1. Event 1 Learning Objects, Interoperability and Standards Hugh Davis

2. Event 2 2 The Research Questions What is the purpose of learning objects? What specifications exist? What is good practice in designing learning objects? How to design for re-use? Why are learning objects used so little?

3. Event 3 3 Defining Learning Objects “A unit of educational content delivered via the internet.” “The notion of small, reusable chunks of instructional media” “A section of a course that can be stored and used again in another communication or learning product.” “Any entity, digital or non-digital, which can be used, re-used or referenced during technology supported learning” (IEEE)

4. Event 4 4 Defining Learning Objects A Reusable Learning Object is a granular, reusable chunk of information that is media independent. …. Each RLO can stand alone as a collection of content items, practice items and assessment items that are combined based on a single learning objective. (CISCO) “ A collection of information objects assembled using metadata to match the personality and needs of the individual learner. “ “A collection of resources that are combined with a learning design to meet a small and well specified set of learning objectives. The applicability of the concept is broad. It covers all kinds of teaching and learning activities”

5. Event 5 5 The Davis version of “What’s a Learning Object?” A discrete learning experience which responds to a given learning outcome…. ….implemented in platform independent formats…. …..possibly packaged with sequencing material to describe how to use it… …. and/or Metadata to describe its purpose…. so that it can be re-used by others on other platforms.

6. Event 6 6 Some of the key players Ariadne http://www.ariadne-eu.org/http://www.ariadne-eu.org/ –A European Association open to the World, for Knowledge Sharing and Reuse, E-Learning for all, International Cooperation in Teaching, Serving the Learning Citizen. IMS http://www.imsproject.org/http://www.imsproject.org/ –The mission of the IMS.. is to support the adoption and use of learning technology worldwide….. –provides a neutral forum in which members with competing business interests and different decision-making criteria collaborate to satisfy real-world requirements for interoperability and re-use. ADL http://www.adlnet.org/http://www.adlnet.org/ –The ADL Initiative, sponsored by the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), –is a collaborative effort between government, industry and academia –to establish a new distributed learning environment that permits the interoperability of learning tools and course content on a global scale. –ADL's vision is to provide access to the highest quality education and training, tailored to individual needs, delivered cost-effectively anywhere and anytime.

7. Event 7 7 The Goals of the research On-line learning tools to meet the needs of all sorts of learners Interoperability of the tools Re-use of materials (note that these aims go well beyond the simplistic idea of a learning object) The Goals imply we must adopt STANDARDS

8. Event 8 8 Some thoughts on Standards Standards are good! Standards do not have to be standardized Standards do not have to be “one size fits all” But standards can become straightjackets if not well designed and imaginatively used when at the specification stage. -That’s why standardisation is a research issue Standards do not guarantee good learning! –Nor good travel, good food, …

9. Event 9 9 Some Criticisms of LOs Clip art instruction Suited to training not HE – MacDonald’s University! Very Expensive to produce Teachers like Teaching (Sage on a stage) Copyright/ownership Do *you* use SCORM?

10. Event 10 Specifications and standards (thanks Eric Duval)

11. Event 11 The Goals On-line learning tools to meet the needs of all sorts of learners Interoperability of the tools Re-use of materials (note that these aims go well beyond the simplistic idea of a learning object) The Goals imply we must adopt STANDARDS

12. Event 12 So What Specifications Exist? Accessibility Competency Definitions Content Packaging Digital Repositories Enterprise Enterprise Services ePortfolio Learner Information Learning Design Meta-data Question and Test Interoperability Resource List Interoperability Shareable State Persistence Simple Sequencing Vocabulary Definition Exchange And that’s just the IMS Specs

13. Event 13 LOM General –Title, language, description etc Life Cycle –Version, Status, etc Meta-metadata –What schema and language is metadata using? Technical –Format, Size, Location, Platform requirements etc. Educational –Type of Interactivity, type of learning resource, difficulty, semantic density, time to learn etc. Rights –Cost, copyright restrictions etc Relation Annotation Classification –In some taxonomy, keywords etc.

14. Event 14 Issues with LOM Too much for people to enter Eric Duval says “Forms must Die” – much of this information can be collected automatically from context We don’t necessarily need it all – but in order to enable interoperability we do need to know what data will be there –Application Profiles (CanCore and UK LOMCore)

15. Event 15 Content Packaging Takes Care of Packaging up your lessons to send to someone else Presenting an organisation of the materials to the learner

16. Event 16 Issues with Content Packaging What is the Run Time Environment? ADL (SCORM) and AICC are making inputs but there is no specification yet. Is this (content) what learning is about? Latest from IMS introduces “Comon Cartridge” which starts to address this – assessment and forums are integrated as basic activities

17. Event 17 QTI Question and Test Interoperability Spec Defines how to represent objective questions (e.g. MCQ) in XML so that they may be exchanged.. Various question types defined – and you can do a lot with Flash The Schema includes Items and Assessments Each item can specify the feedback a student (may) get and the way the question (or groups of questions) may be marked QTI specifies how assessment results should be handled

18. Event 18 www.e3an.ac.uk

19. Event 19 TOIA www.toia.ac.uk

20. Event 20 QTI Issues QTI has not been properly integrated with SCORM and the run time environment There is no notion of Question Banks The handling of results is possibly an enterprise system function Expressing the algorithms for marking in XML is a mess And anyway – can all learning be measured using objective questions?

