Hello Everyone,
I'm new in moodle, I can't find any online course can be launch? Can anybody help me where can I find it? if yes, does it support any stardard like AICC or SCORM
Thanks and regards.
In reply to Willy Ching
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Martin Dougiamas -
Moodle is just the software - you still have to make your own courses for the time being. More standards support is planned for the future.
In reply to Martin Dougiamas
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Chris Ainsworth -
Hi Martin
And Moodle should remain within that relm as well. Standards - how many really understand them and write to them or use them in there intended form - mainly the big players if they can land a nice $$$ earning project.
Anyone who works at the smaller end of the market place are more interested in deploying "quality materials" that are dynamic and ever changing. To meet the needs of the ever changing "standards world" smaller organisations would spend more on compliance testing etc than actually delivering training.
Moodle for me fits nicely into the middle ground.
Just a point of view
Cheers
Chris
"without the learner - there is no training"
And Moodle should remain within that relm as well. Standards - how many really understand them and write to them or use them in there intended form - mainly the big players if they can land a nice $$$ earning project.
Anyone who works at the smaller end of the market place are more interested in deploying "quality materials" that are dynamic and ever changing. To meet the needs of the ever changing "standards world" smaller organisations would spend more on compliance testing etc than actually delivering training.
Moodle for me fits nicely into the middle ground.
Just a point of view
Cheers
Chris
"without the learner - there is no training"
In reply to Chris Ainsworth
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by David Delgado -
Making Moodle compatible with standards is not going to make thing any more complicated for small organizations. In fact, it will make things easier for them, since it will allow them to use any kind of standard materials, wich can be used in any standard e-learning platform. In the future, it will even allow Moodle admins to have standard e-learning application modules integrated into it.
So, for small organizations (like mine), it would be exactly the same to produce and maintain Moodle courses, but we will be allowed to export and import them in standard formats (IMS Content Packaging or IMS Question and Test Interoperability), integrate them into Enterprise/Academic Management Systems (IMS Enterprise), etc.
The only work that has to be done is in Moodle development (Moodle software itself), and this effort will make all of us have much better e-learning systems. Most serious organizations are only allowing the use of e-learning platforms that are compatible with standards such as IMS or SCORM, since they see them as a minimum guaranty of quality and interoperability. In the near future, no e-learning platform will survive without being compatible with standards. It is just a matter of "speaking a common language" and share things.
Please, take a look at this discussion to get more information about it:
http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=1926#9755
So, for small organizations (like mine), it would be exactly the same to produce and maintain Moodle courses, but we will be allowed to export and import them in standard formats (IMS Content Packaging or IMS Question and Test Interoperability), integrate them into Enterprise/Academic Management Systems (IMS Enterprise), etc.
The only work that has to be done is in Moodle development (Moodle software itself), and this effort will make all of us have much better e-learning systems. Most serious organizations are only allowing the use of e-learning platforms that are compatible with standards such as IMS or SCORM, since they see them as a minimum guaranty of quality and interoperability. In the near future, no e-learning platform will survive without being compatible with standards. It is just a matter of "speaking a common language" and share things.
Please, take a look at this discussion to get more information about it:
http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=1926#9755
In reply to David Delgado
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Sergio Alfaro -
David:
Todos tus mensajes me llegan repetidos: ¿ es que tu los pones en dos foros o hay un problema ?
Atte,
Sergio
Sergio Alfaro told me that he was receiving 2 copies of my messages to the forums (¡Gracias, Sergio!). I have checked it and I have seen that this also has happened to me just today.
I have received 2 copies by email of each of the 2 messages that I sent today. The messages appear just once in the forums, but I get them twice by email. It seems that it is only my messages that get duplicated.
I reviewed my past postings and it has never happened to me before. I use to have two IE6 windows opened at the same time with 2 courses from http://moodle.org ("Using Moodle" and "Moodle en Español"). Anyway, I have always worked that way, and this is the first time I have had problems with this.
I guess that there is something wrong in moodle.org now. It was all fine on Thursday, but now, 2 days after, it seems like something in the forums have changed and it is making this happen.
Martin, could you check this and see if you can fix it?. Thank you so much in advance.
I have received 2 copies by email of each of the 2 messages that I sent today. The messages appear just once in the forums, but I get them twice by email. It seems that it is only my messages that get duplicated.
I reviewed my past postings and it has never happened to me before. I use to have two IE6 windows opened at the same time with 2 courses from http://moodle.org ("Using Moodle" and "Moodle en Español"). Anyway, I have always worked that way, and this is the first time I have had problems with this.
I guess that there is something wrong in moodle.org now. It was all fine on Thursday, but now, 2 days after, it seems like something in the forums have changed and it is making this happen.
