JISC

11 October 2006 town meeting

Community of practice
Support projects
Users and innovation development model
Next generation technology and practice
Personal e-administration for teachers and researchers

Community of practice

Is the Community of Practice for a fixed period of 6 months?
The Community of Practice will be in place from March 2007 for an initial period of 6 months covering stage 1 of the Users and Innovation development model. This initial period is concerned with working up outputs that can be used to put a bid together for Phase 2.

The Community of Practice is intended to continue through the life of the programme, assisting in further iterations through the development model cycles and providing valuable feedback at appropriate times, as well as potentially being used as a testbed for projects.

Participants in the Community of Practice can claim reimbursement for travel and expenses or activities associated with being a participant in the Community of Practice, e.g. travel to meetings, interviews with stakeholders, etc. There will be 2 support projects to support the Community of Practice and online activities, and to support the Users and Innovation development model.

Does an institution/individual/team have to have been involved in the initial Community of Practice to submit a bid for the Next Generation technology development projects
If a potential bidder has been involved in the initial Community of Practice they will have the advantage of having obtained evidence from stage 1 of the development model but the bidding for the second phase will be an open process and will be open to anyone that fulfils the eligibility criteria for bidding and can provide evidence of having gone through the activities in stage 1.

Is the funding available for the Community of Practice for travel and expenses only?
Yes. Participants in the Community of Practice can claim reimbursement for travel and expenses for activities associated with being a participant in the Community of Practice (see Q1).There is a limit on how much funding a participant(s) in the Community of Practice can claim. An individual can claim up to £2,000 and a small team can claim up to £5,000. A small team can be made up of participants from one or a number of different institutions. The funding available for reimbursement of travel and expenses is not to cover the full economic costs of participation.

What is JISC looking for in terms of the Community of Practice, e.g. size, should it evolve during the course of the programme, or should it already be established, etc?
The idea of the Community of Practice is to bring individuals and small teams together to share ideas in the e-administration and next generation areas. Potential participants in the Community of Practice should submit a bid including their ideas, why they want to be involved, etc. The Community of Practice support project will bring those individuals and small teams together to have shared discussions in areas of common interest. It is envisaged that sub-communities will form to exchange and generate ideas. Those involved in the Community of Practice then have the opportunity to bid for funding to develop the ideas generated in the Community of Practice through the (open) Next Generation call for proposals for technical development, expected to be issued in June 2007 (deadline for responses August 2007, projects to start October 2007). The Community of Practice involves the facilitation of opportunities. It is one Community of Practice but clusters may develop around, for example, technologies or subject areas.

It is possible that participants in the Community of Practice will lose interest and drop out after the initial 6 months if they are not awarded funding for the next generation projects.
It will be key to facilitate as much interaction as possible between participants at the start of the Community of Practice so that they get to know each other. For those not funded in the next phase through the Community of Practice, the Community of Practice support project will be encouraged to bring people together to see, for example, who could act as a testbed/be involved in technical development.  

Does JISC see the Community of Practice support project as a bridge to the wider community?
It is envisaged that the Community of Practice support project will act as a bridge into the Community of Practice, and out in terms of dissemination and ideas (with the agreement of the participants). It is envisaged that the Community of Practice will have semi-permeable boundaries but it is essential that the Community of Practice feel secure in the sharing of their ideas.

Can the funding available for the Community of Practice to claim against be used for international travel, for example, for travel for an individual as part of a small team?
The funding available for a small team to claim against is up to £5,000 for travel and expenses (JISC would welcome international participation within that funding envelope.

What numbers constitute a successful Community of Practice? If a number of Communities of Practice emerge and thrive, will it have a bearing on the ongoing costs of the support project and how should this be factored into potential bids? What safeguards are there for this?
It is envisaged that there will be 100-200 participants in the Community of Practice at the most. This is an approach that is being piloted to see if it works and it will therefore deliberately be kept relatively small and monitored closely.

There will be different types of users interested in different areas. How will the Community of Practice sub-community interested on one area interact with the sub-community in another?
There is a need to ensure that the Community of Practice is inclusive and doesn’t isolate any participants. There is no natural synergy built in to the Community of Practice – it will depend on what the sub-communities develop. How that dynamic works would be an interesting outcome of the programme.

Under what circumstances is it appropriate to propose being a participant in the Community of Practice as an individual as opposed to being a small team?
Both individuals and small teams are useful. A small team can be made up of people with similar interests from the same or different institutions. It would not be desirable for a number of people from the same institution to bid to participate as individuals where they are already closely aligned.

Back to top

Support projects

What is the duration of the support projects?
The support projects will run from January/February 2007 to March 2009.

There is a requirement for the Community of Practice support project to be familiar with the Managing Successful Programmes Methodology (MSP) but this methodology isn’t very accessible on the internet
See a good overview of MSP. JISC will offer help to the successful support project in this area. A booklet on MSP is also available from the Government Publications Office.

Why would a potential bidder want to undertake the Community of Practice support project and how would they sell it to their institution?
Funding of up to £200,000 would be awarded to the successful institution to undertake the work. There is much to be gained in being involved in a Community of Practice including the opportunity, for example, to write papers and foster internal collaborations that did not exist before; this is also an opportunity to lead on a new and innovative activity. It would be desirable for this project to build on people’s own experiences and areas of interest.

