streamlining content adoption workflows: a report on content use

Streamlining Content Adoption Workflows:

A Report on Content Use in U.S. Higher Education

Executive SummaryThe use of digital content in higher education should make life easier for instructors and students.

They can gain quicker access to less expensive materials – with lower environmental impact – that

are easier for content providers to update and augment with supplementary material. Digital

content is easier to transport and can be accessed from multiple locations at nearly anytime,

which helps meet the needs of both millennial students and nontraditional or lifelong learners.

However, digital materials have created new challenges for the people and organizations involved

in the processes of content distribution and acquisition: faculty members, students, school

administrators, librarians, campus bookstores, and publishers.

Blackboard Inc., working with research firm O’Donnell & Associates, LLC, completed a

comprehensive study of digital content use in U.S. higher education to better understand the

needs of end-users and challenges encountered by the numerous groups involved in the processes

of delivering course material. We have synthesized our findings into this report. Our research

included interviews conducted – either one-to-one or in small group settings – with more than 250

stakeholders in the content workflow, from publishers to book distributors to professors.

Three key themes emerged:

Content workflows – particularly for digital material – are cumbersome and time-

consuming, even though technology exists to make them more efficient.

Difficulties in streamlining the content delivery and acquisition processes are

compounded by the divergent views and needs of the many stakeholders involved.

No single process or channel exists to find, adopt, access, and share course content,

although several collaborative and industry initiatives address individual components

of this workflow.

Research participants believe simplified processes will increase the use of digital content, help

instructors and institutions customize content to make teaching more effective, and increase

student sell-through for publishers and distributors.

1.

2.

3.

ShareAccess

ShareAccess

Share

Adopt

ShareAccessAdoptFind

Adopt

AccessEfficient delivery and repurposing of course content within the LMS, ensuring copyright, standards, and content integrity

Find

ShareFlexible process for adapting relevant and vetted content, mashing up content from different sources, and enhancing media with pedagogy

Easy ways for faculty to locate instructional, commercial, and open content without laborious searching

Quick workflow to acquire content, from assignment of courses to evaluation of materials to student purchases

Find

AdoptFind

AccessAdoptFind

ShareAccess

Adopt

Find Quick workflow to acquire content, from assignment of courses to evaluation of materials to student purchases

2

Many Stakeholders and Perspectives

Within the campus ecosystem, numerous groups play important roles in the selection,

delivery, and use of content. Overwhelmingly, participants say their highest priority is to

ensure student success. However, representatives from each group articulate divergent

purposes and priorities in this effort:

• Faculty focus on delivering content that supports their pedagogical goals

• Administrators and librarians want courses to include content owned or licensed by the institution

• Bookstores concentrate on the physical distribution of course material to students

• Publishers desire to increase the sell-through of their offerings

Although the priorities of stakeholders in the content workflow differ widely, they encounter

a common set of time-consuming challenges, including inconsistencies in the processes

for working with different types of content providers, and technical limitations that slow or

prohibit content sharing across departments and institutions. Participants feel students often

measure their success in terms of grades, rather than knowledge acquired. Students use – and

return to – course materials they believe will assist them improve their grades, usually by

helping them complete assignments and assessments.

Research participants anticipate a rapid increase in the use of digital content and the resulting

need for new workflows and technologies. Stakeholders described a common set of needs:

agreed-upon standards; the ability to integrate both commercial and open content into courses;

lower-cost alternatives to traditional print textbooks; and the seamless delivery of content

through a campus learning management system (LMS). They envision an improved workflow

that makes teaching easier for both mainstream and technologically savvy faculty, and learning

more engaging for students, whether millennial, virtual, nontraditional or lifelong learners.

Simple, Streamlined Workflow

Instructors are changing the ways in which they use content in their courses. Early adopters

of digital content create courses by aggregating content from a variety of sources, including

user-generated, open, and commercial. Mainstream faculty members, however, largely adopt

traditional textbooks, printed readings, and course packs, which they may combine with Web

sites and other digital materials. Many instructors enhance textbooks with online assignments,

tutorials, and assessments. Whether early adopters or mainstream faculty, instructors and

administrators experience similar, frustrating challenges while attempting to acquire relevant

course material, and they desire a simplified workflow that will enable them to find, adopt,

access, and share content.