Martin, could you check this and see if you can fix it?. Thank you so much in advance.
In reply to David Delgado
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Chris Ainsworth -
Hi David
Whilst in general I agree with you regarding standards, many educators, particularly those delivering Face to Face are struggling to come to grips with some of the technology.
In Australia we also have a number of additional Australian Quality Training Framework standards that have to be me and a number of Audit standards as well just to deliver training in whatever form.
What I have done with some of the educators, is to get them to develop delivery material in straight HTML and in many cases they can only do that through saving word documents in a HTML format. Unfortunately the majority who could migrate (and may well do) to an on-line system will do so with simplistic tools that they can themselves manage. The biggest fear - is that many of their students are more computer literate than they are.
There is a large target market out there (especially within the smaller RTO [registered Training Organisation] sector) to at least deploy the likes of moodle - and yes some of their work may well be "quick, dirty and simple", but at least they have put their big toe in the water.
For a lot of "newbies" venturing into this arena, there are a lot of more significant issues, problems, fears to be overcome before they are pushed into "standards".
Simple e-learning platforms will survive - for no other reason than they are simple. Their adoption into the broader arena as an open competitor - I agree will be determined by "standards compliance".
One area that we do agree to disagree on is that it costs no more to develop material that is "standards compliant" I believe for the "newcomer" is a false assumption. You have had the benefit of working with larger systems and are used to the idiosyncrasies of those systems, and are comfortable working within that environment. For those that even struggle with IT and even basic web development, their fears of not meeting their student needs far outweighs "standards compliance".
Maybe it is time within moodle to also start a section where "newcomers" can be support in a transition to developing better materials within a "standards perspective". I believe it would be an enhancement to the "moodle community".
Just a point of view
Cheers
Chris
"without the learner - there is no training"
Whilst in general I agree with you regarding standards, many educators, particularly those delivering Face to Face are struggling to come to grips with some of the technology.
In Australia we also have a number of additional Australian Quality Training Framework standards that have to be me and a number of Audit standards as well just to deliver training in whatever form.
What I have done with some of the educators, is to get them to develop delivery material in straight HTML and in many cases they can only do that through saving word documents in a HTML format. Unfortunately the majority who could migrate (and may well do) to an on-line system will do so with simplistic tools that they can themselves manage. The biggest fear - is that many of their students are more computer literate than they are.
There is a large target market out there (especially within the smaller RTO [registered Training Organisation] sector) to at least deploy the likes of moodle - and yes some of their work may well be "quick, dirty and simple", but at least they have put their big toe in the water.
For a lot of "newbies" venturing into this arena, there are a lot of more significant issues, problems, fears to be overcome before they are pushed into "standards".
Simple e-learning platforms will survive - for no other reason than they are simple. Their adoption into the broader arena as an open competitor - I agree will be determined by "standards compliance".
One area that we do agree to disagree on is that it costs no more to develop material that is "standards compliant" I believe for the "newcomer" is a false assumption. You have had the benefit of working with larger systems and are used to the idiosyncrasies of those systems, and are comfortable working within that environment. For those that even struggle with IT and even basic web development, their fears of not meeting their student needs far outweighs "standards compliance".
Maybe it is time within moodle to also start a section where "newcomers" can be support in a transition to developing better materials within a "standards perspective". I believe it would be an enhancement to the "moodle community".
Just a point of view
Cheers
Chris
"without the learner - there is no training"
In reply to Chris Ainsworth
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by David Delgado -
Hi, Cris:
In my opinion, it is a misconception thinking that to be standards-compliant in e-learning means that things get more complicated for the users (being them teachers, students or admins).
In fact, it means exactly the opposite: things get easier for them. Things get only more complicated for the developers of the e-learning software (Moodle in our case). But their effort makes a much better platform.
For example, teachers could import or export in any Moodle course standard contents or quizzes that can be used in any standard platform. These are made once and can use them anywhere.
An example of this can be seen now in WebCT 4.0. To build course contents before was difficult for teachers, since they had to link each html file to the table of contents. Now they just import a standard content package and everything is built automaticaly.
And, they can work exactly the same way they work now, but now they will have the posibility to save their work in an standard format, and also use contents/quizzes from any other source (even from other platforms, such as WebCT or Blackboard).
It can be more difficult to create standard IMS contents and quizzes from scratch, but it is not the right way. The way to do that is just to create them as usual, and then export them to IMS. The teacher does the same he has always done, but now his work is standard.
The same happens with admins... instead of dealing directly with the external database of the institution, they can use an standard protocol: IMS Enterprise, to do that.
Students just do not see any difference.