Is there a limit on the number of consultants that can be involved in the Community of Practice support project?
As advised in the Users and Innovation appendix (H) to the main call for proposals, where bidders are proposing to meet competency requirements through the use of consultants, the consultants’ contribution to the overall provision of support (and hence their anticipated share of the work) should not represent the majority component of the bid. However, there is no set limit on the number of consultants that can be involved. Bids will be evaluated partly on the value that the consultants identified in the bid would bring.

Could more clarification be given about the workflow regarding the increased effort needed for the Community of Practice support project at the initial and end stages? And will the tools used need to be new or just used on new communities?
There is a high level of activity at the beginning of the Community of Practice support project, focusing on building the Community of Practice and getting it started. Towards the end of the Community of Practice support project the focus is on ensuring that activities are completed and written up, and projects are generated. The deliverables of the Community of Practice support project are outlined in Appendix H to the main circular document. The Community of Practice support project should derive the best way of undertaking that effort. The technology used does not need to be brand new but it should be innovative. It could be legacy technology used in new ways and these sorts of issues will be looked at in terms of value for money, whether the technology addresses the problem to be solved, and whether the Community of Practice supports it. The technology can be commercial technology, open source or something developed in house.

There are many competencies for the support projects outlined in the table in Appendix H. What if there are no successful bids for the Community of Practice support project? Is this factored into JISC’s risk analysis?
We will work with potential bidders to ensure that competencies are met, but JISC may also revert to the traditional open tendering process.

Back to top

Users and innovation development model

Could you please provide some clarification on how an agile development methodology fits with the proposed Users and Innovation Development Model?
It is expected that agile development will take place during the technical development phase of the model. The reality is that whilst this process is not ‘true agile development’ the model seeks to create faster, more adaptable and contextual development model to the needs of an academic setting.

Academics can be fixed to an annual cycle of activity and so may struggle to fit with the development model. How can this be addressed?
Some of the piloting may be done with real people and some may use a testbed of other users in the community. We recognise that the model may not suit the academic annual cycles, but believe that in going through iterations and because of the flexible nature of the model we can fit with a lot of academic activity.

The Users and Innovation development model demonstrates a clear idea of what the programme is trying to achieve. Is this extended to the research methods which should be used in stage 1 – are there fixed methods or is the intention that bidders should be more experimental?
The Community of Practice support project will look at the expressions of interest for the Community of Practice to determine what expertise needs to be brought in. The research methods are not fixed but will be facilitated through the Community of Practice.

‘Agile’ development was mentioned with regard to stage 3 of the development model. What does JISC have in mind in terms of ‘agile’ development? A particular methodology or agile in the sense of some aspect of the methodology?
JISC are trying to introduce ideas of rapid ‘agile’ development rather than trying to adopt particular methodologies. ‘Agile’ development has to adapt to the way that academics work as this programme is based around HEIs. If an institution has its own agile methodology and wants to fit it into this process, that would be acceptable. The Community of Practice support project would then need to develop ways in which others unfamiliar with it could use it. The key to this part of the programme is involving, engaging and regular interaction with users, taking account of current activities, and ensuring that the outputs are fit for purpose.

Please can you provide some clarification as to why there is a cross-over in the figure of eight Users and Innovation development model. Why is it not a circle?
Stage 1 concerns engagement with individuals for a 6 month period. Stage 1 can continue even as participants drop off into the stages concerned with technical development. Both could theoretically be going on simultaneously in separate circles in a flexible and adaptable way. It is intended that process of engaging in the model will help to influence its development.

When staff, students, etc, are undertaking their particular roles they have very particular needs. Is this work targeting a particular task in a particular role or is it a generic need?
The work should identify work based on user needs, this may be within a particular task or a range of tasks, it may also be work that is supporting generic issues for a general area.

Back to top

Next generation technology and practice

The tools that JISC terms as ‘next generation’ are more like ‘this generation’ tools. What if a bidder has an idea that no one wants or has thought of yet?
The fora within the community should provide an opportunity to articulate the idea in a supportive way.

What is the funding available for phase 2 of the Next Generation Technologies and Practice developing technologies strand with a call for proposals being issued in mid 2007, and will its agenda be influenced by these initial stages of the programme?
Total funding of £1,800,000 will be available (maximum of £200,000 per project) for projects with a duration of approximately 18 months. The call will be open and so potential bidders not previously involved in the programme can bid with their own ideas.

Are you expecting the next generation projects to encompass the whole development model cycle rather than part of it? Lots of skills will be needed.
Those involved in the community of practice will be expected to go through the user engagement (the left hand side) of the model, following on from this cycle, the projects that are funded to go into the technical development cycle will be expected to use the model, and also continue to engage in the user engagement elements.

Back to top  

Personal e-administration for teachers and researchers

What is the personal e-administration strand concerned with in terms of individuals within an institution, e.g. the role of an individual within an institution, managing bibliographies, non-academic staff?
It is concerned with anything that involves the individual, in whatever context they are in, engaging with institutional systems. The call specifically mentions teachers, learners and researchers and the programme focuses more on these roles but can involve others that may be interacting with them.

Back to top