When a new tool is proposed or requested for instructional use, the first step in the process is to conduct a thorough needs assessment. The Office of Distance Education assists in gathering foundational information that will help guide the review process, such as identifying who the intended users will be, the primary purpose or function of the tool and how the tool supports student learning or instructional goals, and financial implications and long-term sustainability.

Understanding who will use the tool and how, whether it will be students, instructors, staff, or a combination; and how the tool will function within the course will determine security and accessibility requirements, training needs and support considerations, which can influence whether a tool is an appropriate fit. 

Identifying the primary purpose of a tool and determining which features of the tool are essential to supporting the course or program learning outcomes helps distinguish critical functions from optional ones. This involves clarifying which learning outcomes the tool supports and how its features ensure those outcomes are met.

Understanding how the required features support the learning outcomes is necessary for prioritizing testing efforts which helps determine if the tool provides equitable access to all users. Clearly articulating the instructional value the tool brings to the course helps guide these decisions.

Conversations regarding cost and funding play an important role in tool adoption. Most tools operate under either a user-based subscription, site- or unit-wide licensing, or student-pay models, and each of these can introduce challenges for long-term sustainability, budget and equity considerations. Relying on the student-pay model when adopting educational technology tools can create equity barriers and impact participation, directly tying their ability to learn with the student’s ability to pay. 

When evaluating a tool, considering the financial implications, equity impact, budget constraints, and long-term sustainability ensures the tool adoption supports all learners.

Once we have this information, ASC ODE consults with the instructor to discuss whether existing university-approved or college-approved tools may already meet the instructional or curricular need. Leveraging tools already vetted for accessibility, security, and legal can streamline implementation and ensure compatibility with university systems. 

Additionally, ASC ODE will make an inquiry to find out if anyone else in the College or University more broadly is using the specific tool or a similar one. Ohio State is a large institution that serves more than sixty thousand students. But where disciplinary and technical skills for programs differ, instructors may still find common ground in the usage of tools that meet a similar learning goal. For example, many disciplines will benefit from using a social annotation tool like Hypothesis or creating interactive images and videos with a tool like ThingLink.  ASC ODE are in touch with our peers across the institution to discover who might already be using the tool and what roadblocks or tips they might have encountered with their particular usage.

If a tool is requested by an instructor, staff member, or department that will be used at the College or Unit level, the College of Arts and Sciences, Instructional and Research IT Support Services (IRIS) Risk Management team will review the vendor and tool information for network security, data security, storage, privacy, and FERPA compliance. This is a comprehensive review aimed at identifying and addressing potential vulnerabilities and weaknesses on the back end of the tool that could lead to data breaches or unauthorized access. This is especially important if the tool will be utilizing Single Sign On (SSO). 

OTDI’s Application Services and Business Solutions, Learning Systems team manages and supports enterprise level tools, including CarmenCanvas [1]. If a requested tool requires the use of a learning tool interoperability connection (LTI) within CarmenCanvas, the OTDI Learning Systems team will need to evaluate the connection for FERPA compliance, data security, storage, and privacy. While this review is similar to a security risk assessment, the learning systems integration review focuses on the connection and communication pathways between CarmenCanvas and the external learning tool or system.  

An accessibility evaluation is required for all software purchases, including learning technologies, “to be sure that tools are compatible with screen readers or other assistive technology devices, that non-mouse users can navigate the technology, and that students do not encounter other difficulties because of visual, auditory, or cognitive disabilities” (OTDI). Accessibility testing can take up to three months, depending on the complexity of the tool and the identified use cases. The goal of the accessibility review is to identify problem areas a software or tool may have and create a compliance plan to bring the software in line with Ohio State’s Minimum Digital Accessibility Standards (MDAS). Often a compliance plan requires frequent communication with the vendor and their accessibility team to make sure they are aware of the identified issues and what their roadmap and timeline is for fixing and bringing the tool up to standards.  

If problem areas are identified during the accessibility review, an Equally Effective Alternate Access Plan (EEAAP) needs to be established as part of the compliance plan. An EEAAP is a document that outlines how the requesting unit or person plans to provide equal or alternative access to the learning technology tool to “eligible individuals who are unable to effectively use or interact with the digital information or digital service” [2]. The identification of instructors and/or staff members responsible for oversight and administration of the EEAAP plan will be a key part of the compliance plan. At the college level, accessibility of an adopted tool is the responsibility of the requesting unit or person. ASC’s Digital Accessibility Team, with ASC ODE, can help you identify an individual and develop an EEAAP for the tool.  

Ohio State Digital Accessibility Center (DAC) requires an active Accommodations-Based Exception Request be on file with their office for each tool that does not meet Ohio State’s MDAS. This exception will include business purpose for the tool, the EEAAP established, a communication plan, and a plan if the vendor fails to make their product accessible. If an exception is needed, ASC ODE and ASC’s Digital Accessibility Team will file an Accommodations-Base Exception Request on your behalf. Exceptions are active for one year and need to be renewed annually.  

The College of Engineering, Engineering Technology Services has an Accessibility Assessment Overview webpage that breaks down the steps of an accessibility assessment. Please note, some steps are specific to Engineering but the overall process is similar to ASC.

If a software or tool has a monetary cost associated with it, whether it be a student-paid cost or a department/unit-paid cost, the vendor terms and conditions must be reviewed by the ASC Business Services department and the Ohio State legal team. License agreements, intellectual property rights, warranties and liabilities, data protection and security, compliance with Ohio laws and regulations, and dispute resolution are some of the many aspects the Legal review encompasses.