The most important thing in all this is that it is not only easier, but also is standard among e-learning platforms: most e-learning platforms are using that standards, all them work the same way, and so... Content producers such as book publishers (Mc Graw Hill, Pearson,...), and software developers creating Academic Management Systems (PeopleSoft,...) or e-learning tools (Centra,...) will make e-learning products that can only be used in e-learning platforms that follow standards.
So, in brief:
- Using standars make things easier for teachers and admins and students see no difference.
- Using standards let us share our work with different platforms/software/contents.
- Not using standars would isolate us from all the other e-learning tools, and lots of organizations do not accept any e-learning platform that does not follow standards. That means nearly diying.
Finally I will just put you an example:
What if each Web page in the Internet would use a different propietary protocol (instead of the standard HTTP) to show their contents? Would you download a different browser for any Web page? Would we have about 3,300,000,000 Web pages if this would happen?
This is what happened before with e-learning platforms, but now we have e-learning standards that lets us share contents, quizzes, student data, and many other things exactly the same way in any of them (as Web pages are)
In my opinion, it is a misconception thinking that to be standards-compliant in e-learning means that things get more complicated for the users (being them teachers, students or admins).
In fact, it means exactly the opposite: things get easier for them. Things get only more complicated for the developers of the e-learning software (Moodle in our case). But their effort makes a much better platform.
For example, teachers could import or export in any Moodle course standard contents or quizzes that can be used in any standard platform. These are made once and can use them anywhere.
An example of this can be seen now in WebCT 4.0. To build course contents before was difficult for teachers, since they had to link each html file to the table of contents. Now they just import a standard content package and everything is built automaticaly.
And, they can work exactly the same way they work now, but now they will have the posibility to save their work in an standard format, and also use contents/quizzes from any other source (even from other platforms, such as WebCT or Blackboard).
It can be more difficult to create standard IMS contents and quizzes from scratch, but it is not the right way. The way to do that is just to create them as usual, and then export them to IMS. The teacher does the same he has always done, but now his work is standard.
The same happens with admins... instead of dealing directly with the external database of the institution, they can use an standard protocol: IMS Enterprise, to do that.
Students just do not see any difference.
The most important thing in all this is that it is not only easier, but also is standard among e-learning platforms: most e-learning platforms are using that standards, all them work the same way, and so... Content producers such as book publishers (Mc Graw Hill, Pearson,...), and software developers creating Academic Management Systems (PeopleSoft,...) or e-learning tools (Centra,...) will make e-learning products that can only be used in e-learning platforms that follow standards.
So, in brief:
- Using standars make things easier for teachers and admins and students see no difference.
- Using standards let us share our work with different platforms/software/contents.
- Not using standars would isolate us from all the other e-learning tools, and lots of organizations do not accept any e-learning platform that does not follow standards. That means nearly diying.
Finally I will just put you an example:
What if each Web page in the Internet would use a different propietary protocol (instead of the standard HTTP) to show their contents? Would you download a different browser for any Web page? Would we have about 3,300,000,000 Web pages if this would happen?
This is what happened before with e-learning platforms, but now we have e-learning standards that lets us share contents, quizzes, student data, and many other things exactly the same way in any of them (as Web pages are)
In reply to David Delgado
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Martin Dougiamas -
In an ideal world, perhaps, but in fact there are MANY different "interest groups" developing standards, and so there are many different standards for web pages, and many different standards for e-learning. If you browse help forums for IMS, SCORM etc people have all sorts of little import/export problems caused by stuff like version changes, inconsistencies, platform assumptions and extensions ... so it's not that simple. Hell, many people these days still have trouble transporting (standard) image files.
I still believe e-learning standards are still a worthy goal for "one day" and for "some things", but it's not a magic bullet that can be implemented right now for everything. It's all a big work-in-progress that may never resolve properly.
From a marketing perspective Moodle could just implement some narrow subset of the available "standards" and then loudly proclaim itself standards-compliant (like most e-learning companies do ) ... never mind that it is only useful with a very narrow range of cases... most people won't notice anyway. 
My own priorities on this are shaped a bit by the fact that I can see about 1000 simple, useful features that could be implemented in Moodle, yet I've seen NO available public repositories of standardised e-learning content yet!
David, you said "An example of this can be seen now in WebCT 4.0. To build course contents before was difficult for teachers, since they had to link each html file to the table of contents. Now they just import a standard content package and everything is built automaticaly." ..
This is something I hear a lot, but there's a fundamental assumption that all teaching material can be re-usable, unchanging and freely available in standard formats from others - I don't agree that is going to happen. I re-edit my *own* content every time I re-use it to reflect my own changing ideas and my new audience (and so do most teachers I know). If you're going to use standard content then most people would find it easier just to point to an ordinary web page with a URL - why even import it in this networked age?