Research participants believe the growing abundance

of content types, and increasing number of ways to use

them, will enhance teaching and learning. In addition to

printed books and supplements, instructors use an array

of course materials. Some content is printed; other content

is digital. Some materials are open source; others are

copyright-protected. They incorporate content created by

textbook publishers and generated directly by users. This

wealth of content options, however, also causes frustration:

instructors spend too much time searching for relevant

course material.

As the size and scope of textbooks and supplements have

grown, faculty members use less of the content packaged

by publishers and customize more content themselves.

Some students respond by purchasing only the course

materials they deem necessary for success; others forego

buying materials altogether. Publishers and institutions, in

turn, offer custom packages of content aligned directly with

a school’s set curriculum.

Research participants report a sharp increase in the

creation and adoption of user-generated content,

from lecture podcasts and videos to full-scale courses

comprised of interactive material and rich media. As digital

content becomes increasingly easy to create and mash

up, instructors can provide a greater variety of course

materials, which addresses different learning styles and, in

turn, increases student engagement.

“The driving factor I use to select content is that it best supports my learning outcomes. I use animations and simulations from the Web, and some that are created in-house, but I have spent countless hours looking for the most effective content.”

Faculty Member

1. FIND: Relevant Content Quickly

ShareAccess

ShareAccess

Share

Adopt


Adopt


Find




Find

AdoptFind

AccessAdoptFind

ShareAccess

Adopt


4

Instructors generally describe themselves as feeling

comfortable with – even excited about – the burgeoning

amount and types of new content. However, they

characterize as laborious the process of searching numerous

dispersed sources to locate relevant course material. And

they want consistent ways to rate and vet content. Although

publishers deliver peer-reviewed content, and industry

experts point to community repositories with rating systems,

such as the Multimedia Educational Resource for Learning

and Online Teaching (MERLOT), faculty members continue

to seek high-quality, peer-reviewed course content that they

can filter quickly and easily.

Steps Forward: Finding Content

Instructors and administrators would like to locate content

in a manner similar to the experience Amazon.com

offers, with its flexible search capabilities, and links to

similar and relevant material. They want to tag and store

content easily, and in customizable ways, so that it can be

disaggregated into smaller chunks and then remixed. A

first step toward a system in which content can be vetted

by peers, rated, and reviewed is the Digital Marketplace,

created and managed by the Office of the Chancellor of

the California State University System. This initiative, were

it to be fully realized, could provide an effective model

for simplifying the process of finding content. Research

participants express little faith, however, that it will

advance to become a broad-scale solution, particularly in

a time of weak state and national economies.

“The explosion of digital content is going to change the roles on campus. Professors will have more of a ‘librarian’ function: they’ll have to search the Web for content and will need some sort of filtering process. Software will have to be developed to make it easier for them to search vetted content.”

Industry Expert

“Not everything I want is available at the library. I search online for books and articles that are relevant to my courses, but the process is time consuming. I have less time to prepare for class than I want to. I know good content is out there. It would be very helpful to have some guidance.”

Faculty Member

Key stakeholders in the content adoption process, which begins when

course assignments are made, typically midway through the preceding

semester, describe a variety of challenges and inconsistencies in delivering

course content to end-users:

Faculty members hold diverse, individual preferences for adopting digital

content. Those who willingly spend extensive time searching for content,

often to create their own courses, comprise the minority of faculty. The

majority, particularly introductory-level instructors, simply adopt digital

content from the publisher’s assessment platform that accompanies

the chosen textbook. Instructors for upper-level courses often mix

print and online resources – articles, book chapters, and cases – with

personal collections of self-created material. During busy times of the

semester, faculty have limited time to review content and even less to

learn corresponding technologies. As a result, many instructors adopt the

subsequent edition of their current textbook, even if they actually would

prefer to try new materials.

