. Integration consists of the ability to make two (or more) systems appear as one
to provide a seamless experience, yet the approaches to integration vary by vendor. This paper explores
those approaches, as well as – based on structured interviews with five leading colleges and universities
– the many benefits educators and their institutions can derive from integration.

Just a few – perhaps the most important – of those benefits include:

• Overall enhanced ability to manage (schedule, edit, and manage) class sessions
• Single-click access to live sessions and recordings from the LMS
• Single sign-on
• One user interface (UI) to learn
• Seamless work flow between systems
• The ability for a variety of learning styles to be addressed by an institution
• Greater self-reliance on the part of faculty and learners and greater “relationship management”
between a university and its stakeholders

Because the approaches to integration vary by both real-time collaboration vendors and those who
make asynchronous LMS platforms, this paper explores how deep and / or wide an integration might be
and what to look for in implementing an integrated solution.



Methodology
Wainhouse Research (WR) interviewed a number of subject matter experts (SMEs) on the topic of
integration, as well as five educational institutions that have accomplished some degree of integration
between their LMS platforms and their real-time collaboration / virtual classroom technologies.
Reflecting a wide variety of organizations with a wide variety of needs, these institutions and those
involved in the issue of integration, are:

• Babson College – Tova Garcia Duby, Senior Manager, eLearning Platform Operations, ITSD
Operations & Security
• Drexel University – Dr. Mike Scheuermann, Associate Vice President, Instructional Technology
Support & Executive Director, Online Learning Council
• Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana – Kara Monroe, Assistant VP of Center for Instructional
Technology
• University of Utah – Cory Stokes, Director, Technology Assisted Curriculum Center
• San Diego State University – Dr. Mark Laumakis, Lecturer Department of Psychology and Faculty
in Residence, Instructional Technology Services

Blended Learning and Integration Defined
The world of blended learning – the combination of face-to-face and online, real-time and on-demand
instruction – received a major boost in recent years when the U.S. Department of Education conducted
a meta-study that determined that, on average, students in online learning programs tend to perform
slightly better than those receiving only face-to-face instruction. 1 This confirmed what many educators
already instinctively knew: that online educational technologies not only are here to stay, but also likely
to be increasingly essential components of teaching and learning.

Yet the diversity of technological platforms and tools available to educational institutions is staggering.
Any program – whether brick-and-mortar or online or blended – starts with the LMS, the essential basis
for creating and disseminating information on courses, for course content, online learning, class rosters,
schedules, assignments, tests, and grades. Most colleges and universities, and even some
primary/secondary schools, have adopted LMS solutions. Yet most LMS platforms were designed to be
asynchronous, on demand repositories of information, and are
only part of the solution to blended learning program delivery. “Integration gives us the ability
The other key element relates to live engagement, the ability to to see transitions from one
foster rich collaboration and communication between learners, mode to another. (IM to virtual
educators, and even administrators. Live engagement spans classroom.)”
the ad hoc instant of interaction to the planned lesson, and - Kara Monroe, Ivy Tech
from post-class office hours to pre- or post-class learner review Community College System
of material, as well as non-pedagogical but essential services,

1
www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf



such as online student services (help desk, library, and orientation). A variety of collaboration tools
support live engagement, from web conferencing – which enables virtual classrooms – to Instant
Messaging & presence – which lets students network informally and engage in ad hoc collaboration –
and finally to voice recording – not so much live, but which provides a rich and compelling method of
providing feedback and input (not to be confused with recorded classes; voice recording is purely using
the recorded voice as a tool for interaction and feedback). Other tools exist, such as group
videoconferencing, lecture capture, and virtual worlds, but in terms of mainstream acceptance and the
ability to be placed in the hands of the greatest numbers of learners, web conferencing, IM, and voice
authoring tools are leading the way.

In a heterogeneous world, where choice rules and options abound, institutions seek to seamlessly tie
together their preferred learning platforms, and integration is the means of doing so.

