Sharing Resources

1

• Sharing Resources
• Creating Reusable E-Learning Resources
• Sarah Currier
• sarah.currier_at_strath.ac.uk
• CETIS Educational Content SIG
• CETIS and the University of Strathclyde

SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.
2
Overview

• Learning technology interoperability standards
  introduction and overview.
• The work of CETIS.
• The DNER Learning Objects criteria for
  evaluating learning resources.
• The DNER Learning Objects a snapshot of
  current practice.

SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.
3

• Learning Technology Interoperability Standards
• an introduction and overview
• with thanks to Lorna M. Campbell, Niall Sclater
  and Boon Low
• for the presentation this section is based on

SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.
4
What are learning technology standards and
specifications?

• Standards and specifications that are designed to
  facilitate the description, packaging,
  sequencing and delivery of educational content,
  learning activities and learner information.

SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.
5
Why do we need learning technology standards and
specifications?

• To prevent content becoming locked in to
  proprietary systems.
• To ensure educational content can be reused.
• To enable educational content learner
  information to be shared.
• To facilitate interoperability.

SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.
6
Who is developing LT interoperability
specifications?

• IMS Global Learning
• http//www.imsproject.org/
• Learning Resource Meta-data
• Question and Test Interoperability
• Learner Information Packages
• Competencies
• Simple Sequencing
• Content Packaging
• Learning Design
• Accessibility
• Digital Repositories Interoperability.

SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.
7
Who is developing LT interoperability
specifications?

• Advanced Distributed Learning (ADL).
• http//adlnet.org/
• US Department of Defence Initiative.
• Working with IMS.
• Primarily focused on the delivery of web based
  content.
• Shared Content Object Reference Model (SCORM).
• SCORM incorporates IMS Meta-data and elements of
  IMS Content Packaging.

SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.
8
Who is developing LT interoperability
specifications?

• European Centre for Standards/Information Society
  Standardisation System Learning Technologies
  Workshop (CEN/ISSS WS-LT).
• http//www.cenorm.be/isss/Workshop/LT/Default.htm
• Project teams active in a variety of areas
• Localisation and internationalisation of Learning
  Object Metadata.
• Description of language capabilities.
• Quality assurance.
• Taxonomies and vocabularies.
• Educational modelling languages.

SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.
9
Who is developing LT interoperability
specifications?

• Open University of the Netherlands (OUNL)
• http//eml.ou.nl/introduction/index.htm
• Educational Modelling Language (EML)
• Describes and defines the process of learning
  itself.
• Capable of supporting a wide range of pedagogical
  approaches.
• Supports single and multi users, behaviourist,
  constructivist and mixed mode learning.
• Describes Units of Study in terms of roles,
  activities, environments and objects.
• IMS Learning Design is based on the OUNLs EML
  specification.

SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.
10
Who is developing LT interoperability
specifications?

• Dublin Core Metadata Initiative.
• http//dublincore.org/
• Focused on developing interoperable online
  metadata standards.
• Liaisons with IEEE/LOM WG, CEN, ISO, etc.
• Memorandum of Understanding with IEEE LTSC
• http//dublincore.org/documents/2000/12/06/dcmi-ie
  ee-mou/
• Metadata Principles and Practicalities D-Lib
  (The Ottawa Group) http//www.dlib.org/dlib/april
  02/weibel/04weibel.html

SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.
11
Who is developing formal LT interoperability
standards?

• Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers
  (IEEE) Learning Technology Standards Committee
  (LTSC)
• http//ltsc.ieee.org/index.html
• Wide variety of working groups
• Learner related
• Content related
• Data and metadata, including Learning Object
  Metadata (LOM) News flash! Is now officially a
  Standard.
• Management systems and applications

SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.
12
Who is developing formal LT interoperability
standards?

• International Standards Organisation (ISO) Sub
  Committee 36 (SC 36)
• Learning Technology.
• Standardization in the area of information
  technologies that support automation for
  learners, learning institutions, and learning
  resources.
• IEEE LTSC has a "formal" relationship with SC 36.
  
