Academic Media Production Services

SMA TechCheck and Beaming Calendar

Combined Revision Proposal
November 23, 2004

1. Background:
AMPS created the beaming calendar for SMA in 2001, to help reduce the confusion occurring around the
schedule for Singapore and MIT videoconference sessions. AMPS helped SMA centralize information by
allowing a single administrator to enter schedule information into a web interface, then publish that
information to students, technicians, and staff at MIT and Singapore.

In 2002, AMPS built a web-based information management system for the SMA program, called
TechCheck. The system was designed to improve the process for collecting and publishing problems that
occurred during SMA videoconferencing sessions. Rather than using email forms, which mailed session
reports to technicians but were not stored, the system allowed all session reports to be saved in a
database. Additional features included TechCheck’s ability to pull class information from the beaming
calendar and prefill forms with correct information, store updatable status information about ongoing
problems, send email alerts for specific problems, and allow troubleshooting searches by specific criteria.

While both system have fulfilled their original goals – centralizing accessible session information and
reducing follow-up communication – they can be improved. Several semesters’ use by different technician
teams, combined with expanded use of the beaming calendar, has highlighted areas for further
development. SMA and AMPS technicians have requested a set of additional features and corrections.

2. Project Description and Justification:

The overall project will be approached in two phases:

PHASE ONE: Beaming Calendar

 Presentation Layer Improvements – which would allow the end-user to more easily find targeted
event information that interests them.
 Administrative Feature Improvements – which expand the range of information that could be
associated with an event, and simplify the task of configuring that information.

Completion of phase one would accomplish the following goals:

 Filter and differentiate the event information, so the end-user could more conveniently view only
the course information that interests him.
SMA Tools update
Combined project proposal
Page 1 of 6
  Accommodate the increasing variety of session information and the wider range of dates it’s
offered (i.e. weekends)
 Attach more helpful information to each session.
 Allow the administrator to more easily and efficiently manage the information within the
calendar.
 Improve the overall usability of the Beaming Calendar for administrators and technicians
 Tighten the relationship of the Beaming Calendar with the TechCheck tool, to ensure better
interaction between them.

PHASE TWO: Tech Check

 Data Capture Improvements -- which modify the input fields to various pages, in order to
improve what information the system collects
 Interaction Improvements-- which modify how the application behaves for the technician or
administrator
 Database Integration Improvements -- which modify how the system manipulates data and
communicates with the Beaming Calendar.

Completion of phase two would accomplish the following goals:

 Reduce errors that occur due to misalignment of shared data between TechCheck and the
Beaming Calendar databases.
 Reduce errors that currently occur through technician oversight, by making TechCheck more
intuitive and simpler to use.
 Improve the overall usability of the TechCheck for administrators and technicians

3. Assumptions and Deliverables:

(a) The following initial assumptions will guide the project:

 The development of the two phases will occur sequentially, NOT concurrently.

 Neither tool will be actively used until both are completed.

 Julita Kussmaul will be AMPS primary client contact for managing approval of all elements of the
project. AMPS will not be directly managing approval or modifications with Singapore contacts.

 AMPS will focus exclusively on the feature changes requested by SMA that are listed below under
deliverables. Where AMPS finds additional opportunities for feature improvements to the

SMA Tools update

Combined project proposal
Page 2 of 6
 TechCheck or Beaming Calendar, they will be undertaken only where SMA-approved and where
they will not significantly impact cost.

 AMPS will make slight modification to the visual design of the tools to update and refresh its look
and feel.

 AMPS will not focus on improving the Problem Finder feature of TechCheck, which does not
appear to be widely used.

(b) Given the above assumptions, the following deliverables will be developed by AMPS. Where further
investigation shows that any of these deliverables are not feasible, AMPS will explicitly notify SMA and
discuss options:

PHASE ONE: BEAMING CALENDAR

 Presentation Layer
o Allow the differentiation by color-coding between the regular classes and the "other
meetings", such as the special events, recitations or qualifying exams that are not taped,
digitized or archived.

o Add program views, and other filters, such as “special events only” - 6 programs are
planned to commence in the Fall 2005

o Add Saturday and Sunday to the Course Schedule display

 Administrative features:
o Add option for 3rd connect site for each class.

o Add the pull down menu with the faculty names for each class. The template should
feature the "Primary Lecturer" and the "Distance Facilitator".

o Improve sorting of information in administrative view to allow easier finding of

information.

o Create an automatic notification email to alert about a cancelled class.

o Improve the archiving function by displaying the classes by year or by semester vs. the
current aggregate list of all classes.

 Database integration:

o Upgrade database programming to synchronize all relations with Beaming Calendar and
TechCheck and improve overall performance.

SMA Tools update

Combined project proposal
Page 3 of 6
PHASE TWO: TECHCHECK

 Data capture improvements:

o Add timestamp for recording connection times

o Reduce the 4 connection timestamps to 2 (establish call, reconnect)

o Create a field for adding Lecturers (when not listed in faculty list)

o Create an “Other” box for listing problems not covered by problem list

o Eliminate “chat drop” as problem.

o Pair up “disconnect,” “reconnect ip,” “reconnect isdn”

o Shift “no video” from connection-related problems to video-related

o Remove “call drop” from video-related problems.