Anyhow, I'm just trying to counter the extreme hype I keep hearing about this stuff ... people seize on these acronyms and wave them about without, it seems, having thought about it much (not you, David). Yes, standards ARE a worthy goal to strive for, and are especially needed in areas like quizzes, but I have reservations about them right now in courses and content, particularly when current ones being promoted by powerful commercial groups.
Please pardon my late-night ranting ...
I still believe e-learning standards are still a worthy goal for "one day" and for "some things", but it's not a magic bullet that can be implemented right now for everything. It's all a big work-in-progress that may never resolve properly.
From a marketing perspective Moodle could just implement some narrow subset of the available "standards" and then loudly proclaim itself standards-compliant (like most e-learning companies do
My own priorities on this are shaped a bit by the fact that I can see about 1000 simple, useful features that could be implemented in Moodle, yet I've seen NO available public repositories of standardised e-learning content yet!
David, you said "An example of this can be seen now in WebCT 4.0. To build course contents before was difficult for teachers, since they had to link each html file to the table of contents. Now they just import a standard content package and everything is built automaticaly." ..
This is something I hear a lot, but there's a fundamental assumption that all teaching material can be re-usable, unchanging and freely available in standard formats from others - I don't agree that is going to happen. I re-edit my *own* content every time I re-use it to reflect my own changing ideas and my new audience (and so do most teachers I know). If you're going to use standard content then most people would find it easier just to point to an ordinary web page with a URL - why even import it in this networked age?
Anyhow, I'm just trying to counter the extreme hype I keep hearing about this stuff ... people seize on these acronyms and wave them about without, it seems, having thought about it much (not you, David). Yes, standards ARE a worthy goal to strive for, and are especially needed in areas like quizzes, but I have reservations about them right now in courses and content, particularly when current ones being promoted by powerful commercial groups.
Please pardon my late-night ranting ...
In reply to Martin Dougiamas
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Floyd Collins -
All I can say is Amen,,, I was worried when I seen all the talk about standards that I was alone in this thinking but I could not agree more with you on this point Martin.
In reply to Martin Dougiamas
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Dale Jones -
Hallelujah. I couldn't agree more about the "standards" that are being bandied about. It'll be nice when/if some content becomes available, but even then I'll probably just carry on amending my own material for the intended audience, and introduce links to other content. Another teacher doesn't know the range of abilities in my classes, so how can I expect their content to be appropriate in my situation? I've tried it before (using outside content) but with the best will in the world I've found it's always quicker to write my own.
Just my tuppence worth (is tuppence allowable in a multi-national forum? ;^))
Just my tuppence worth (is tuppence allowable in a multi-national forum? ;^))
In reply to Dale Jones
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Chris Ainsworth -
Hi Dale
I agree with you regarding using your own material. You have the benefit of ensuring what you are deploying is in the context in which you intended.
Providing people with the skills to quickly write their own material and deploy it on a nice platform like moodle would benefit students / learners far more than "complying with stadards". That said - I would like to see at some stage a simple "how to - fill in the gaps" standards document that is easy to read and understand. Now there is a challenge in itself.
Thanks Martin for a sharing a functional platform that allows educators to easily get involved in technology based training delivery.
Cheers
Chris
I agree with you regarding using your own material. You have the benefit of ensuring what you are deploying is in the context in which you intended.
Providing people with the skills to quickly write their own material and deploy it on a nice platform like moodle would benefit students / learners far more than "complying with stadards". That said - I would like to see at some stage a simple "how to - fill in the gaps" standards document that is easy to read and understand. Now there is a challenge in itself.
Thanks Martin for a sharing a functional platform that allows educators to easily get involved in technology based training delivery.
Cheers
Chris
In reply to Chris Ainsworth
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Floyd Collins -
Chris
This is where I feel the modules are so important. If we make them so they are easy to follow then teachers will be able to just copy and past their content into the needed fields and presto.
See my post on WebQuest something like that would simplify making content for a course.
In reply to Floyd Collins
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Martin Dougiamas -
I really would like to see a Webquest module too .. see the new Webquest forum
In reply to Martin Dougiamas
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Mark Berthelemy -
"yet I've seen NO available public repositories of standardised e-learning content yet!"
Hi Martin et al,
You might want to have a look at: http://www.nln.ac.uk/Materials/default.asp
To view the materials themselves click on "Access materials" near the top.
You would only be able to download them if you're a registered user from a UK Further or Higher Education institution. However they are all SCORM compliant packages.
All the best,
Mark
Hi Martin et al,
You might want to have a look at: http://www.nln.ac.uk/Materials/default.asp
To view the materials themselves click on "Access materials" near the top.
You would only be able to download them if you're a registered user from a UK Further or Higher Education institution. However they are all SCORM compliant packages.