Sales representatives for textbook publishers focus their efforts in the

adoption process on presenting their offerings – the most recent print and

digital editions and supplements – to faculty members. During a semester,

this opportunity is brief. Publishers must uncover the objectives and

dynamics of each course, present both print and digital solutions, as well as

fully online delivery platforms, and sometimes provide customized offerings

for review by faculty selection committees or individual instructors.

Campus bookstores spend significant time and resources assessing inventory

needs. Employees must track down instructors, as many fail to submit book

orders in a timely manner. Uncertain which materials will be assigned again in

subsequent terms, stores must estimate the value of books purchased back

from students. They also must predict the buying patterns of students, as an

increasing number delay purchase decisions until understanding how assigned

materials will be used, and students increasingly research alternatives to

buying materials from their campus bookstores.

“There are large barriers to adoption due to all the new technologies involved. Faculty and students aren’t demanding ways to access digital content yet, because they don’t necessarily know what to ask for.”

Campus Bookstore

“If I create a course that contains modules from different places, I want my students to be able to purchase it at one time, all together, and not have to purchase each module individually.”

Faculty Member

“A big concern we have is sell-through to students. We try to find ways to help ensure 100% sell-through, mostly by having relationships in place with institutions, in which they pay for content, often through site licenses.”

Textbook Publisher

2. ADOPT: Decrease Follow-up, Increase Sell-through

ShareAccess

ShareAccess

Share

Adopt


Adopt


Find




Find

AdoptFind

AccessAdoptFind

ShareAccess

Adopt


6

Campus administrators must complete a

mandatory further step created at the institutional

level by the Higher Education Reauthorization

Act. This legislation, enacted by the U.S. Congress

in 2009, requires colleges and universities in

the United States to publicize, in advance of a

semester, the costs of materials assigned for

individual courses.

Digital content, because it is not sold on

bookstore shelves like printed textbooks and

shrink-wrapped supplemental materials, creates

in the adoption process an additional set of

challenges, which bookstores and publishers must

spend considerable time attempting to solve.

Each publisher offers a proprietary process for

distributing digital content, involving access cards

packaged with printed textbooks or stand-alone

products containing student pass codes. Although

these items are intended to streamline content

adoption, keeping track of numerous cards and

codes to various online destinations is difficult for

many students.

Bookstores play a pivotal role in an institution’s

relationship with both its faculty and student

body. They also track faculty adoption information

for publishers, and process scholarship

and financial aid transactions for campus

administration. However, an increasing percentage

of student transactions occur online, and a

growing number of schools now purchase content

at the institutional level. For these reasons, some

research participants characterize the role of

the campus bookstore as being in transition. As

content providers increasingly focus resources

on distributing strictly digital products, causing

further changes in the content supply chain,

campus bookstores may be disintermediated from

the content adoption process. Other participants,

however, believe the bookstore remains an

irreplaceable campus institution. It remains the

only entity within a campus ecosystem that serves

students and faculty while providing a channel

for a school’s institutional branding and offers a

valued resource to the local community.

Steps Forward: Adopting Content

Research participants point to five industry

initiatives and trends that streamline the content

adoption process: (1) CourseSmart LLC, an

online search and distribution portal founded

and supported by six textbook publishers, is

perceived as simplifying the evaluation process

for faculty by providing a single source to find

and evaluate textbooks. (2) Bookstore chains and

large independent campus bookstores – such as

Barnes & Noble, Follett Higher Education Group,

and University of Arizona Bookstores – put many

processes online, making it easier for instructors

to order materials and students to purchase

books or content packages that are shipped to

the campus store for pick up. (3) Institutions

increasingly license partial or whole curriculum

directly from publishers, such as case materials

offered by Harvard Business Publishing, and then

charge students course fees for the content.

(4) Collaborations with digital distributors,

such as XanEdu Publishing, make obtaining

course packs and custom textbooks much more

efficient; and content database providers, like

ProQuest, make accessing e-reserves or other

library materials much easier. (5) Web sites

such as RateMyProfessors.com provide greater

transparency into course content: before making

purchase decisions, students increasingly use sites

like this to research the relevancy of assigned

materials to course content.