At its essence, integration consists of the ability to make two (or more) systems appear as one to
provide a seamless experience. Typically an integration between multiple systems requires that each
system makes what are called Extensible Markup Language (XML) calls between systems, taking
advantage of the application programming interfaces (APIs) provided by platform vendors or third
parties. But what does that mean? As you might guess, there are many different ways to integrate
platforms, as we discuss later in this paper. Often the integration software that uses the APIs is
packaged as a “bridge” or “adapter” that sometimes works out of the box, or sometimes requires
customization and development work. The process can be as simple or as complex as an organization
wishes it to be, often based on planning of what functionality and integration capabilities it seeks to
accomplish – and what capabilities are supported by the various vendors.

What integration results in are the following possible integration capabilities where – at their best – web
conferencing, IM, and voice authoring capabilities (as examples) are made available through the LMS:

• The ability to schedule, edit, and manage sessions
• Single-click access to live sessions and recordings from the LMS
• Single sign-on – no additional user name/password required to access sessions/recordings
• Scheduled sessions appear on LMS calendar – and voice commentary / guidance from the
instructor can be added to LMS course pages
• Voice discussions boards and emails can be generated within and from the LMS course pages
• Synchronous tools appear as tools or modules within the LMS – and as an example, the IM
engine can be populated with class roster information from within the LMS
• Session recordings are available as individual resources within the LMS
• The ability to invite external guests
• The ability to pre-configure session settings and pre-assign moderator and participant roles
• Sessions can be shared across courses
• Integration may be enabled for all courses or for individually selected courses
• Custom configurations of server settings, role mapping, and permissions



Later in this paper we explore these integration features in greater detail as we describe how integration
works.

In a survey Wainhouse Research recently conducted with over 200 educational users of technologies,
integration between LMS and web conferencing solutions is important or very important to 85% of
higher education respondents and 78% of service / content providers. More than half of primary /
secondary respondents feel the same. 2

0%
11%
10%
Very important / valuable - 5
20% 36%
49% Important / valuable - 4
30%

40% Neutral - 3
18% 67%
50% Somewhat Important / valuable - 2
60%
Not at all important / valuable - 1
27% 36%
70%

80%
11%
90% 18% 7%
2% 11%
5%
100%
Primary /Secondary Higher Ed Provider

Figure 1 Importance of LMS and Web Conferencing Integrations to Educators

Plenty has been written elsewhere concerning what one can do with synchronous tools like web
conferencing, IM, and voice authoring. What concerns us here is the impact of integrating synchronous
tools with your LMS.

The Benefits of Integration
The benefits for administrators, instructors, learners – and the institution – are many. Sometimes they
are unique to each user group; sometimes they overlap, as described below.

Benefits for Instructors
One benefit that affects everyone involved in educational technology is a simple one: efficiency.
Efficiency can be realized in many ways, by having:

2
Wainhouse Research Distance Education and e-Learning Metrics Survey 2011



• One system to log into – No need to log out to change systems, and no need to enter multiple
passwords, is a simple result that translates into greater productivity. This lets instructors focus
on the task at hand and not the overhead of administrative tasks (even as it gives them control
over how their courses are delivered to learners).

“How I access last year’s content for this year’s course: I had a recording from the summer course.
All I did was go into Blackboard Learn, grab the URL, then snip it and send the shortened link. As
long as they have logged out of any other live sessions they can jump in. I have it set for guest
access so I have maximum flexibility to do with those archives whatever I want to do.”
- Dr. Mark Laumakis, San Diego State University

• One UI to learn – When well integrated, the user interface for one product can emulate the UI
of the other, which makes it easier for instructors to stay on task and spend less time struggling
with different user experiences.
• A seamless work flow between systems – Stream of thought is not interrupted when an
instructor can jump between the LMS and synchronous capabilities seamlessly. This makes the
adoption of new learning technology easier and more appealing. And it makes the ability to
draw upon class materials that traditionally resided in silos that much easier and effortless.
• Access to content anywhere, anytime – Because
“From the faculty perspective
learning objects that are maintained in the LMS are
what gets missed from the
accessible from within a live session or in on demand
‘integration story’ is that when I
fashion, faculty can use those objects easily wherever
do live sessions and then have
they are. This may include – in case of emergency –
archives: it creates a nice
recorded classes from the past that can be drawn upon
backstop for when things come
if the instructor is not available or past or new
up. If I’m traveling to a
materials that need to be made accessible spur of the
conference, or have a family
moment.
emergency, I have a “stack” in
• More modalities of learning are made available when
Blackboard of recorded class
learners have access, as an example, to recorded
sessions I can share.”
classes. An instructor can pay attention to learner
- Dr. Mark Laumakis, San Diego
behaviors: are an individual’s learning styles being
State University
helped by the choices available? Can the instructor
redirect as needed?
• Essential tools like voice authoring can enable instructors to provide feedback to learners and
explain complex assignments. In certain disciplines of study that rely on auditory experience,
e.g., language instruction or music, voice authoring can become an indispensable component of
instruction – not standing on its own, but instead integrated into the other modalities such as
the LMS.