21. Event 21 SCORM Sharable Courseware Object Reference Model (from ADL) Launch and track directed learning experiences SCORM makes use of other Specifications from Ariadne, IEEE etc.

22. Event 22 The Three Parts of the SCORM Model The full version at http://www.rhassociates.com/scorm.htmhttp://www.rhassociates.com/scorm.htm 1.Overview - about the model, vision and future 2.Content Aggregation Model (CAM)- how to put learning content together so it can be moved and reused. 3.Run Time Environment (RTE): How content is launched and the learner's progress is tracked and reported back.

23. Event 23 Content Aggregation Model IEEE LOM IMS XML Bindings (defines how to code the metadata in XML) IMS Content Packaging – –Packaging consists of "zipping" all relevant files together with an XML "manifest" that defines all of the contents and their relationship to one an other.

24. Event 24 Run Time Environment API A standard way of communicating with an LMS, regardless of what tools are used to develop the content - a web-friendly approach using JavaScript. (Flash also understands the API) The data model standardizes how LMS systems track learners.

25. Event 25 Creating SCORM in the Reload Editor

26. Event 26 SCORM 1.3 and IMS SS SCORM 1.2 dealt with linear and hierarchical organisations Simple Sequencing (in SCORM 1.3) allows author to specify: – The sequence which a learner follows through the content –The conditions on which the sequence may branch –The conditions on which a learner is seen to have learned –What should happen when a user returns to the work after a break

27. Event 27 IMS SS Issues SS has a simple user model –Which activities learners have “completed” But “personalisation” is based purely on results within this activity – makes no use of other knowledge of user – not really “adaptive” This is still a world of multiple learners learning alone – no model of collaboration

28. Event 28 IMS Learning Design IMS Spec from Educational Modelling Language – EML Attempt to allow teacher to represent their pedagogic approach People engage in Activities with Resources –People: one or many, learners or staff -> Roles –Activities: description, structured –Resources: learning objects & services Many roles need co-ordination in a workflow Conceptually LD wraps the content with: –Multiple roles and coordinated activities It adds Services – currently the main ones are: –send-mail –Conference

29. Event 29 LD (Contin) learning-design title learning-objectives prerequisites components roles activities environments method play* act* role-parts * Metadata

30. 30 The Dynamics of Learning Design play Act 1Act 2Act 3Act 4Act 5 Role-part 1 Role-part 2 Role-part 4 Role-part 5 Role Activity Environment Learning objects Learning services Activity- Description method components

31. Event 31 IMS LD Issues It does not represent a great range of activities yet There is no canonical LD player (CopperCore?) Authoring is complex (LAMS vs RELOAD)

32. Event 32 We’ve come a long way… LO LOM LMS Admin Content packaging Simple sequencing CMI QTI RCD Ariadne: 1995 ADL: 1997

33. Event 33 Still more to be done… What is specific to learning about –IEEE LOM  Dublin Core –Packaging  MPEG-21 –Sequencing  SMIL –Repositories  Z39.50 Even the IMS specifications have unfortunate areas of overlap and of omission– e.g. QTI handling results but no-one handling Banks of QTI items, The repository issue is far from solved (JORUM, Merlot)

34. Event 34 Barriers to Adoption Teachers never create metadata (that’s for librarians) Teachers never finish anything Teachers often “borrow” parts of their teaching materials without permission Teachers are not good at re-usable design (University) teachers hate the idea of re-use (All the above means we need eLearning development Units to work with teachers)

35. Event 35 Barriers to Adoption Expense may still be an issue (until re-use kicks in) Difficulty of locating existing materials (interface to repositories is not sorted yet) Quality Level - A lot of LOs available are of poor quality

36. Event 36 What has to happen for LOs to attain wider adoption? Less uninformed criticism from the educational community would help Tools must ensure that teachers and students and LO developers NEVER see XML! Metadata must cease to be a barrier A greater range of pedagogical approaches must be supported Scale of economy must be achieved Repositories must provide more relevant results Incentives for teachers to develop and share LOs must emerge

37. Event 37 Latest from IMS - LTI provides a framework for integrating rich learning applications – (Tools)s with platforms like VLEs, portals,etc. (Tool Consumers) Allows closed systems to be open Allows use of cloud services Prevents bad integrations Good tools can be integrated with many application