• Produce formal certified standards.

SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.
13
What do LT interoperability standards do?

• Enable users to search for, locate and retrieve
  appropriate content Metadata, Digital
  Repositories.
• Plan educational scenarios and formulate
  instructional design EML Learning Design.
• Deliver educational content tailored to learners
  requirements Learning Design, EML, Simple
  Sequencing, SCORM.

SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.
14
What do LT interoperability standards do?

• Share content between systems Content
  Packaging, SCORM.
• Create and deliver computer aided assessments
  Question and Test Interoperability.
• Record and share learner information Learner
  Information Packages (LIP), Competencies,
  Enterprise.
• Ensure educational content is accessible to all
  users Accessibility.

SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.
15
How do LT standards relate to educational
practice?
administration
pedagogy
learning resources
teacher
student
dialogue
delivery system
competencies
library
tests assessment
activities
library
registry/authority
course
Original diagram by C. Duncan
SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.
16
How do LT standards relate to educational
practice? Existing specifications.
IMS LIP
IMS Enterprise
Metadata
OUNLEML
IMS QTI
IMS Competency Definition
IMS Content Packaging
Original diagram by C. Duncan
SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.
17
How do LT standards relate to educational
practice? Existing specifications.
IMS LIP
IMS Enterprise
Metadata
ADL SCORM
OUNLEML
IMS QTI
IMS Competency Definition
ADL SCORM
IMS Content Packaging
Original diagram by C. Duncan
SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.
18
How do LT standards relate to educational
practice? Forthcoming specifications.
IMS LIP
IMS Enterprise
Metadata
IMS Digital Repositories
IMS Learning Design
OUNLEML
IMS QTI
IMS Digital Repositories
IMS Competency Definition
IMS Simple Sequencing
IMS Content Packaging
Original diagram by C. Duncan
SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.
19
CETIS Supporting the UK FE/HE community

• Centre for Educational Technology
  Interoperability Standards.
• Funded by the Joint Information Systems Committee
  (JISC).
• Support UK Higher and Further Education.
• Represents UK FE/HE on international educational
  standards initiatives, e.g. IMS, CEN/ISSS.
• Advises Universities and Colleges on the
  strategic, technical and pedagogic implications
  of educational technology standards.
• Manages the Special Interest Groups (SIGs).

SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.
20
The CETIS SIGs

• Accessibility SIG
• Assessment SIG
• Computer aided assessment and Question and Test
  Interoperability.
• Educational Content SIG
• Content Packaging, Learning Design, Simple
  Sequencing, SCORM, EML, etc.
• Learner Information and Enterprise SIG
• Metadata SIG
• Focused on learning resource metadata.
• FE Focus Group
• Supports the interests of FE colleges in the SIGs
  and other organisations.

SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.
21
Further information

• The CETIS website
• http//www.cetis.ac.uk/
• Hosts websites for all the SIGs.
• Regular updates of latest developments in the
  field of LT standards.
• Described by The Technology Source as
• Probably the most comprehensive and current
  site devoted to educational technology
  interoperability standards, the CETIS Web site is
  an essential resource for anyone working in the
  fields of learning objects or learning content
  management systems.

SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.
22
Metadata Survey! Please help

• The Metadata SIG is conducting a survey
• http//www.icbl.hw.ac.uk/philb/cetis-md-dev/use-q
  nr.htm
• - Looking at who is active in the area of
  describing educational resources, what metadata
  schemas they use and why, (and also, what they
  don't use and why not).
• - Focusing on IMS Meta-data- are also interested
  in why people are choosing not to use it so
  welcome returns from people who are using any
  other schemas.

SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.
23

• Aims to ensure that DNER content can be made
  available for use and re-use in e-learning across
  UK FE/HE
• Funded by the JISC's DNER Learning Teaching
  Programme
• Project partners University of Hull Newark
  Sherwood College University of Strathclyde's
  Centre for Academic Practice and Department of
  Computer and Information Sciences.

