Schroeder-Girbino MOU Reflection
- Does your MOU effectively/clearly address all project outcomes? Did these go through revision/disambiguation?
I worked through my MOU before I had the kick-off meeting with my client, filling it out based on my WBS and timeline. I ended up making multiple additions after my client chose her LMS, which affected how the intellectual property would be designated.
Additionally, my client revised her instructional time down, from six weeks to four weeks, which required a revision in my MOU.
I do believe that my MOU addresses all outcomes, particularly scope creep. I put in the “Description of Renegotiations” section, that revisions shall not exceed twenty hours, or the module deliverables will be renegotiated. I discussed that with my client during our first meeting. It was helpful to have a first draft of the MOU to refer to during our conference call.
- How did you go about settling potential agreements and/or disputes?
I did not experience any disputes, but it did take about fifteen minutes of discussion to work through an LMS solution that fit my client’s needs, worked with her budget (public school will not pay for LMS licensing), and the hosting of the WordPress site. Luckily, I already have a hosting service, and was able to create a sub-domain without incurring extra fees.
- Did the final version of you MOU diverge from what you had originally thought it would be? If it did diverge, how? If it did not diverge, why didn’t it?
The original version of the MOU was much shorter. I ended up adding a much more thorough breakdown of the “Expectation 4” list for each party involved. I felt that it was necessary to address accessibility, intellectual property, and disability guidelines, especially when I referred back to the rubric. I have done my own contracts before as a designer, but this MOU was more complicated.
- Had you thought of each of the MOU’s final stipulations beforehand? When coordinating with all parties to complete the MOU, did you encounter anything you had not considered before? For example, were any special needs, stipulations or conditions negotiated which you did not consider while envisioning the project?
No, I did not consider all the final stipulations beforehand. I had mostly considered the deliverables/timeline/criteria regarding the MOU. Prior to this process, I had not considered intellectual property rights or accessibility responsibilities.
After my kick-off meeting, I needed to address the blended learning aspect of the unit, and where new curriculum would be housed and accessed by students vs. the more interactive components. One complication that I had not considered was the difficulty of getting G Suite for Education attached to a new Gmail account, and I believe that I would need to stipulate LMS accessibility to the instructional designer in any future M.O.U.s.
- What was the most challenging part of the MOU process? Why?
The most challenging part was getting the signatures done on the same document. First, I created a Docusign account, but did not send out the correct signing protocol, so the MOU bounced back to me with only my signature. I fixed that issue and resent, but as it was already Friday by then, it took a while for all parties to sign (four weekdays). My client does not have strong Wi-Fi at her residence, and she needed to do the signing on her phone. Then, Dr. Xie is overseas, which added to the signing timeline. It took multiple texts and reminders to get it all done. I think that doing this over the summer, when most of the parties involved are technically “on break” was a factor, also.
I was very glad that I had built a week into the Memorandum of Understanding signing schedule, and would need to keep this in mind for future projects.