Learning objects: achievements and challenges Tom Boyle CETL for Reusable Learning Objects London Metropolitan University Simposio Oviedo,

The term Learning Object has become the Holy Grail of content creation and aggregation in the computer-mediated learning field. Polsani (2003)

The use of learning objects promises to increase the effectiveness of learning… Duval et al 2003

Themes of talk  Learning objects: main achievements to date  Significant challenges  What do we mean by learning objects?  Better models of composition and decomposition  Linking learning objects and learning designs  Questions explored within a three dimensional model of the ‘learning object’ space  Work of the CETL for Reusable Learning Objects  Conclusions

Learning Object achievements Major achievements in international specifications and standards –IMS Content Packaging –IEEE LOM –SCORM Repositories built on these standards Universal impact of concept Many fine examples of learning objects

Packaging and metadata Manifest Metadata Organizations Resources Physical files/content IMS Package file Manifest Content

‘Objects’ versus ‘learning’ ‘Learning objects’ as knowledge objects –packaged –described –stored –retrieved Based on international specifications and standards Much less emphasis on ‘learning’ and the design of effective learning objects CETL for Reusable Learning Objects places a strong emphasis on design for effective learning

CETL for Reusable Learning Objects Started in April 2005 with £3.3 million funding from HEFCE for the period Partners: London Metropolitan University, University of Cambridge, University of Nottingham Design and develop reusable learning objects (RLOs) –with a strong pedagogical focus Use and evaluate these RLOs with substantial student cohorts Extensive staff development and dissemination programme

Some questions What are learning objects? How do ‘bigger’ and ‘smaller’ learning objects fit together? What is the relationship between learning objects and learning designs? What is the model for reuse – is it based on content or content + pedagogical design?

The term ‘learning objects’ has been used with multiple meanings. We need to clarify the different meanings used and how they might relate to each other.

Learning objects as granular "Learning Objects are a new way of thinking about learning content. Traditionally, content comes in a several hour chunk. Learning Objects are much smaller units of learning, typically ranging from 2 minutes to 15 minutes." (Wisconsin Online Resource Center) "[A Learning Object] is defined as the smallest independent structural experience that contains an objective, a learning activity and an assessment." (L'Allier 1997)L'Allier 1997

Learning objects as anything? “a learning object is defined as any entity that … may be used for learning, education or training.” IEEE LOM A Learning Object is an independent and self-standing unit of learning content that is predisposed to reuse in multiple instructional contexts. (Polsani 2003)

Mapping the learning object space ObjectPattern Holo Base Raw Packaged The Learning Object Cube - LOC

Exploring the LOC space Packaged Instance Pattern Base Holo Raw Def: “a learning object as any entity that … may be used in learning” …. IEEE LOM

Learning objects as basic units ObjectPattern Holo Base Raw Packaged “ the smallest independent structural experience” - the minimum meaningful pedagogical unit

Packaged Instance Pattern Base Holo Raw Definitions sound as if they are focused on the bottom left quadrant, but in practice are applied almost all the way along the aggregation dimension Complex or higher order learning objects

Aggregation models of composition Aggregation –aggregation of assets into learning objects –aggregation of smaller ones learning objects to form bigger ones independent reuse of components –composition and decomposition ‘Lego’ brick scenario But this has little to do with how learning objects are actually classified and used There is no adequate pedagogical model. The ‘aggregation model totally avoids the key issues of the nature of the learning objects (at each) level and how they fit together

Packaged Instance Pattern Base Holo Raw “A micro-context for learning” Reusable pedagogical patterns Extract the reusable learning design – the pedagogical pattern and make it reusable

Generative learning objects (GLOs) The basis for reuse is the pedagogical pattern rather than ‘content’ of the learning object A richer basis for reuse and repurposing This gives a tremendous increase in productivity Allows local tutors to repurpose learning objects to meet their local needs and preferences

Some examples of learning objects

EASA learning objects Winner of European Academic Software Award 2004

Engage students with familiar every day examples

Graphic examples

Active student learning

Reference for a book

Acids and Alkalis

Mobile multimedia learning objects

Linking learning objects and learning designs - Generative learning Objects (GLOs)

GLOs separate  design pattern from Concrete learning object How to elucidate and articulate these patterns? and How to make the result usable by tutors? Challenges

GLO Authoring Tool

Conclusions: productive questions What are base learning objects? How do we create higher order learning objects from these base objects? How do we extract and make available reusable learning designs at this level? How do we involve tutors – as re-users of content? – or (also) as adapters of reusable pedagogical patterns? Raw ObjectPattern Holo Base Packaged