All the best,
Mark
In reply to Mark Berthelemy
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Ger Tielemans -
What I see in your depot are good nice crafted examples of resources, interactive instruction materials. Nothing wrong with that: We can paste them in Moodle as valuable resources. (Please, more, more, more)
But it would be nicer if Moodle could read and show the inner structure of these kind of resources in a kind of TOC with chapters, so students could jump to the chapters they need on that moment.
A kind of library-shelf in Moodle with IMS/CP books and Flashing examples..
What makes Moodle different is that it combines a maximum of freedom of choice for students with a maximum of tunable scaffolding choices for teachers plus a wonderful bonus: that big set of monitoringtools for the teacher.
Where the other programs stop with the instruction, the real life in Moodle starts: a student tries to handle a self-chosen problem, constructing solutions, going back to the resources, getting feedback from teachers and peers in tunable forums, chats, and yes, in the ROYAL WORKSHOP...
(When I write this my NLN Art & Design course is still loading, according the animated pencil.)
In reply to Ger Tielemans
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Martin Dougiamas -
Yes, it would be nice, but many SCORM resources don't seem to have that. They're just blobs with a thin coating.
Look, here's the "manifest" for one of the examples in this course:
http://moodle.org/file.php/5/SCORM_TEST/HTML/imsmanifest.xml
Look, here's the "manifest" for one of the examples in this course:
http://moodle.org/file.php/5/SCORM_TEST/HTML/imsmanifest.xml
In reply to Martin Dougiamas
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Ger Tielemans -
Martin you wrote: From a marketing perspective Moodle could just implement some narrow subset of the available "standards" and then loudly proclaim itself standards-compliant.
Please, can you comment on the two SCORM examples in your demo course and explain how narrow your implementation is of SCORM in these two examples:
- SCORM/AICC-subset COMPLIANT?
- SIMPLE SEQUENCING?
- IMS/CP?
- less..?
Explain why you call this SCORM implementations, or should you remove SCORM from the header because it is a liitle bit... misleading?
I would prefer that you explain how clever it is that we work in Moodle inside a design frame, so the materials and the exercises have a for a teacher recognizable front-end (fill-in-form) and a database-structure backend. structure, the first step on the way to reuse.
Then You should confess that you are moving the next level of structure XML. (Another word managers are fond of)
XML? Toot-o-matic, build in Moodle?
In reply to Ger Tielemans
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Martin Dougiamas -
These ARE SCORM-compliant content packages (according the places I downloaded them from), and installed in Moodle without modification. The packages themselves don't support any of the fancier SCORM features, so there's no need for Moodle to. What Moodle does support is HTML, Flash, JPG, GIF and other less-sexy but very usable standards, which is why they work.
I'm not claiming any SCORM compliance yet - just pointing out it's not necessary to be compliant simply to view SCORM packages.
As for the other stuff you've written, I'm not sure what you're getting at - can you explain what exactly I'm supposed to be confessing?
I'm not claiming any SCORM compliance yet - just pointing out it's not necessary to be compliant simply to view SCORM packages.
As for the other stuff you've written, I'm not sure what you're getting at - can you explain what exactly I'm supposed to be confessing?
In reply to Martin Dougiamas
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Ger Tielemans -
Calling the pasting of a blackbox in Moodle SCORM-compatible, only because somenone else wrote with chalk SCORM on that box, come on Martin, who is fooling who?
What I mean is that you better can profile yourself in another direction: XML.
- I am more impressed by the long explanation from David Delgado about Backup and XML and the roadmap to standards
- You should make a readable management summary of that futureplan and paste it on your frontpage.
In reply to Ger Tielemans
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Martin Dougiamas -
That roadmap is already all over the web.
Please, show us your SCORM code.
(Martin takes a deep breath, counts to 10, and goes to bed.)
Please, show us your SCORM code.
(Martin takes a deep breath, counts to 10, and goes to bed.)
In reply to Martin Dougiamas
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Ger Tielemans -
I hate SCORM as long as it is missing groupactivities, sleep well.
In reply to Ger Tielemans
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Martin Dougiamas -
Some good bedtime reading if you don't mind the nightmares: http://phenom.educ.ualberta.ca/~nfriesen/
Compare with: http://moodle.org/doc/?frame=philosophy.html
Compare with: http://moodle.org/doc/?frame=philosophy.html
In reply to Martin Dougiamas
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Mark Tyers -
I wholeheartedly agree about the over-reliance on learning-objects. Having created and used them with mixed success over 2 years I recently tried a different approach adopting the e-tivities approach espoused by Gilly Salmon et. al.
Tonight I finished my first session with 15 yr olds and was impressed by their enthusiasm and that already they are reflecting on their studies.
