1. Model-Driven Instructional Engineering to Generate Adaptable Learning Materials Juan Manuel Dodero Universidad Carlos III de Madrid [ICALT 2006, ADALE Workshop]

2. Introduction Objective –Analyze model-driven software engineering approach for… Customizing high-level generation of LDs Adapting LDs Agenda 1.Related work –Systematic Instructional Design –Instructional Engineering 2.Issues 3.Exploring Model-Driven approach 4.Conclusions

3. Systematic Instructional Design Instructional Design and Technology (IDT) –“IDT encloses the analysis of learning problems, as well as design, development, assessment and management of processes and resources intended to improve learning. IDT professionals often use systematic ID procedures and employ a variety of instructional media to accomplish their goals” [Reiser & Dempsey, 2002] Related work on systematic IDT –R.D. Tennyson, A. E. Barro (1995): Automating instructional design: Computer-based development and delivery tools, Springer, 1995. –Paquette et al. (1999): MISA: A knowledge-based method for the engineering of learning systems. Journal of Courseware Engineering, 2. –R. A. Reiser, J. V. Dempsey (2002): Trends and issues in instructional design and technology, Merrill/Prentice Hall. –Sloep, Hummel & Manderveld (2005): Basic Design Procedures for E- learning Courses, in Koper & Tattersall (Eds.) Learning Design.

4. Instructional Engineering (IE) Definition of IE: –“A method that supports the analysis, the design and the delivery of a learning system, integrating the concepts, the processes and the principles of instructional design, software engineering and cognitive engineering” [Paquette, 2002] Related work –CEM method  L. Uden: “An engineering approach for online learning”, Journal of Distance Engineering Education, 1(1) –MISA Method  Paquette et al. (2005): An Instructional Engineering Method and Tool for the Design of Units of Learning, in Koper & Tattersall (Eds.) Learning Design –CPM profile  Nodenot et al. (2003): A UML profile incorporating separate viewpoints when modeling co-operative learning situations, Int. Conf. on Information Technology: Research and Education.

5. Some IE Issues Issue 1: Different models –Different roles provide design specifications pertaining to different models Issue 2: Different levels of abstraction –Any role can provide design specifications with different levels of abstraction Issue 3: Different contexts –Learning objects and services are useful for specific learning contexts (they are not instructionally universal) Issue 4: Different concerns –Pedagogy is the same, but learning topic is different –Learning topic is the same, but pedagogy is different

6. mappings and transforms Exploring MDA… CIM: Computation-Independent Model PIM: Platform-Independent Model PSM: Platform-Specific Model

7. Model mappings and transforms

8. Model-Driven IE CIM: Computation-Independent Model PIM: Platform-Independent Model PSM: Platform-Specific Model E-learning model LMS-specific SCORM IMS LDEtc. SecurityNavigationEtc. Pedagogical model

9. MDIE: current approaches Adaptive hypermedia (applied to e-learning scenario) –S. Ceri, P. Dolog, M. Matera & W. Nejdl (2004): Model-driven design of Web Applications with Client-Side Adaptation, ICWE’04. PSM level –Grob, Bensberg, & Dewanto (2005): Model Driven Architecture (MDA): Integration and Model Reuse for Open Source eLearning Platforms, e- Learning and Education Journal, 1, feb 2005. –Wang & Zhang (2003), “MDA-based Development of E-Learning System”, ICSA’03 PIM level –Nodenot et al. (2004): Model-based Engineering of Learning Situations for Adaptive Web Based Educational Systems, Proc. of WWW’04 Conference, New York, USA. Upper levels… –Díez et al. (2006): Towards An Effective Instructional Engineering Analysis Method, Proc. of EC-TEL’06, Crete, Greece.

10. MDD Generative approach

11. Model merge

12. Example: multiple models ModelDimensionExpertsMeta-models X0X0 Subject- specific e.g. mathematicians (if developing a course on mathematics) e.g. mathematical ontologies [Gruber and Olsen, 1994], MathML [Carlisle et al., 2003], etc. X1X1 TechnicalLT experts, software engineers, etc. SCORM, IMS LD, IMS QTI, etc. X2X2 PedagogicalPedagogues, instructors, etc. Educational ontologies e.g. [Leidig, 2001], [Mizoguchi, 1996] X3X3 UsabilityUsability engineers, cognitive scientists, etc. Usability model e.g. García- Barriocanal, 2003

13. Conclusion “The machine has been delegated a problem which is and remains primarily a teaching problem“, interview with Prof. R. Maragliano, elearningeuropa.info, 23 Aug 2004. MD instructional engineering –It is not about (fully) automated instructional design –It deals with different levels of automation Model-driven considers… –different levels of abstraction of specifications –different models/domains –separate context-specific issues –separate pedagogical issues