Learning Standards& Language ProjectsLearning Standards& Language Projects

Bob Godwin-JonesVirginia Commonwealth University

Calico 2009

Bob Godwin-JonesVirginia Commonwealth University

Calico 2009

"The nice thing about standards is that you have so many to choose from; furthermore, if you do not like any of them, you can just wait for next year's model."

- Andrew Tannenbaum, Computer Networks, 1981, p. 168

Standards to...Find-Organize-Present

❖FIND

✓Find rather than re-invent the wheel; more informed search than Google scattergun

❖ ORGANIZE

✓Combine resources from multiple sources: own, commercial, open source

❖ PRESENT

✓Use in current LMS, but also in other contexts, now and in the future

Finding:OSID’s & Federated Searches

❖What is it? “One Search to Identify & Download”(actually “Open Service Interface Definition”)

❖ Allows simultaneous search of multiple resources: “federated search”, familiar from library services search

❖OSID a project of Open Knowledge Initiative at MIT

❖ Intermediary between client and database/repository, written in Java and XML

❖ Content: institutional, subscription, publisher, open, self

❖ Why not just use Google?

✓targeted search -> only repositories you select

✓hidden sources (“deep Web”) -> authentication built in

✓integratable -> search & add within application

✓option, if enabled: upload own content

❖Demos: VUE (concept maps) SoftChalk (lessons)

Finding:OSID’S & FEDERATED SEARCHES

Organize: IMS Common Cartridge

❖What is it? Standard for import/export into LMS

❖Web accessible content:

✓ html, xml, web links

✓ media files (flash, mpg, jpg, mp3)

❖ Packaged in a zipped archive, imported into LMS

❖Content list & org in XML manifest file, like SCORM

❖ May include discussion forum (defined in manifest)

❖3rd-party application integration (using IMS LTI)

Organize: IMS Common Cartridge

❖ Assessments using the LMS’ native system

❖Question Types (QTI 1.2) ->

✓True/false

✓Essay

✓Multiple choice (single or multiple response)

✓Simple fill in the blank

✓Pattern match

Organize: IMS Common Cartridge

❖Why not just use SCORM?

✓Not just self-paced learning content

✓ Expandable content through 3rd party tools

✓Assessments integrated fully into LMS & gradebook

❖Issues: QTI 1.2, Sequencing (-> LTI), SCORM 2.0

❖Publisher, LMS support

❖Demo: 3 views of same content ->

Open U (export), UCompass (import), code

Sample code from CC imsmanifest.xml file

Present:Confluences & Options

❖ Towards interoperability

✓CC Installer using OSID on Open University course✓OSID’s to create personal & collaborative Portfolios

❖Presenting Content for student access

✓Common Cartridge -> few LMS as yet (Angel)

✓ SCORM -> supported by most LMS’s (inconsistently)

✓ SCORM to Common Cartridge conversion tool (IMS)

✓Flash in SCORM-compatible content ≠ mobile access

✓LMS -> towards eclectic options (even Blackboard)

❖Choosing an authoring tool for content✓Support now for SCORM✓Likely or announced also for Common Cartridge

❖Free authoring tools

✓eXe Mac, Win & Linux; open source; CC export✓Xerte Flash based, Windows, free not open source✓RELOAD - supports SCORM 2004 sequencing

❖Commercial products✓Lectora high-end, Windows. multiple export✓ReadyGo many diff LMS's supported, Windows,✓CourseGenie from Wimba, works in Word✓SoftChalk LessonBuilder Mac/Win, activities

Present:Confluences & Options

Questions?rgjones@vcu.edu

Postscript: Divergences

❖LETSI on SCORM:

“Over the last few years, SCORM has become the de facto standard around the world to allow content developed in one learning system to be exported and used in all other systems.” LETSI Assumptions Document.

❖ IMS on SCORM:

“IMS’s experience with ADL is that ADL has ‘gamed the system’ toward its own objectives rather than those of industry. The result of this has been an industry concentration on a relatively small part of the interoperability challenge as it relates to learning systems – migration of self-paced learning content, that is, CBT, to the Internet, in a training context. While the vision of ADL and SCORM was/is admirable with respect to learning objects, it addresses a very limited and non-pervasive part of the educational spectrum...”