Back on topic with regard to the 'standards', whilst it may not seem worth pursuing them at the moment, lack of support will cripple attempts to use Moodle in UK FE colleges in a political sense. The problem is I sympathise with Martin in that there are far more important things to develop than standards compliance in the short term!
Is there a middle ground in the adoption of the more useful parts of the standard to allow most materials to be ported accross from system to system whilst ignoring the more esoteric parts of the standard?
In reply to Martin Dougiamas
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Les Kopari -
I came up with a problem when clicking around from "philosophy.html" above.
Try clicking Other Documentation -> Contributed Documentation -> Official Documentation.
Do you get the frames redisplaying in the frame?
Or is it just me?
In reply to Martin Dougiamas
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Ger Tielemans -
OOPS, missed your example of the manifest, saw it in my email this morning. So it is a little bit SCORM? But still what means SCORM-compatible for a normal user? (See lower)
Point is that in Holland and Scotland people tested several products that claimed to be SCORM compatible. They created a resourse in one product and did try to read it with the others, and that for all products, It was a disaster. The more clever a product did try to handle SCORM, the bigger the chance that it failed.. You cannot call a brute-force program, killing the nice details of the others, the winner..
The danger of SCORM? Your first article reference makes the point:
"<snip>...............SCORM," Rehak says, "is essentially about a single-learner [whose learning is] self-paced and self-directed. This makes it inappropriate for use in [higher education] and K-12" (Kraan & Wilson, 2002).....<snip>
- If you try to fit complete in Scorm, you have to give up groupactivities
- self-paced, self-directed?? NO SIR, The teacher uses AICC to stear and control you: (in areas with security certificates a must) Yes good old CBT, and we know how that ended..
I was wondering... Why not change Moodle into a HYBRID SYSTEM?
- Create a libraryroom with SCORM documents on the shelfs: a user could enter the room and lookup the TOC of each SCORM-resource, and jump to the chapter he needs.., and then go back to the other creative parts of Moodle, the rooms with groupactivities and student choosen tasks. (SCORM can communicate with the Moodle admin about the individual studentactivities in the library. I will use it for monitoring most of the time, not for grading )
- In the other areas LD from IMS will rule, not because it wants to control the student, but for monitoring and synchronising parallel student activities. (one of the things workshop now cannot handle: students have to wait to long, being dependent from others behavior.) But I fear that LD will not be useable in the short future, but is worth the waiting. and SCORM will steal it like the took IMS/CP without giving IMS the credits.)
Learning objects: yes we call this kind of words container-concepts: you can drop any meaning in it. (that other empty electronic container word is portfolio) One trick to escape from that LO is to invent new metaphors: In Moodle (and TT) you create learning molecules: you group together on a Moodle theme-cards sets of resources, tasks (and in the future: related scales). Only in this combination of three different "atoms?" the molecule gets its educational meaning: the criteria for the task are not separable from the situation, or the way you did offer and introduce the resources on that specific card. Standards don't ask about the educational meaning of thesei combinations: All teh metadatlabels of the world cannot compensate for that..
So, not exchange of complete outlines makes sense, but the reusabilty of these combinations on the moodle-cards: can I import from your course card 6, 7 and 8 and from that other one 2,3, 5.
Commenting on your CCs: In a situation where you expect a student to be in control, he must have overview of the combination of resources and tasks. A computerscreen is blocking this: on the moment he chooses one of the tasks or resources, the others dissapear from the screen.
Why not create a screen where the teacher can combine a resource and a task in one vertical split screen with a scrolbar? (At Twente University dr. Rik Min developed a complet theory about this PI-theory, parallel instruction.)
Next version: the stduent can choose the combination...
P.S. About that first article again:
In Holland The Dutch Marine uses a Moodle alike product (TT) for their trainings, but in our country soldiers are allowed to think and have a conscience...
..... and (we promiss them to bring them to the international criminal court in The Hague when they commit a warcrime... Is this the difference in spirit Norman Friesen is pointing at?)
In reply to Ger Tielemans
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Ger Tielemans -
- In the attachement you can find the files they used for the SCORM shoot-out, last year.
- This year there will not be a SCORM plugfest, instead of that there is a QTI-shoot-out.
- But for next year Moodle is invited.
By the way, how do I import a SCORM-flie, and where will the TOC popup? On the Cards?
For playing with SCORM they gave me these links:
http://home.click2learn.com/standardswork/scorm12rk/index.htm
About the proposed changes, still missing two wishes from IMS LD : http://training.sun.com/US/images/pdf/DynamicAnalysis.pdf
In reply to Ger Tielemans
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Les Kopari -
For those of us who didn't know:
"The Shareable Content Object Reference Model (SCORM), published by the Advanced Distributed Learning (ADL) project, is a de facto standard for e-learning content."