24

• Survey and evaluation of 5/99 DNER content
• Study outputs related to this
• A mapping, drawn from existing studies and
  documentation, of current and prospective DNER
  content, identifying categories and levels.
• Identification of the key issues pertaining to
  use of such content as learning objects for each
  category and level.
• There are four more outputs. See
  http//www.strath.ac.uk/Departments/CAP/dnerlo/out
  puts.html

25

• DNER LO Methodology
• Identified 27 content producing projects from
  5/99
• Gathered data about the content produced
• Developed criteria for evaluating content
• Evaluated the content of 18 selected projects
• Now summarising and analysing the data
• This presentation gives some preliminary
  findings

26

• But first!
• What is a learning object anyway?
• "A learning object is an entity, digital or
  non-digital, that can be used, re-used, or
  referenced during technology supported learning."
• Koper, R. Modeling units of study from a
  pedagogical perspective the pedagogical
  meta-model behind EML. http//eml.ou.nl/introducti
  on/docs/ped-metamodel.pdf

27

• DNER LO Evaluation Criteria
• Granularity and Aggregation Level
• Reusability
• Subject Specificity
• Horizontal / Vertical Reusability
• Interactivity
• Metadata
• VLE reuse
• Interoperability

28

• DNER LO Content categories (Top level)
• - Same as Aggregation Level
• Information object
• Learning object
• Information resource
• Unit of study
• Module
• Course
• Collection

29

• DNER LO Content categories (Second level)
• Information objects
• Text files Still images Still images with text,
  etc. 3D images Animations Moving images Sound
  files Collections data Links pages Glossaries
  Bibliographies Spreadsheets Promotional
  material
• Learning objects
• Text files Media files Case studies Still
  images with ext etc. Animations Moving images
  Models Simulations Assessments Worksheets
  Exercises Promotional material
• Units of study
• How-to guides Slideshows Moving images Themed
  pathways

30

• Survey Results Metadata
• Full range of levels of understanding stages of
  planning
• DC already implemented 39 (70 are planning
  IMS)
• DC planned 28
• IMS implemented 0
• IMS Meta-data planned 39 (70 already
  implemented DC)
• Survey Results VLE reuse
• About half of all projects said content was
  reusable in a VLE, or that they were working
  towards this end.
• Another fifth said their content was intended to
  be used only as is.
• Remainder (ca. 30) either didnt answer the
  question or didnt appear to understand it.

31

• Evaluation Criteria Reusability of content
• Technical format Contextual dependency
  Technical dependency
• Reusable May be delivered via a wide variety of
  platforms or technologies, do not reference
  related external content, are not technically
  dependent on external resources.
• Somewhat reusable May be restricted to a single
  delivery technology but are still relatively
  reusable due to the ubiquitous nature of that
  technology.
• Potentially reusable Have potential for reuse,
  i.e. they may be delivered in a standard format,
  e.g. HTML, but are dependent on related
  resources.
• Not reusable Restricted to a specific delivery
  platform or technology, and/or are highly
  dependent on related resources.

32

• Survey Results Reusability of content
• 22 of 18 projects produced some Reusable
  content.
• Of these, only 11 (2 projects!) produced
  primarily Reusable content.
• 61 produced some Somewhat Reusable content.
• 56 produced some Potentially Reusable content.
• Only 17 (3 projects) produced any Not Reusable
  content. (All justified by project objectives)

33

• Some Final Observations
• Awareness of tl issues in library-based
  e-learning resource provision is growing but
  there is still a lot of work to be done in
  training, dissemination encouraging
  collaboration.
• Library-based e-resource providers need to get
  active in places like the CETIS SIGs for
  everyones benefit they have a lot to offer as
  well as stuff to learn.
• So please get active in the relevant SIGs.
• Please fill out the Metadata SIG survey.
• And keep an eye on the DNER Learning Objects
  website for much, much more detail and
  interesting stuff from the study
• http//www.strath.ac.uk/Departments/CAP/dnerlo/ind
  ex.html