When accessing content, participants experience two main problems: its

expense and the lack of technological standardization in formats. Campus

stakeholders consider course materials to be too expensive, particularly

textbooks, and seek more options, yet they do not want to increase

the total cost to students. As end-users become increasingly influential

in the selection of course material, content must be configured and

formatted for a myriad of hardware devices, yet remain flexible enough to

complement a complex learning environment.

Institutions increasingly use LMS platforms as their campus communications

hub, and administrators want faculty to use the LMS in all courses. After

course content is adopted, instructors seek easy ways to deliver and store

it, preferably being able to access it through a course page within the LMS.

This process is complicated by the technology differences between the

variety of sources from which instructors adopt material.

Some schools employ multiple platforms to deliver course content.

When no standard process for authentication or passwords exists,

instructors and students must sign into multiple sites for a single course

– a cumbersome, multi-step process. Accessing content is complicated

further at schools that employ numerous digital distribution channels,

such as institutionally generated repositories, Web-based distributors

like Study.Net, licensed databases that reside in specific academic

departments or schools across an institution, and library databases like

Gale by Cengage Learning.

The lack of standards for storing digital content, whether attachments,

downloads or entire course management applications, frustrates

instructors. They also seek standardization in the creation and protection

“I want e-books from publishers and my homework system integrated into our LMS. Third-party authentication is also really important, and the learning curve to use new online content delivery platforms must be very shallow for professors and students.”

Faculty Member

3. ACCESS: Deliver and Store Content Easily

ShareAccess

ShareAccess

Share

Adopt


Adopt


Find




Find

AdoptFind

AccessAdoptFind

ShareAccess

Adopt


8

of copyrights. Many are concerned that, while technology exists to

enable them to pull, mash-up, and repurpose content from a variety

of sources, doing so may cause copyright violation. Their concern

becomes acute when using commercial course material delivered

digitally, which they may customize for a specific course and then

re-use during ensuing semesters. Stakeholders across the content

workflow desire standards to be established and upheld fairly, in

order for everyone to benefit from digital content.

Steps Forward: Accessing Content

Faculty seek flexible access to content. In a manner similar to the

Apple® iTunes® user experience, they want to obtain material from

different sources easily, disaggregate content, and then mix and

mash it up to create courses with single log in. They would like

institutions, publishers, and LMS providers to agree on copyright

standards. Many recommend a single student purchase transaction,

and some see the evolution of a universal course cartridge delivery

mechanism as a first step. The IMS Global Learning Consortium

(IMS GLC), a not-for-profit member organization supported by

publishers and LMS providers, is leading the Common Cartridge

initiative to define standards for the interoperability of content and

its integration across LMS platforms. Instructors also seek standards

in digital content delivery formats, such as e-books. Having to work

with different platforms from multiple providers, each with its own

set of technical protocols, frustrates them. They see encouraging

steps forward in online homework and assessment products, such as

Aplia™ from Cengage Learning, Pearson Education’s MyLab series,

and WileyPlus from John Wiley & Sons, Inc. The pedagogical and

financial successes of these commercial offerings also demonstrates

students readily use them.

“Universities must be able to manage content and present it to students. Content screens should be editable and versioning available to keep improving the content. This ‘feedback loop,’ and a consistent look and feel across courses, is very important. The most critical thing is to make content easy to manage into a rich user experience.”

Institutional Administrator

“Standards for content need to be defined, so faculty can easily share it through a common platform. How do you define, tag, and sort information to make it available to the masses? Organizations must work together to define standards.”

Industry Expert

Research participants envision a future for education in which a great

amount of content sharing occurs, initially by offering access to online

repositories to faculty within an institution, then across institutions,

and, ultimately, sharing course content around the globe. They realize

many copyright matters must be addressed, and technological barriers

mounted, before this vision can be realized.

Institutions and individual instructors invest significant time and resources

into the creation and customization of course material. However, the

need for new, modified, and repurposed content only increases with

the growing number of LMS and Web-based collaborative teaching and

learning tools being introduced. Participants describe using applets with

animation, gaming and real-time experiences, course-based wikis and

blogs, and advanced e-portfolios carried by graduates into the workplace.

These tools are useful, yet further complicate the existing, non-intuitive

processes for integrating content and sharing material.

