Eduworks EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY STANDARDS Robby Robson Eduworks Corporation CELL:

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards2 SIF HOW WE GOT HERE ARIADNE AICC (1988) ADLIMS IEEE LTSC JTC1 SC36 EdNA (1994) ALIC OKI OASIS CREATE NEW WORLD ORDER GET CONTENT TO RUN ON AN LMS GET SYSTEMS TO INETEROPERATE CEN/ISSS WS-LT W3C (1994) ebXML EICA HR-XML CONSOR- TIUM CanCore Dublin Core (1995) HLA (1994) MERLOT NSDL

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards3 A Functional Model of e-Learning Applications Content Authoring Tools Catalog Manager Content Assembly Tools Learner Registrar Delivery Environment Content Repository and Offering Catalog Learning Planner Collaborative Environment Learner Profile Manager Activity Info Offerings Register Info Offerings Goals Plans Register Info Activity Info Assessment / Testing Engine Results Info Register Info Assessment Objects Learning Offerings Learning Objects Recorded Events Learning Objects Learning Objects See e-Learning Application Infrastructure by Geoff Collier

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards4 Standards Development Process R&D Concept s Technica l Trends User Needs Approved Standards Spec Consortia Programs, Testbeds, Markets Standards Bodies Specifications, Best Practice Consensus, Consolidation, Conformance New products, Pilot Programs, Testbeds

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards5 Who Is Doing What Search, catalog, discover learning content –Metadata –Digital Repositories Content/LMS interoperability –CMI –SCORM Assessment –Question & Test Interoperability –SCORM Simulation –High Level Architecture (DMSO/SISO) Enable Adaptivity –Learner Information Package –Personal and Private Information –Competency Definitions System Interoperability –Open Knowledge Initiative –Schools Interoperability Framework –IMS Abstract Framework Instructional Design –IMS Learning Design –ASTD E-learning Courseware Certification

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards6 AICC AICC started in 1998 to solve concrete (hardware) interoperability problem Moved to LAN-based (Client/Sever) model in 1990’s Moved to Web in late 1990’s – via IEEE LTSC Contributed heavily to SCORM Working groups today –CMI (Computer Managed Instruction) –SIM (simulation & smart graphics) –DELS (Digital Electronic Library System) –Test Lab Seriously considering Web services approach Updating CMI to match SCORM

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards7 THE IEEE LTSC Chartered by the IEEE Computer Society Standards Activity Board Develops accredited technical standards, recommended practices and guides for learning technology Coordinates formally and informally with other organizations that produce specifications and standards for similar purposes.other organizations ACCREDITATION CHAIN ISO | ANSI | IEEE | IEEE CS | LTSC | WG

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards8 LTSC Current Timeline* LOM DATA MODEL LOM BINDINGS CMI WORK DREL SG REUSABLE COMPETENCY DEFINITIONS ??? Learning Technology System Architecture * No warranty is expressed or implied!

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards9 IMS Global Learning Consortium IMS is an independent, non-profit consortium in which members with competing business interests and different decision-making roles collaborate to satisfy real-world requirements for interoperability and re-use of learning resources. Established 1997 as a consortium of educators, government agencies, and vendors Define and deliver specifications to further interoperability for on-line learning technology and content More than 50 Contributing Members. Over 70 Developer Network subscribers. A web community of users

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards10 IMS SPECIFICATIONS AND DIRECTIONS Additional uptake by standards organizations Abstract Learning Framework Function/Content Model New specs: DRM, Adaptive Testing, Competencies

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards11 IMS DIGITAL REPOSITORY INTEROPERABILITY SEARCH, GATHER, (ALERT)/EXPOSE REQUEST/DELIVER SUBMIT/STORE DELIVER /STORE between two repositories

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards12 The Advanced Distributed Learning initiative Launched in November of 1997 (DoD & Whitehouse) MISSION: –develop a DoD-wide strategy for using learning and information technologies –modernize education and training –promote cooperation between government, industry and academia –develop e-learning standardization Specification development delegated to IMS in 1997