Benefits for Learners
Besides efficiency, integrations may very well translate into superior outcomes. It goes without saying
that learners are highly
differentiated in their behaviors,
to put it mildly. They study
differently from one another,
they learn differently, and they
communicate differently.
Typically they may be less
organized than their instructors,
so while integration can offer
the same types of payback, it
may be exponentially greater.
• One system to log into –
As with instructors, not
needing to log out to
change systems and not
worrying about multiple
passwords is a winning
combination for
learners. The classic
multi-taskers can focus
on their learning Figure 2 Single-Sign-on with Learner Access to LMS, Web Conferencing,
Voice Authoring, & IM
activities, not on
switching platforms.

“The students are in the LMS, doing other things, then toggle to the classroom environment. That’s
the way these folks work. They segment their time to do their online learning activities. Having
(web conferencing) embedded in the LMS, not having them have to log out, fire up another
browser, log back in with a new browser, or go someplace else and use other credentials, is
tremendous.” – Dr. Mike Scheuermann, Drexel University

• A seamless work flow between systems – Stream of thought is not interrupted when a learner
can jump between the LMS and synchronous capabilities seamlessly. This makes the ability to
access class materials more seamless. And it makes the ability to “step up” the degree of
interactivity with instructors or other learners that much faster. A learner reviewing material in
the LMS can quickly author a voice recording with a query, or see if an instructor or cohort
member is online and available, or even launch a web conferencing session.



• The learner can work at her own preferred pace and
“Students go to their class in the
modality -- He or she has choice in where to focus and
LMS and all the links to meet are
how and when to communicate with others when
there.”
assistance is needed. Voice authoring, as an example,
- Cory Stokes, University of Utah
will let learners use voice discussion boards to interact
with one another – and/or with an instructor.

Benefits for Administrators – and the Institution
Administrators, and the institution, benefit from integration in a variety of ways. For IT, it becomes
easier to manage systems – administrative staff can typically work with both the LMS and the
synchronous learning tools, with a number of immediate benefits:
• Faster / more accurate session scheduling. Sessions can be scheduled from within the LMS, as
an example, named, be made recurring, and even be assigned to groups or subset of class
rosters.
• Faster, more accurate course and materials updates. Materials can be updated within the LMS,
as an example, at the conclusion of a class session directly from the virtual classroom.
• No separate user database to synchronize. Because one database is now supporting the
integration, an entire step is removed from the management process: the need to keep an
entirely separate database updated via synchronization. This makes updates occur faster and
allows them to be more accurate.

“Integration has reduced significant time from the operations and administrative side by enabling
faculty members to manage their own courses. It is used more readily on their own.”
- Tova Garcia Duby, Babson College

All of these management features result in less IT involvement, in fact. Course administrators, who may
be the instructors themselves or instructional designers and staff located within departments, can “do it
themselves” without needing IT support. And this results in easier adoption of the learning
technologies.

For the institution:

• Integration creates an expanded, community-facing portal for enabling the very best in learning
activities. Students “get this” by taking advantage of the integrations to do their work and
more, and faculty “get this” by using it to foster relationships.

"LMS / collaboration integration results in a relationship management tool - not just content
management. It fosters student - faculty learning relationships."
- Kara Monroe, Ivy Tech Community College System



• Remote faculty can be called upon to teach subjects for which there is limited demand or on
campus expertise. Having the LMS integrated with the synchronous learning tools means it is
easier to train remote faculty, while also easier to give them access to all the tools they need to
be productive quickly.