Faculty and administrators seek standard ways to share materials in the

content workflow. They want to share licensed content and their own

user-generated material within their institution and with others. For

example, schools that develop specialized courses, mixing user-generated

and commercial content, would like to share the material with other

institutions, which then could customize, augment or enhance it to meet

their own course needs. Specifically, instructors desire to access and

share assessment materials, such as prepared test questions for pieces

“The production and consumption of free content dramatically affects what needs to be stored and how. The challenge is to design a digital rights management system that is robust enough to include licenses and accommodate specific instructions that might accompany copyrights.”

Campus Administrator

4. SHARE: Standards and Flexibility

ShareAccess

ShareAccess

Share

Adopt


Adopt


Find




Find

AdoptFind

AccessAdoptFind

ShareAccess

Adopt


of course content like articles, animations or videos. They seek the

ability to disaggregate and mash-up different kinds of content while

maintaining clear distinctions between purchased, borrowed, and

original material.

Steps Forward: Sharing Content

Creation and sharing of user-generated content is evolving more

rapidly than commercial digital content adoption. User-generated

content ranges from an instructor’s Microsoft® Office PowerPoint®

presentation to sophisticated course programs created by

innovative campus groups, such as the Center for Media Innovation

at the University of South Florida and the Faculty Technology

Resources Center at the University of Cincinnati. As first steps

toward sharing content more easily, instructors point to a myriad

of public Web sites and digital tools they use to deliver course

material, including YouTube®, TeacherTube.com, Slideshare.net,

and a host of wiki applications. Increasingly, faculty access high-

value digital content licensed by their institutions, often through

initiatives involving open educational resources such as MIT

OpenCourseWare, Carnegie Melon’s Open Learning Initiative (OLI),

California Open Courseware Consortium (OCC), and Community

College Consortium for Open Education Resources (CCCOER).

As these initiatives progress and are used by more mainstream

faculty members, stakeholders across the content workflow predict

dramatic changes will occur in the way courses are conceived, built,

and delivered. Therefore, standardization of technological protocols

and agreement on copyright matters are critical for continued

growth in sharing both open and commercial content.

10

“A standardized system for sharing content would need to allow for mass customization, with lots of choices for us – schools, programs, faculty, and students.”

Faculty Member

“Here’s the pain: Institutions want to publish openly, but they can’t. The solution? We need to find a way to substitute some open materials for third-party content and create a standard sharing model that respects copyright.”

Industry Expert

Share

Find

Adopt Access


Easy ways for faculty to locate

instructional, commercial, and

open content without laborious searching

Efficient delivery and repurposing of course content within the LMS, ensuring copyright, standards, and content integrity

Flexible process for adapting relevant and

vetted content, mashing up content

from different sources, and

enhancing media with pedagogy

12

ConclusionSeveral collaborative initiatives – some open, others commercial – address the challenges experienced while

using digital content in U.S. higher education. It is unlikely, however, that a single solution for problems in the

content acquisition and distribution processes will emerge. In this report we summarize common themes

emerging from interviews with faculty members, school administrators, librarians, campus bookstores, textbook

publishers, distributors, and industry experts. Stakeholders across the content workflow seek more effective and

efficient ways to find, adopt, access, and share material. They recommend four courses of action:

Partnerships and Alliances. Challenges in the content workflow are too large and complex for a single institution

or organization to solve alone. Rather than focus on individual interests, collaboration is required to determine

and architect solutions to help as many stakeholders as possible.

Pilot Programs. Too many use cases for individual and organizational needs exist for a collaborative initiative to

immediately solve all problems in the content workflow. Targeted, proof-of-concept programs are required to

test and measure the success of new and improved technologies and business models.

Industry Standards. A common set of meaningful principles and technology-neutral processes – that involve

openness, shared access, and copyright protection – is needed for meaningful progress toward a content

workflow that enriches teaching and learning fully while remaining profitable for participants.

Simple Processes. Making the content distribution and acquisition processes as simple and flexible as possible,

while striking balance between commercial and open material, is the first step toward solving problems in the

content workflow.

