Subject: Re: IFETS-DISCUSS Digest - 15 Feb 2000 to 16 Feb 2000
From: Stephen Downes (stephen.downes@ualberta.ca)
Date: Wed 16 Feb 2000 - 21:43:41 MET
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2000 13:43:41 -0700 From: Stephen Downes <stephen.downes@ualberta.ca> Subject: Re: IFETS-DISCUSS Digest - 15 Feb 2000 to 16 Feb 2000
List address to send message to everyone: ifets-discuss@LISTSERV.READADP.COM
Details of current discussion: http://ifets.ieee.org/discussions/discuss.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hiya,
Two quick comments - no doubt I'll have a lot more to say in
the future, but not in this message...
First, someone wrote, "LO now has four independent sub-component
(characteristics) for LO to be useful and potentially re-use:
content, functions, learning objectives, look and feel :-)"
We want to draw a distinctions between 'components' and
'variables'.
Components are self-contained entities which are,
if you will, plugged into each other, but which theoretically
could stand on their own. An online quiz, a windows calculator,
Mozilla - these are examples of components.
Variables are values or properties which cannot stand as
entities on their own, but only as affixed to components.
A colour scheme, font selection, user id, etc. are examples
of variables.
Customization is produced by the dynamic selection of both
components and variables.
A 'learning object' per se is a component, but not a variable.
The learning object consists of a set of educational materials
(including, but not exclusively, 'content' and 'functions') and
some open (or undefined, or default defined) properties,
such as look-and-feel, etc.
What needs to be standardized for learning objects is not
the educational materials but rather the set of open variables.
It is in this way that learning objects can intermingle and
interact with larger systems.
Even such fundamental elements as 'learning objectives' may
not be present in a learning object. A chapter from Jane
Austin's "Pride and Prejudice" (suitably illustrated, of course)
may be a 'learning object' but would not have learning objectives
per se.
Which leads to my second point...
Some people have been talking about the 'size' and even the
'granularity' of learning objects.
The answer to all such questions is: depends on what it is
and what it does.
There's a very nice picture in the IMS proposal which shows
how large learning objects, such as a lesson, are composed
of sets of smaller learning objects, such as {reading, discussion,
quiz, test}, and where even such smaller learning objects are
in turn composed of even smaller learning objects.
(I would link but www.imsproject.org is currently crashing
Netscape with bad .css and taking NT with it. *sigh*)
The idea is that learning objects ought to 'plug in' to each
other, much in the way that a Flash viewer plugs into a
Netscape browser and some online content, in order to
produce a larger object (a web page), and even larger
objects (a web site).
The smallest learning objects might be very small. A test,
for example, may be composed of a set of questions drawn
from a question bank; each question is itself a learning
object (and a fairly complex one at that, as people who
have created test banks know).
The IMS proposal has made good progress in two areas:
- defining, through function protocols, a primitive 'ontology'
of learning objects
- defining, through metadata, a primitive 'taxonomy' of
learning objects.
But it's just a start and it is becoming increasingly important
for teachers and professors to have their say in both the
ontology and the taxonomy. Otherwise, Microsoft (they
of 64,000 bugs) will do it.
That's what I have to say for now. Comments appreciated.
-- Stephen Downes - Information Architect - University of Alberta stephen.downes@ualberta.ca http://www.atl.ualberta.ca/downes--------------------------------------------------------- Forum website: http://ifets.ieee.org/ Forum's contact person: kinshuk@massey.ac.nz Info on Join/Leave List: http://ifets.ieee.org/maillist.html ---------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a24 : Thu 17 Feb 2000 - 01:28:58 MET