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards13 SCORM CONTENT LIFECYCLE Existing Content Learning Content Authoring Tools Learning Content Authoring Tools Chunk Create Repurpose Assemble Learnin g Catalog Learnin g Catalog LMS Import Find Track Deliver

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards14 A SCORM IS BREWING DIRECTIVE TO CREATE SCORM (13111) SCORM 1.0SCORM 1.1SCORM 1.2SCORM 1.3 PF1PF2PF3PF5PF4PF6PF7 - Course Structure Format (XML Version of AICC Course Structure Files) - Runtime API – developed jointly among AICC, IEEE, and ADL - Metadata based on IMS Version “C” is for “Content” - Metadata Harmonized - Bugs Fixed - CMI Data Model Pared back (removed pre- requisites and completion requirements) - Added Content Packaging - Deprecated Course Structure Format - Created Test Suites - Bugs Fixed - Simple Sequencing - Metadata Harmonized - Bugs Fixed - Conformance program getting started

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards15 OKI Architecture Interfaces (as API’s) Coalition creating OKI Tools Community

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards16 OKI Architecture Clearly defines points of interoperability between components of a learning technology environment Precisely defines interoperability behavior at those points Allows incremental adoption of the architecture Desktop Computing Analogy

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards17

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards18 ARIADNE Alliance of Remote Instructional and Distribution Networks for Europe Founded under EU 4 th Framework in January, Became a Foundation in June 2000 Contributor to LOM A European Association open to the World, for Knowledge Sharing and Reuse, E-Learning for all, International Cooperation in Teaching, Serving the Learning Citizen.

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards19 ARIADNE ARCHITECTURE

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards20 CONFORMANCE TESTING PROS – CURES THE SYMPOTOMS –Without it interoperability isn’t quite there –Honesty becomes the policy –Feedback into standards process CONS – CURES THE SYMPTOMS –Does not guarantee interoperability –Gives vendors an out –Effort better spent on making good specifications and standards SEE JON BELL PDF PRESENTATION

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards21 HOW CONFORMANCE TESTING WORKS STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION TEST SUITE TEST SUITE DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION CERTIFYING AUTHORITY TESTING ORGANIZATION Develops Trains Sanctions & Supports Commissions Uses Interprets Standards

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards22 Questions 1.What forms of delivery system commonality do content providers need in order to develop content for end user organizations? 2. How can we classify content providers (e.g. commercial vendors, non-profit open source) and how do their needs and vested interests vary? 3.What forms of flexibility or local initiative do end-user organizations desire? 4. How can we classify end-user organizations (and different end-users within different end-user organizations) and how do vested interests and needs vary from one end-user to another? 5.What are the issues that end-user organizations address when considering the following options when developing and/or acquiring software systems and on-line content: a."roll their own" on their own, b. "roll their own" in concert with other end- user organizations (e.g. in an open source initiative), c. adopt a well integrated commercial product (i.e. a monolithic commercial product if you take a pejorative view), d.adopt a well integrated collection of "best- of-breed" commercial components (i.e. a fragmented bunch of non-interoperable parts if you take a pejorative view), e. or adopt a hybrid approach which varies over time to includes one or more of the above.

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards23 Questions - Continued 6.What problems or difficulties do proprietary, vendor specific, de facto standards present? 7.What useful roles can specification, validation, and formal standardization organizations play in developing de jure standards? 8.What new problems or difficulties do specification and standardization efforts present? 9.What pressures are commercial software application suppliers under from both content suppliers and end-user organizations? 10.What strategies do vendors adopt to serve their vested interests, while accommodating the interests of their suppliers and users?

Eduworks October 17, 2002UC Berkeley - ET Standards24 RESOURCES CETIS (Centre for Educational Technology Interoperability Standards) (