SakaiCAL

1. SakaiCAL

2. SakaiCAL

3. SakaiCAL

4. SakaiCAL

5. SakaiCAL

6. SakaiCAL

7. Forming a Regional Community: SakaiCAL West Coast Symposium Melissa Zhuo Candice Cetrone Susan Roig Jezmynne Westcott Steve Miley

8. Overview: • What is SakaiCAL? • Needs analysis • Conceptualization • Preparation • Implementation • Feedbacks and outcomes • Reflections/Lessons learned

9. Who, What, When, Where • What is SakaiCAL? • To bring together Sakai users and prospective users from the Western Region, from all types of institutions, for the purpose of networking in order to broaden participation in the Sakai community and to strengthen collaborative efforts within this community. • How did it start? • “Small talks” in 6th Sakai Conference (Atlanta) • The conversation continued in 7th Conference at Amsterdam

10. Who, What, When, Where • Organizers: • Claremont McKenna College • Scripps College • Claremont Graduate University • Libraries of the Claremont Colleges • Univ. of California, Santa Barbara • When: July 9, 2007 • Where: Claremont McKenna College

11. Needs analysis • How did we evaluate the interest in the community? • Email inquiries to known users & colleagues • Web searches to find Sakai users • Mailing lists for CVC & State Univ. Chancellor office • SakaiProject.org newsletter • NITLE west coast Sakai users • What result? • Overwhelming positive response to inquiry • Referrals nearly doubled attendance • Original estimate 40 participants; 127 sign-ups

12. Conceptualization • What format will fit the needs best? • How many people we might get? 30? 60? Cap it at 100? • Round-table discussions? Or… • Conference?Presentations, posters, demos? • Finding a venue

13. Conceptualization • Tracks: • Pedagogy/Instructional Design (40%*) • Admin/Development (12%) • User Support/Training (20%) • OSP/ePortfolio (15%) • Future Needs (13%) • Funding: NITLE IIF Award, CMC, & Scripps * From Poll

14. Preparation • Marketing • eMails • Website created for information and registration • Sakai site • UCSB created a site to coordinate the SakaiCAL communication • All attendees were added to the site • Tools such as Polls and JForum used • Used as testing ground for 2.4

15. Preparation • Logistics • Welcome packets • Enlisted community users to facilitate the discussions • Created an evaluation form • Laptops and iPods for each table to capture text and audio • Maps, signs, and direction were used to route attendees to location.

16. Implementation • How many turned out for the event? • What were the track summaries? • Who were the attendees? • What were people talking about? • What they wanted out of the event, and from the discussions?

17. Feedback: • Survey • "I really liked this type of format. The interchange was really helpful. It's something that is missing from the big Sakai conferences except at the board sessions and sometimes that is not a helpful format.”

18. Feedback: • “It was obvious that there were many people in attendance who are evaluating Sakai. Or perhaps in the beginning stages of piloting it. I think a “bootcamp”; session for new Sakai users -- one NOT focused on development but on administration, getting started -- would be very useful. Sakai's big problem is that it has been dominated by developers so far. The lack of administrative modules and documentation are a big problem.” • “Sakai is too heavily focused on development and developers. There were many people at the symposium who are evaluating Sakai, or getting started piloting it. Many don't have extensive resources (e.g., Java support). The community needs to focus more in this area, and get away from the developer-centric focus. Bootcamp sessions for new administrators, faculty, etc., would be a good start.”

19. Feedback: • “I didn't feel that I learned anything that would help me with Sakai “management”; Being on the (b)leading edge with our recent 2.4 upgrade, I got verification of our local experiences and an opportunity to hear about other viewpoints and experiences. Overall, the opportunity to communicate and the efforts to put this conference together are appreciated. • "the pedagogy sessions were okay, but with people who have very little experience it was difficult to make significant progress"

20. Outcomes • Collaboration • Shared understanding of issues relating to the conference tracks as well as future needs • NITLE arranged for an OSP demonstration from connections made at the SakaiCAL conference • Interest in future regional collaboration was express • Pedagogy became a strong trend in moving forward regarding the use of Sakai in the community • Stanford libraries and Claremont libraries worked in November, sharing ideas regarding integrating library resources into Sakai • “Timeline” development project by Whitman College, Pomona College and Claremont McKenna College

21. Outcomes • Education • In the months following the conference, there was a noticeable increase in requests for Sakai training for faculty, as well as faculty arranging for individual appointments and discussion about using Sakai • Inspired by the conference, one physics faculty member began to explore tools beyond the prearranged Claremont defaults

22. Lessons learned • What we did right • Success: met our goals • Well-organized, ran smoothly • Good location, easy to travel to • More local users • What could be done differently in future? • Structure format around participants’ needs • Workshop for newbies • More showcases • Regular online follow up communications

23. Questions

24. Thank You for Coming