“(The company that became part of Blackboard), Wimba, took the effort to make it appear like a
Blackboard interface, following a Blackboard paradigm. They made Wimba fit into that experience.
The more it fits into the LMS, and operates how one configures other tools, the easier the
adoption.” - Cory Stokes, University of Utah

• It goes without saying that a streamlined IT organization offers its financial payback in greater
productivity. With learners and instructors more able to conduct their own activities within the
LMS and synchronous learning tools, the IT and/or Learning Technologies groups can focus on
higher level issues. Even support can be enhanced, as is the case when learners and instructors
can learn about ancillary tools while being supported on other tools, or when a Help Desk
prevents redundancies by supporting the entire suite of tools, with IM as a helpmate. Thus
integration has its own unexpected side benefits that leverage the investments institutions have
made into their LMS platforms, as an example, by driving utilization.

“We love the Blackboard Instant Messaging; it’s a tool for which I cannot begin to describe all the
ways it’s used. It supports everything from basic faculty / student interaction to inter-office
communications. One office keeps it open during the day, and if someone takes a student call, the
technician will send an IM to be sure no one else has spoken to the person. So it immediately
reduces redundancy.” - Kara Monroe, Ivy Tech Community College System

• Integration helps an institution respond to crisis because mission critical communications tools
are readily accessible at a moment’s notice. Specific groups or subgroups can be invited into
“situational” assessments or crisis response meetings and have access to all the same materials
and methods of connecting and communicating – with security and immediacy.

“Most surprising to me was how quickly I was able to satisfy the university administration when
people were panicked about H1N1. Within two days I had a plan for turning on the Wimba server
host, in case we had to close the campus. We could post messages through the LMS that the
community shouldn’t come to campus, and still have class. It was so easy to do this from the
existing components.” - Cory Stokes, University of Utah

• Finally, integration supports those who hold the purse strings. Among other benefits,
integration can result in a richer set of analytical tools for understanding how these technologies
are supporting learner activities, the goals of the institution, and even fiscal performance.



“The next hot thing for us is - analytics. I want to take deeper dives into the data regarding student
success and student retention. That gives us the ability to share what we learn with other entities like
Enrollment Management and the Provost’s office. A richer data set can be used besides ‘how many
times did they log in.’ If you have the session detail integrated in the tool and take a much deeper
look, it surpasses data mining and enables you to engage in real, meaningful analysis. You can’t talk
about integration’s benefits without also talking about analysis of the comprehensive student and
instructor experience. It’s not just getting at the surface information about student log-ins, etc.; it is
about what they did.” - Dr. Mike Scheuermann, Drexel University

Creating new academic programs is a process that is not accomplished overnight; it requires planning
and patience, often while not even certain what will be the results in terms of learner or faculty
engagement. This means getting programs to their intended audiences is essential, and integration can
drive revenues by being a change agent as new programs are delivered.

“As our blended MBA program, Fast Track, substantially grew, more and more faculty members
were teaching with technology 24x7. We needed to support the faculty and get them comfortable
with the tools as quickly as possible. The pressure was on. We developed and implemented a
“Driver” program, where faculty members were paired with student workers who were certified in
the teaching tool the faculty was using. The student “Driver” drove the technology for the faculty –
allowing the professor to focus on teaching while getting more comfortable with the tools. This
made a huge difference in making the faculty comfortable and allowed us to meet the growing
needs of the faculty teaching in Fast Track.” - Tova Garcia Duby, Babson College

Integration Width and Depth – and Why it’s Key
What does it mean when two different applications claim they are integrated together? In practice the
degree of integration – and the usefulness of the result – can vary radically. Thus while integration may
be indicated with a check mark on a spec sheet, in practice no two integrations are alike. The true value
of each integration implementation can only be uncovered through careful inspection of the result.

