1 / 31

Interoperability: future-proofing CAA

Heriot-Watt University 6th February, 2002. Interoperability: future-proofing CAA. Niall Sclater CETIS Manager, Educational Systems University of Strathclyde. Why do I need to know about QTI?. I’m authoring a bank of questions in my subject area

keely
Download Presentation

Interoperability: future-proofing CAA

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Heriot-Watt University 6th February, 2002 Interoperability: future-proofing CAA Niall Sclater CETIS Manager, Educational Systems University of Strathclyde

  2. Why do I need to know about QTI? • I’m authoring a bank of questions in my subject area • I’m involved in the selection of a CAA system for my institution • I have a general interest in online learning and assessment

  3. The basics • IMS QTI is a means for exchanging assessment information • It uses XML • 2 key parts of the spec: • Assessment Section Item • Results Report • Also QTI lite • Can be implemented separately

  4. Response types • Multiple choice • True false • Multiple response • Image hot spot • Fill in the blank • Select text • Slide • Drag object • Drag target • Order objects • Match item • Connect the points

  5. The concept of rendering • The same item can be “rendered” in different ways to allow for different • delivery platforms • technical capabilities • participant challenges (eg visual, audio, physical etc)

  6. Rendering example

  7. Response types logical identifier xy coordinate string number logical group Render types choice hot spot fill in blank slider ‘object’ Basic response & render types

  8. True false example

  9. True false example XML <questestinterop> <qticomment> This is a simple True/False multiple-choice example. The rendering is a standard radio button style. No response processing is incorporated. </qticomment> <item ident="IMS_V01_I_BasicExample001a"> <presentation label="BasicExample001a"> <material> <mattext> Paris is the Capital of France ? </mattext> </material> <response_lid ident="TF01" rcardinality="Single" rtiming="No"> <render_choice> <response_label ident="T"> <material><mattext> True </mattext></material> </response_label> <response_label ident="F"> <material><mattext> False </mattext></material> </response_label> </render_choice> </response_lid> </presentation> </item> </questestinterop>

  10. Response processing <item> … <resprocessing> <outcomes><decvar/></outcomes> <respcondition title="Correct"> <conditionvar> <varequal respident="TF01">T</varequal> </conditionvar> <setvar action="Set" >1</setvar> <displayfeedback feedbacktype="Response" linkrefid="Correct"/> </respcondition> </resprocessing> <itemfeedback ident="Correct" view="Candidate"> <material><mattext>Yes, you are right</mattext></material> </itemfeedback> … <item>

  11. Multiple choice example

  12. Multiple choice example XML <questestinterop> <item title="Standard MC Item" Ident="IMS_V01_I_BasicExample002"> <presentation label="BasicExample002"> <material><mattext>Which one of the listed standards committees is responsible for developing the token ring specification ? <mattext> </material> <response_lid ident="MC01" rcardinality="Single" rtiming="No"> <render_choice shuffle="Yes"> <response_label ident="A"> <material><mattext> IEEE 802.3 </mattext></material> </response_label> <response_label ident="B"> <material><mattext> IEEE 802.5 </mattext></material> </response_label> <response_label ident="C"> <material><mattext> IEEE 802.6 </mattext></material> </response_label> <response_label ident="D"> <material><mattext> IEEE 802.11 </mattext></material> </response_label> <response_label ident="E" rshuffle="No"> <material><mattext> None of the above. </mattext></material> </response_label> </render_choice> </response_lid> </presentation> </item> </questestinterop>

  13. Response processing <item> … <resprocessing> <outcomes> <decvar vartype="Integer" defaultval="0"/> </outcomes> <respcondition title="Correct"> <conditionvar> <varequal respident="MCb_01">A</varequal> </conditionvar> <setvar action="Set" >1</setvar> <displayfeedback feedbacktype="Response" linkrefid="Correct"/> </respcondition> </resprocessing> <itemfeedback ident="Correct" view="Candidate"> <material><mattext>Yes, you are right.</mattext></material> </itemfeedback> … <item>

  14. Multiple response example

  15. Image hot spot example

  16. Fill in blank (string) example

  17. Numerical example

  18. Composite example

  19. Results reporting • Specific to a single participant • 4 constructs • summary (eg max score, num attempts) • assessment • section • item • Each construct contains a context which specifies details such as name of participant

  20. Where does QTI fit in with other specs? • IMS Meta-data Specification • IMS Content Packaging Specification • IMS Learner Information Packaging Specification • IMS Digital Repositories Interoperability Specification

  21. IMS Spec Development Process IMS Members Elect Public Technical Board Final Approval Feedback Scope Drafts Working Group Scope Base Document Public Draft

  22. What’s next with QTI? • V1.2 currently being approved • selection and ordering of sections and items • scoring roll-up in sections and assessments (from question scores to test scores) • results reporting • Question and test metadata • Harmonisation with other specs • Integration with ADL SCORM • Implementations now needed • V1.3 early in 2002

  23. UK Interoperability Developments • Strong representation in QTI working group • CETIS QTI SIG • meetings • online discussions • repository of open source tools • hosting workshops • CAA Centre & SCAAN • JISC MLE CAA Project • e3an

  24. Products which say they are implementing QTI • E-Test 3, RIVA Technologies Inc • Question Mark Perception • Can studios • Oracle i-learning • Blackboard • WebCT • Ultimate assessment • E3AN

  25. IMS and other initiatives • IMS Europe • SCORM • Open Knowledge Initiative • Prometeus • Questionmark -> Blackboard & WebCT

  26. www.imsproject.org

  27. QTI page

  28. QTI: some problems • For vendors • implementing QTI is costly • stops them from protecting their user base • Vendors want simple specifications; users want broad, well-defined ones • It is difficult to define specifications which do not have an effect on functionality

  29. Finally: why bother with QTI? • Avoid lock in • allow data to be moved in standard formats • allow one system to replace another • Integrate systems from different vendors; allow choice of best assessment tool • Facilitate exchange of questions and tests between institutions, allow market to develop • Enable separation of content from presentation • Standard assessment records will facilitate student mobility

  30. Further information www.sclater.com www.imsproject.org www.cetis.ac.uk/assessment

More Related