1. Learning Object Repository Key for success Suzanne Lapointe GTN-Québec Member Cogigraph and Télé-Université

2. Plan  Vision  Context  keys for Success  Case Studies  Université du Québec  CREPUQ’s Tool Box  Francocommunauté virtuelle

3. To increase the quality of teaching by giving access to better quality resources. The idea is to stop doing the version 0,1 … Learning Object repository…. Vision

4. How : 3 steps Create and preserve resources ! Promotion Access requisite (open, limited, pay-per-use) Interoperability Quality Control Reutilisability Pedagogical integration of those resources Use and Reuse resources

5.  At the university Level - professor  Increase the faculty member’s interest to diffuse the LO they produced and to reuse the one already done.  Implement intellectual property functionalities that suits their needs  Explain how to produce LO.  At the university Level – Develop internal expertise to support the faculty members … Challenges

6. OR’s paradox  Success rely on A) quantity B) quality C) accessibility of the banks D) integration with platform

7. Association with other banks  federation … ….. Conclusion 1 2 3 4 …… How to fill the gap?

8.  Merlot  USA (36,000 resources)  Nime  Japan (250,000 resources)  Edna  Australia (260,000 resources)  ARIADNE  EUROPE (50,000 resources)  CANADA  LORNET (4,000 resources) … GLOBE consortium

9. Federation : Key for quantity

10. Association with other banks  federation Metatagging easy for the users ….. Conclusion 1 2 3 4 …… How to fill the gap?

11. Metatagging easy for the users

12. Behind the Scene : LOM

13. Federated Search

15. Passport :

16. How we diffuse expertise  Workshop in 2005 with library experts, content developers and archivist diffusing the expertise of Normetic  Conference in 2006 with CREPUQ – Faculty members and technopedagogical specialists were invited.  Training for users.

17. Association with other banks  federation Metatagging easy for the users Respect Intellectual Property Conclusion 1 2 3 4 …… How to fill the gap?

18. Rights by folders

19. Specify the rights

20. Association with other banks  federation Metatagging easy for the users Respect Intellectual Property Conclusion 1 2 3 4 Integration to platform How to fill the gap?

21.  Platform in each university  A large amount of faculty members doing their own resources  Each resource is done for themselves, few shared their resources. … Context - PROCENA

22. Integration of PALOMA

23. Other platforms with LOR

24. Projet 1 : Projet FODAR : UQ  Who’s involved?  Why ?  Technology developed for the project  Plan : Second Phase

25. Who’s involved ?  The universities member of the Réseau de l’Université du Québec UQAMUQTR UQARUQAC UQATETS INRSENAP TELUQUQO

26. Funding  FODAR (UQ funding)  90,000$ first year  Around 90,000$ second year

27. … Innovation and learning object repository … technical nature Develop an environment web based easy to use with friendly user interface for referencing the objects; doing research; applying rights to the resources. 1. Giving access to a system easy to use. 2. Utilize standards for referencing the objects 3. Being able to connect one repository to another 4. Avoid the necessity of expertise by the development of an user friendly interface. 5.. ……

28. …Innovation and learning object repository … editorial nature Facilitate access of the objects descriptions and encouraging reuse! First action : encouraging the faculty members to reference their resources in a bank 1. Which resource? 2. How can we insure quality ? 3. Which options of access limitation? 4. Who will be involved in the institution From the organization point of view: Which strategies to implement to encourage the professors referencing their object and encouraging reuse ?

29. Technology used  Already developed with research fundings  System complete and operational but difficult to use for non experts  Core of the technology  federated search

30. What we learned  Involving library experts is a good way  with library experts (4$ per record)  In successful universities (top down approach combined with bottom up)  Specialized Object repositories are easier

31. Plan for Second Phase  At least, 1 LOR in each institution  System REA.UQ fully operational  Document the experiences  Expertise in metareferencing in each institution  Editorial policy regarding learning objects diffusion in each institution

32. Project II : Projet CREPUQ  Why ?  Who’s involved ?  Similar experiences

33. Tool-Team Mandate  Identify the technopedagogical tools developed and used by the universities (forum, portfolio, wikis…).  Implement a learning object repository with those tools and encourage reuse.

34. Who participate ?  Quebec universities ; coordinate by the CREPUQ TELUQUQTR UdMUQAC ENAPETS LavalHEC

35. Similar experiences  Similar previous experience (public services)  Knowledge Exchange Service : 15 years  Adullact : French project : 10 years

36. New Project : still waiting for funding Partners in Francocommunauté virtuelle project  Moncton University  University of Ottawa  Téluq and Cogigraph Create a portal giving access to the OR from different french universities in Canada

37. Conclusion : grouping isolate experiences At the beginning of the implementationThink about quality