Excerpted from:
http://home.click2learn.com/standardswork/scorm12rk/overviews/SCORM_overview_200305.htm
In reply to Ger Tielemans
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Jenny Watt -
I wrote a paper for a research project on Learning Objects. I would post it but I signed a confidentiality agreement.
The general gist of the paper was that basically everyone agrees that Learning Objects and standards like SCORM are a really good idea in theory but they are not sure how to apply it in reality. One of the major concerns is how a piece of data or information becomes a Learning Object and should pedagogy be involved?
One good article I found was by Cisco:
http://business.cisco.com/servletwl3/FileDownloader/iqprd/86575/86575_kbns.pdf
They have since written a follow-up article:
http://business.cisco.com/servletwl3/FileDownloader/iqprd/104108/104108_kbns.pdf
I have tons more resources if anyone is interested, including a list of Learning Object Repositories.
After I wrote the paper I was intrigued enough to want to see what I could do. This combined my love of computer applications with my new-found interest in Instructional Design. Since I am in the process of developing online courses for use in my company I built an application that would apply pedagogy to Learning Objects and developed my own system not too dissimilar from the one that Cisco developed.
What I built was an application that would store my Learning Objects as XML files and then dynamically assemble them for presentation to a student.
http://66.25.38.140/learningobjects/application/itemproc.asp?id=154&type=lesson&document=lesson
This page is built from 5 different XML files using XSL. I include a link to this page from my Moodle-based course. The nice part for me is if I find an error I can correct it once and it will be automatically corrected the next time a student accesses it. I can also assemble this as a package to fit nicely into other systems. At this point I can produce a SCORM compliant package that will be read by the Microsoft LRN Viewer(note: you will need Internet Explorer to view this page):
http://66.25.38.140/learningobjects/application/courses/153/LRNViewer.htm
I can also import it into Moodle and hope to soon be able to import into Blackboard and WebCT. So with my one collection of Learning Objects, I am able to produce documents in several formats. This is the advantage of Learning Objects to me.
Desite the fact that there are "standards" like SCORM, it is a very broad and loose standard and every application has their own interpretation of it. So what does a SCORM package look like? Depends on who you ask. Basically SCORM LO standards defines what tags exist in the metadata definition. From there it is up to the companies implementing it as to what data they put and how they read or interpret it.
As it stands now, if I find an error in my quiz in Moodle I have to change every single occurrence of that question in all the classes I have in which that question appears. If Moodle were SCORM compliant in the quiz area, then the quiz would also be dynamically generated from an XML/SCORM-compliant data source. Any module would build its information dynamically. Basically there is no need to keep course data in the database - just pointers to where the information can be constructed when needed.
What would take this one step further is to have the page above also link to the previous topic and subsequent topic, or determine what level student (grade school, high school, college, adult) and reconfigure the information to be displayed in a format appropriate to them. Learning Objects are a LONG way from there - but that is one of the ideas the developers have.
This is a great book that really gives you an idea of the vision those involved in the standards have. It used to be available to read online but it looks like it is no longer available.
http://www.transformingeknowledge.info/
Sorry to get long-winded but wanted to add my two cents to the discussion.
In reply to Jenny Watt
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Martin Dougiamas -
Thank you, Jenny. It's obvious you know more about SCORM than me and most of us - it's great to have you here!
I was going to mention your previous work on this (http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=1926#9856) but embarrassingly, I still haven't had enough time playing with it to work out how it relates to SCORM.
From what I have seen in there, the manifest points to lots of files that are XML representations of Moodle module settings. For example:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<resource>
<name>content</name>
<type>2</type>
<reference>http://66.25.38.140/learningobjects/application/courses/153/lesson179/lesson179.html</reference>;
<summary>Instructor Notes, Examples and Web Resources for this Lesson
<alltext></alltext>
</resource>
The whole thing may well conform to SCORM, but since only Moodle would understand this data it would seem to be a learning object of limited usefulness ... what am I missing here?
I was going to mention your previous work on this (http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=1926#9856) but embarrassingly, I still haven't had enough time playing with it to work out how it relates to SCORM.
From what I have seen in there, the manifest points to lots of files that are XML representations of Moodle module settings. For example:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<resource>
<name>content</name>
<type>2</type>
<reference>http://66.25.38.140/learningobjects/application/courses/153/lesson179/lesson179.html</reference>;
<summary>Instructor Notes, Examples and Web Resources for this Lesson
<alltext></alltext>
</resource>
The whole thing may well conform to SCORM, but since only Moodle would understand this data it would seem to be a learning object of limited usefulness ... what am I missing here?