 Interaction improvements:

o Simplify existing workflow where possible, to make report filing easier.

o Prevent misalignment of room information in TechCheck and Beaming Calendar from

causing major problems.

o Prevent double entries of single session from occurring (i.e. Singapore report and MIT
reports recorded in different entries)

o Reduce likelihood of technicians filling out, but forgetting to submit session reports

o Reduce likelihood of technicians making mistakes selecting time zone or rooms.

o Allow technicians to review and correct information before submitting reports

o Allow administrators and technicians to modify existing data to correct submitted

information.

o Create a signal to administrators or technicians when no report has been filed for an
event.

 Database Integration

o Upgrade database programming to synchronize all relations with Beaming Calendar and
improve overall performance.

4. Process and Cost Estimate

The following process overview and cost estimate is based on the above-mentioned deliverables. Further
modification of the deliverables may affect the pricing below – where such modifications occur during
SMA Tools update
Combined project proposal
Page 4 of 6
development discussions, AMPS will explicitly note what changes have diverged from this estimate, and
note that this change may affect the bottom line price.

AMPS will invoice upon the satisfactory completion of each stage.

PHASE ONE: BEAMING CALENDAR

Process and Cost Overview:

Project Stage Actions Stage Deliverable Total Cost in $

Low / high
1. Project  Review and kickoff – Review goals,  Project specification:
Discovery assumptions and deliverables for Revised project proposal –
project to ensure that all issues are if necessary – to $400 – $780
covered. incorporate new project
expectations,
 assumptions, deliverables,
cost estimate, or timeline.

2. Conceptual  Task/interaction analysis - Internal  Task flow map – Present

Design team discussion and brainstorming
for early definition of page
requirements and feature
interaction.
 Low-fidelity wireframes –
initial conclusions for
improvements through a $2,350 -- $4,050
map of application’s
workflow, accompanied
by:
Paper renderings of page
layout and elements to
identify specific
interaction dynamics.

3. Prototyping  Create prototypes – Incorporate all  High-fidelity prototypes –

conclusions from conceptual design HTML walkthrough of
into HTML versions of the proposed application to allow $1,970 -- $3,650
pages. complete picture of its
functionality.

4. Production  HTML Production – Incorporate all

prior revisions; Update master CSS
template, create newly revised $2,400 -- $3,700
individual pages as required
 Programming – Minor updates to
programming as required.

5. Release  Quality Assurance - Final internal  Internal release – allow

review of HTML and programming internal access to product
code. for review and $1,925 -- $2,940
modifications if necessary
 Public release – launch
product to all end users.

TOTAL DEVELOPMENT COST ESTIMATE $9,050 -- $15,120

PHASE TWO: TECHCHECK

Process and Cost Overview:
Project Stage Actions Stage Deliverable Total Cost in $
Low / high

SMA Tools update

Combined project proposal
Page 5 of 6
1. Project  Review and kickoff – Review goals,  Project specification:
Discovery assumptions and deliverables for Revised project proposal –
project to ensure that all issues are if necessary – to $406 – $778
covered. incorporate new project
expectations,
 assumptions, deliverables,
cost estimate, or timeline.

2. Conceptual  Task/interaction analysis - Internal  Task flow map – Present

Design team discussion and brainstorming
for early definition of page
requirements and feature
interaction.
 Low-fidelity wireframes –
initial conclusions for
improvements through a $1,479 -- $2,771
map of application’s
workflow, accompanied
by:
Paper renderings of page
layout and elements to
identify specific
interaction dynamics.

3. Prototyping  Create prototypes – Incorporate all  High-fidelity prototypes –

conclusions from conceptual design HTML walkthrough of
into HTML versions of the proposed application to allow $1,392 -- $2,265
pages. complete picture of its
functionality.

4. Production  HTML Production – Incorporate all

prior revisions; Update master CSS
template, create newly revised $1,509 -- $2,211
individual pages as required
 Programming – Minor updates to
programming as required.

5. Release  Quality Assurance - Final internal  Internal release – allow

review of HTML and programming internal access to product
code. for review and $1,766 -- $2,781
modifications if necessary
 Public release – launch
product to all end users.

 PHASE TOTAL $9,701 -- $16,246

COMBINED PROJECT TOTAL: ……………………………………….. $18,751 to $31,366

I’m happy to review this proposal in detail with you to cover any questions you may have.

Please note that the cost range reflects uncertainties about time required on various elements of the
project. If you have any concerns about the final cost, I would be happy to sit down with you and find
the means to adjust the scope of this project to fit it into your budget.

Thanks,
Mark Brown -- Sr. Project Manager
Academic Media Production Services
http://web.mit.edu/amps
mwbrown@mit.edu / 2-3490
SMA Tools update
Combined project proposal
Page 6 of 6