Research Methodology

The research presented in this report was conducted by Blackboard and O’Donnell & Associates in two phases,

over a combined period of six months, between September 2008 and April 2009. Six focus groups were

conducted, and scores of in-depth interviews were completed. More than 250 stakeholders in the content

adoption workflow and thought leaders participated, from the learning institutions, industry organizations, and

commercial content providers listed in the appendix.

Appendix

Faculty MembersAllen Community College – BurlingameAmerican University of SharjahAshford UniversityAthens StateBaltimore County Community CollegeBaruch CollegeCalifornia State University, ChicoCalvin CollegeCapella UniversityCentral Piedmont Community CollegeCoastline Community CollegeDes Moines Area Community CollegeDuquesne UniversityFayetteville Technical Community CollegeFlorida International UniversityGrant MacEwan CollegeHenry Ford Community CollegeMarshall UniversityMississippi State UniversityMt. San Antonio CollegeNorth Carolina State UniversityNorth Georgia College & State UniversityNorthern CollegeNorthern College, Haileybury CampusPalm Beach Community College – Boca RatonRed River College Rowan-Cabarrus Community CollegeSan Diego State UniversitySouthern Illinois University EdwardsvilleUniversidad de MonterreyUniversity of Arkansas at Fayetteville University of CincinnatiUniversity of Nevada, RenoUniversity of North Carolina at GreensboroUtah Valley University School of BusinessValley University School of BusinessWest Virginia University

Administrators and LibrariansBrigham Young UniversityCity University of New YorkCity University of New York – Queens CollegeEstrella Mountain Community CollegeGeorge Mason UniversityGeorgia Southern UniversityGrand Rapids Community College

Maricopa Community CollegeNew York UniversityPalomar CollegeSpalding University University of California, IrvineUniversity of ChicagoUniversity of MiamiUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillUniversity of Northern IowaUniversity of Notre DameUniversity of RochesterUniversity of South FloridaWayne State UniversityWright State University

Campus BookstoresArizona State UniversityBarnes & Noble, Inc.Follett CorporationGeorge Washington UniversityGeorgetown UniversityNew York University San Diego State UniversityState University of New York – PotsdamUniversity of Tennessee – Knoxville

Commercial Content ProvidersCengage LearningHarvard Business School PressMcGraw-Hill EducationNational Geographic Society NBC Learn, a division of NBC Universal, Inc.Pearson EducationYale University

Industry ExpertsAbbey Road Associates, LLPBridgepoint EducationThe Corporation for Education Network Initiatives in California (CENIC)CourseSmart LLCDigital Marketplace, Office of the Chancellor of the California State University SystemMSUglobal Learning Ventures (GLV), Michigan State UniversityMultimedia Educational Resource for Learning and Online Teaching (MERLOT)National Association of College Stores (NACS)National Center for Academic Transformation (NCAT)Open Courseware Consortium (OCC)Smarthinking Inc.Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA)

14

About Blackboard Inc.

Blackboard Inc. (Nasdaq: BBBB) 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.

About O’Donnell & Associates, LLC

O’Donnell & Associates is a comprehensive publishing services firm that delivers

end-to-end publishing solutions for education and information companies. Since 1990,

O’Donnell & Associates has helped dozens of leading companies research, plan, develop,

and implement scores of winning strategies and product launches. Whether developing

a series of textbooks, creating online courses, or launching an eLearning initiative,

O’Donnell & Associates offers the skills, creativity, and expertise to manage projects from

concept through design through product launch.

Copyright © 1997 –2010, Blackboard Inc. All rights reserved. Blackboard and the Blackboard logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of Blackboard Inc. or its subsidiaries in the United States and/or other countries. U.S. Patent Numbers: 6,988,138; 7,493,396, 7,558,853.

O’Donnell & AssociatesOne Dock Street

Stamford, CT 06902+ 1.203.973.0635

odassoc.com

Worldwide Headquarters650 Massachusetts Ave, NW, 6th Fl.Washington, DC 20001+ 1.800.424.9299, ext. 4+ 1.202.463.4860, ext. 4

blackboard.com

streamlining content adoption workflows: a report on content use

Documents