One way to measure the degree of integration between an LMS and virtual classroom technologies is to
consider two dimensions – width and depth. For the purposes of this paper, width is the degree to
which the LMS is integrated with external real-time and asynchronous collaboration components such
as:



• IM and presence – Does the integration enable the ability to post a roster of course attendees
on the course web page in
the LMS and indicate (by
obtaining real-time presence
information) those who are
currently online? If so, can
text chat be initiated easily
and escalated to a real-time
ad hoc collaboration session
consisting of audio (VoIP) /
video / web conferencing as
needed?
• Web conferencing – Can the
LMS display upcoming
scheduled events or
meetings? Can web
conferences be scheduled
within the LMS? Can
meeting participants be
selected from the current
Figure 3 Web Conferencing Session Created from within LMS
course roster?
• Authoring tools & archiving –
Can web conferences or events be recorded, archived, and posted automatically to the LMS?
Can the recordings be easily accessed by authoring tools through the LMS for editing and
enhancement? And can additional tools like voice authoring be a part of the overall integrated
environment?

While the width of a specific integration may touch several components, depth refers to the level – or
degree of “completeness” – that has been implemented between the LMS and each virtual classroom
technology. Thus depth may increase over time: while an initial integration may enable just a few
capabilities, subsequent releases could potentially do more. (This partially explains why some vendors
have more integration capabilities than others: they have been at this game for a longer period of time.)

Some examples of increasing depth include:

1. Single Sign-on – After logging in to the LMS, users can access each supported collaboration
components without having to go through additional logins. A deeper integration would, for
example, also pass the role of the user from the LMS to the web conferencing component –
which could be used to assign appropriate privileges automatically – anyone can host a meeting
but only instructors can post meeting archives, etc.



2. User Interface-level integration – A simple method for integration literally takes the user
interface of the component and present it to the user in the LMS (typically using html’s
“iframes”). While this approach may be acceptable for a first pass, chances abound for the two
systems to look and act very differently – from cosmetics / look-and-feel to operational
inconsistencies. Thus, unless the two systems are carefully designed up front with this level of
integration in mind, this approach often appears to the user as a band-aid. A deeper
integration, for example, involves having the integrated component call the user interface of the
LMS (through an API) for interactions with the user – thus forcing consistency. Going forward, if
the LMS UI is revised, the presentation of the integrated component is automatically revised as
well.
3. bLTI (Basic Learning Tools Interoperability) – A collection of “open standard” capabilities
designed with the intention of enabling a basic level of integration between learning tools from
different vendors (accomplished through a consortium-defined set of APIs). Some examples of
bLTI integration include the ability to schedule web conferencing sessions from within an LMS,
and posting archives on the LMS. Since bLTI enables integration though API calls, it is not
susceptible to the inconsistency issues of UI integration. However, to achieve its goal of being
implemented by a number of vendors, bLTI can only go to a limited, “common denominator”
level that can work across different solutions and is not taxing from a development resource
standpoint.
4. Deep integration – Usually implemented when the LMS and collaboration component vendors
agree on a set of data exchange specifications (usually though defined APIs) which may or may
not be in the public domain. While this method holds the most promise, it also has its set of
issues. First, the vendors must agree on how (and to what level) the integration will work, and
the specification of the data exchange that will make the integration possible. Both vendors
then need to develop code to support the API, test the integration (usually between specified
versions of each offering), and support the integration in the field. Ongoing issues can arise
when either vendor changes their offering and/or decides to no longer support the API. All of
these issues can be eliminated if the same vendor is supplying both the LMS and the
collaboration components.

Examples of deep integration include:

• In session features – Specific collaborative features can be automatically enabled based on the
user’s role as defined in the LMS. For example, each user can be presented with different
menus depending on their role – presenter vs. participant, privileged session controls and
interactive tools, etc.
• Session scheduling –Enable users to schedule web conferencing sessions that include
participants that span across courses and sections. Show list of scheduled sessions for each
course within the LMS.



• Manage session content – Pre-plan the content needed for a collaborative session using any
LMS-based materials: add slides, polls, screen sharing, web tours, breakout sessions, etc. Use
the content plan to drive a web conference; post the plan in the LMS so others may see and
share.
• Create content – Record a collaborative session (“voice authoring”) – even if the instructor is the
only attendee. Post the recording as “just another content item” in the LMS, and use the LMS
access controls (course, instructor, etc). Students can record their own voice responses and
post in the LMS for instructor feedback (catalyzes foreign language learning), or the original post
can seed a discussion thread.
• Measure level of participation – Use poll results and other interactive metrics to assign a grade
to each session attendee for their level of participation
• Integration interface and configurability – Enable a single web conferencing instance to
integrate with more than one LMS. This can help test new LMS/collaborative solutions prior to
deployment.

