Sharing Resources Creating Reusable E-Learning Resources Sarah Currier sarah.currier@strath.ac.uk

1. Sharing Resources Creating Reusable E-Learning Resources Sarah Currier sarah.currier@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 OUNL’s 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-ieee-mou/ • “Metadata Principles and Practicalities” D-Lib (The Ottawa Group): http://www.dlib.org/dlib/april02/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 dialogue student delivery system competencies library tests & assessment activities library registry/authority course Original diagram by C. Duncan SJC, HOTBED Presentation, RSAMD, 16 July 2002.

16. administration pedagogy learning resources teacher dialogue student delivery system competencies library tests & assessment activities library registry/authority course 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. administration pedagogy learning resources teacher dialogue student delivery system competencies library tests & assessment activities library registry/authority course 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. administration pedagogy learning resources teacher dialogue student delivery system competencies library tests & assessment activities library registry/authority course 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-qnr.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. Aimsto 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/outputs.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/introduction/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 didn’t answer the question or didn’t 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 t&l 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 everyone’s 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/index.html