While width and depth applies to any specific pair of LMS and collaboration offerings, a final aspect of
integration to consider is the flexibility of both the LMS and collaboration solutions to integrate with
alternative offerings. While an organization may be well serviced by a specific LMS / collaboration
solution combination today, what if plans change? The investment made in user training, process
integration, and content creation means that, if either the LMS or collaboration solution no longer fills
an organization’s need at some point in time, being able to swap out one or the other – but not both –
can preserve a substantial investment. So, for example, a web conferencing system that can adequately
integrate with more than one LMS (or vice versa) could eventually add up to a significant advantage.

Implementing an integrated solution – What to look for
Before making a final integrated solution choice, there are a few factors beyond width and depth to
consider that will impact deployment, on-going development, and support.
Who develops and supports the integration? There are at least three possibilities:
1. The customer develops the integration software themselves (or by contracting a third party),
either from scratch by coding to a set of defined API’s, or by acquiring third-party “OEM”
modules and modifying the code as needed to fit their needs. After the development work is
done, the customer implements the result and is responsible for on-going development and
maintenance (modifying the code as needed to accommodate new features or API changes
encountered through new LMS or collaboration software releases).
2. A partner of the LMS vendor or the web conferencing vendor develops, implements, and
supports the integration software, typically with some sort of certification or “blessing” from the
LMS vendor. The customer relies on the partner for on-going development and software
maintenance – which can become an issue if the partner is a smaller supplier and/or changes
their commitment to the solution.



3. The LMS vendor or the web conferencing vendor develops, implements (assisted by a
professional services group if available), and supports the integration software. The LMS vendor
provides ongoing development and software maintenance to accommodate new LMS or
collaboration software releases – which becomes totally transparent if the LMS vendor is also
the collaboration software vendor.

“Given economic and time constraints, we need vendors to do deeper integration within the
products so that we don’t have to continue to burden our IT departments with complex integrations
and their ongoing management.” - Kara Monroe, Ivy Tech Community College System

In the first two cases, a strong integration “ecosystem” must be in place to insure that the customer
and/ or the partner is successful in their development and implementation. In all cases, a healthy
ecosystem cultivates engaged development partners – which in turn creates a number of high quality,
leading edge alternatives for end users.

“We expect that the API’s exist and are well documented. And we expect the vendor to partner
with our LMS provider, bring them into whatever developer network they have. Wimba had a Vista
Powerlink and Moodle API. That gave them a huge leg up in the RFP process.
- Cory Stokes, University of Utah

A strong integration ecosystem consists of:
• A full set of useful, well defined APIs – that do not change over time and remain backwards
compatible.
• Committed developer support – including quality documentation, phone support (multi-lingual
as needed), access to test systems, and strong communication (on new software versions,
collecting input on API enhancements, etc).
• A formal partner program – to assist developers with testing and certification, and to help
publish, promote, and co-sell the resulting integrations.
• Vendor-provided consulting services – to assist with end user implementation and adoption to
ensure success.
• A community of like-minded professionals or cohorts – who can offer integrated learning /
collaboration systems advice and best practices. While vendors can be expected to do their
part, the ability for those who roll up their sleeves to deploy and monitor integrated solutions to
share lessons learned can be invaluable at improving performance and reliability.



Blackboard’s Approach to Integration
Blackboard – sponsor of this paper – and both of the companies it acquired to create Blackboard
Collaborate (Elluminate and Wimba) have separately and together worked to make integration opportunities
as seamless as possible for many years. This started with Blackboard’s Building Blocks program but also,
on the part of Wimba and Elluminate, with creating the APIs and programs for integration of their own tools
with the broader marketplace. This has resulted in what may be the deepest possible integration between
two platforms, Blackboard Learn and Blackboard Collaborate, and the broadest set of third-party LMS
integrations between Blackboard Collaborate and other LMS platforms. What this means in practice is that
Blackboard is supporting not just Blackboard, but the entire ecosystem of third-party and open source LMS
platforms. And it results in the following:

• Deep integration between Blackboard Learn and Blackboard Collaborate – Naturally, because they are
under the same umbrella, Blackboard Learn and Collaborate together total a whole greater than the
parts – when it comes to integration. In-session, scheduling, and interface / configuration features drill
down to a rich set of live engagement and on demand (e.g., voice authoring) capabilities accessible from
within Blackboard Learn.

• Similar deep integration between Blackboard Collaborate and open source LMS platforms like Moodle
and Sakai – Many (but not all) of the Blackboard Collaborate capabilities available to Learn users are
available to Moodle and Sakai users. One reason is that they are open source, and it is relatively simpler
to accomplish new capabilities on the part of Blackboard (any vendor can do this; pay attention to how
much they take advantage of open source). Some limitations do exist, however, which may simply be
the result of technology differences or timing: because Collaborate is the new integrated synchronous
platform for Blackboard, available only since summer 2011, it may take time for some capabilities to be
added. Email notifications and scheduling integration features may be most robust in Learn, and less so
in Moodle and Sakai. Or the ability to set permissions in-session may be available from within Sakai but
not from within Moodle. These typically are minor missing parts: all Collaborate real-time, in-session
virtual classroom capabilities are available to be fully integrated with Moodle and Sakai.

• Highly functional, partner-supported integrations between Blackboard Collaborate and well known third-
party LMS platforms – LMS makers Desire2Learn, Epsilen, BrainHoney, and itslearning, as examples
have their own integrations with Blackboard Collaborate, the depth of which may be based on how those
vendors chose to create their APIs or work with Collaborate’s APIs. The integration code resides in their
LMS environment but it is built according to Blackboard’s specifications and standards. The partner
typically sells that capability and is responsible for forming and maintaining the necessary software code.
As with the open source platforms, all of these platforms integrate fully with Collaborate’s real-time tools
on an in-session basis. And as with open source platforms, all of these vendors have various degrees of
scheduling and role configuration abilities, making it easy to schedule and start sessions, or (as an
example) create an assignment within the LMS or take attendance. This results in a richer set of
functionality in these partner supported versions than in the next category, the “OEM’d” integrations.

• The OEM’d class of integrations of Collaborate available from Pearson’s Learning Studio Class Live,
Class Live Pro, and both Fronter Lite and Fronter Full – These differ from partner- or Blackboard-
supported integrations in that the LMS maker Pearson builds a simple, standard offering in their LMS’s in



which a very limited number of in-session features are available, such as text chat or polling. Many other
capabilities, such as telephony, whiteboarding, and application sharing may or may not be available from
within their LMS, should a Collaborate user organization wish to integrate. Features like scheduling or
the ability to work with multiple recordings in a robust fashion are missing. More to the point: often only
one virtual classroom is available per course instance, as an example. Thus one of the key benefits of
Collaborate – breakout rooms and multiple classroom instances – may not be available in this type of
integration.

Three major points are worth making here regarding integration: 1) The deeper partner-supported
integrations of Desire2Learn, Epsilen, BrainHoney, and itslearning offer more functionality than do the pure
OEM, “limited” integrations. 2) The Blackboard Collaborate-driven integrations with Moodle, Sakai, and
Blackboard Learn offer the richest set of opportunities for full or (in the case of the open source products)
almost full integration. Finally, 3) WR recommends that organizations wishing to integrate their Blackboard
or third-party LMS with Blackboard Collaborate spend time investigating the specifics of the integration
capabilities that will be available to them. Much of the work has been done by Blackboard and other vendors
but, as they say, the devil is in the details. Where an institution sits in the process of deploying either its
real-time, live engagement and on demand tools like voice authoring capabilities and its LMS solutions will
determine how it should proceed in attempting an integration.

Conclusion
Integrating your LMS with your web conferencing and other live learning tools is not a simple process,
but it is much easier than ever before based on the work done by the vendor community. Our hope is
that this white paper has shown why colleges and universities and schools can benefit from integrations,
how the process takes place, and what to seek in an integration ecosystem. The benefits range from the
simple to the sublime.

“One of the great things about this tool, it keeps giving back. Many of our reference desks use the
(Blackboard Collaborate IM) tool to provide instant feedback to students.”
- Kara Monroe, Ivy Tech Community College System

And once an organization has experienced the benefits, there is no going back.

“We never considered not going integrated. The idea that others are not integrated is an anomaly to
me.” - Kara Monroe, Ivy Tech Community College System

Two or more platforms plus seamless access result in greater efficiencies. This will impact all
stakeholders involved in the business and pleasure of education: instructors, learners, and the
institutions in which they are a part.



About the Authors
Alan D. Greenberg is Senior Analyst & Partner at Wainhouse Research. He is distance education and
e-Learning practice manager at Wainhouse Research, and co-lead analyst on WR’s WebMetrics web
conferencing survey program. He has conducted research into dozens of distance learning networks and
e-learning users, authored the three-volume segment report The Distance Education and e-Learning
Landscape, as well as numerous white papers and reports on lecture capture, web conferencing,
videoconferencing, virtual worlds, and interactive whiteboards as applied for education and e-Learning.
He also has consulted to many states, universities, and regional educational consortia on distance
education strategies, and received the 2010 Outstanding Leadership by an Individual in the Field of
Distance Learning award from the U.S. Distance Learning Association. Alan holds an M.A. from the
University of Texas at Austin and a B.A. from Hampshire College. He can be reached at
agreenberg@wainhouse.com.
Andrew H. Nilssen is a Senior Analyst & Partner at Wainhouse Research, where he is a consultant to
rich media conferencing vendors, network infrastructure vendors, end users, government agencies, end
users, and venture capitalists. Andy is a co-author of WR's annual three volume series Rich Media
Conferencing, the firm’s thorough analysis of the conferencing industry and leads the WR web
conferencing and IM & Presence practice. Earlier in his career, Andy managed the planning and
launching of PictureTel's Venue and Concorde group videoconferencing systems. Andy has 25 years of
experience in high-technology product marketing and market research, earned his MBA and BSEE
degrees from the University of New Hampshire, and holds two ease-of-use related patents. Andy can be
reached at andyn@wainhouse.com

About Wainhouse Research
Wainhouse Research, www.wainhouse.com, is an independent market research firm that focuses on
critical issues in the Unified Communications and rich media conferencing fields, including applications
like distance education and e-Learning. The company conducts multi-client and custom research studies,
consults with end users on key implementation issues, publishes white papers and market statistics, and
delivers public and private seminars as well as speaker presentations at industry group meetings.
Wainhouse Research publishes a variety of reports that cover all aspects of rich media conferencing, and
the free newsletter, The Wainhouse Research Bulletin.

About Blackboard, Inc.
Blackboard Inc. is a global leader in enterprise technology and innovative solutions that improve the
experience of millions of students and learners around the world every day. Blackboard's solutions allow
thousands of higher education, K-12, professional, corporate, and government organizations to extend
teaching and learning online, facilitate campus commerce and security, and communicate more
effectively with their communities. Founded in 1997, Blackboard is headquartered in Washington, D.C.,
with offices in North America, Europe, Asia and Australia.
Built for education, Blackboard Collaborate delivers web conferencing, enterprise instant messaging, and
voice authoring capabilities that facilitate effective and efficient instruction, meetings, and help—anywhere,
anytime. To learn more about how you can reach your academic, administrative, and financial goals
through more interactive and cost-effective collaboration, visit blackboardcollaborate.com, contact us at
collaboratesales@blackboard.com, or try our solution free for 30 days at bbcollaborate.com/try.


Campus Technology Research White Paper: Integration: The "Behind the Scenes" Key Enabler of Blended Learning

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Destaque

Destaque (6)

Semelhante a Campus Technology Research White Paper: Integration: The "Behind the Scenes" Key Enabler of Blended Learning

Semelhante a Campus Technology Research White Paper: Integration: The "Behind the Scenes" Key Enabler of Blended Learning (20)

Mais de Dillard University Library

Mais de Dillard University Library (20)

Último

Último (20)

Campus Technology Research White Paper: Integration: The "Behind the Scenes" Key Enabler of Blended Learning