In reply to Martin Dougiamas
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Jenny Watt -
"The whole thing may well conform to SCORM, but since only Moodle would understand this data it would seem to be a learning object of limited usefulness ... what am I missing here? "
What I sent you was not related to learning objects. It is a IMS/SCORM compatible packing list for the course content. The IMSMANIFEST.XML file is nothing more than a packing list and beyond that each application seems to do its own thing. That is pretty much the extent of SCORM support for packaging the course content. Blackboard (Bb) does the same kinda thing. We will have to write a procedure, much like you have done with the quizzes, to import each type of document. So there would be an import for Bb, WebCT, and any others that come along. The packing list just gives you a way to find the various parts of the package. Once you have found them, ya gotta figure out what to do with them!
http://66.25.38.140/learningobjects/courses/153/153.zip - this is the Microsoft LRN package that I linked to in my last post.
http://66.25.38.140/learningobjects/other/ExportFile_XHTML01.zip - this is basically the same course exported from Bb to an IMS 1.1 compliant package (Bb 5.5)
http://66.25.38.140/learningobjects/manifests/153/153.zip - this is my Moodle package
All contain the IMSMANIFEST.XML file and beyond that some similar structure but it gets down to content like the example you posted - different for each application.
As far as learning objects - that is another matter altogether and is more an internal handling of course data. For my courses, all the course content is stored as XML on another server and retrieved as the student needs it. Other than quizzes, forums, and workshops, nothing is stored within Moodle except pointers to a file that will build the content the students want to see. That was the link I gave in my last post.
Theoretically, anyone could link to my data for their own courses and using my Learning Object Management System, add their own or edit what I had or use what I had to build new courses or lessons. If they needed to include a lesson on how the Internet works then they could link to the objects on my server - a Learning Object Repository of sorts. I have one file that handles all the data generation. I feed it an object ID, object type and report format and it builds it for the user.
What I would like to see for the dynamic aspect of learning objects is to allow forum descriptions, workshop assignments and quizzes to be built dynamically from an external data source. So, for example, the Bb quiz format I am importing now would exist in a folder in Moodle and when a student wanted to take a quiz, the quiz data would be imported and displayed. The quiz data would be in IMS-compliant format so that any quiz creation application would be able to create a quiz and Moodle would import it. If I had several classes that used that same quiz, I would have one file to update.
There is MUCH more to supporting the various aspects of SCORM, AICC, etc. Learning Objects and content packaging are just small parts. Quizzes and learner data are others. We should probably pick one and start there. What aspect of SCORM compliance is everyone most interested in?
In reply to Jenny Watt
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Martin Dougiamas -
Ah, OK, thank you, Jenny, that's much clearer to me now. The stuff you've done is very cool indeed, and the code to process the manifest will be very useful.
I think, from what I've seen and heard so far, that import of basic learning objects (simple content objects) is definitely the most important thing at this stage, followed by the import/export of quizzes (IMS QTI). When I say important, I mean useful for most teachers, in that these are what seem to currently be filling the learning object repositories.
The initial interface I'm envisioning for using simple learning objects is just this: a new item under the list of resource types called "SCORM-compatible learning object", and a file picker that lets you choose from available .zip files. Moodle unpacks the zip, reads the manifest, identifies the start page, and sets this URL in the resource (just like an uploaded file except this is automatically set). Basically this provides a way to easily get to the actual web content embedded in the package.
The next step, I think, is to create a dumb API adapter to pacify the Javascript in some of these objects that searches for an LMS API adapter. As time goes by this may be improved to actually communicate properly but it's not necessary in the first instance.
Just baby steps. (If Ger is reading this I'm sure he will be itching to jump in and propose fantastic and tangential developments with XML this and that, but things need to start small and practical).
[the indents are getting a little crazy here .. maybe we should start some new discussions]
I think, from what I've seen and heard so far, that import of basic learning objects (simple content objects) is definitely the most important thing at this stage, followed by the import/export of quizzes (IMS QTI). When I say important, I mean useful for most teachers, in that these are what seem to currently be filling the learning object repositories.
The initial interface I'm envisioning for using simple learning objects is just this: a new item under the list of resource types called "SCORM-compatible learning object", and a file picker that lets you choose from available .zip files. Moodle unpacks the zip, reads the manifest, identifies the start page, and sets this URL in the resource (just like an uploaded file except this is automatically set). Basically this provides a way to easily get to the actual web content embedded in the package.
The next step, I think, is to create a dumb API adapter to pacify the Javascript in some of these objects that searches for an LMS API adapter. As time goes by this may be improved to actually communicate properly but it's not necessary in the first instance.
Just baby steps. (If Ger is reading this I'm sure he will be itching to jump in and propose fantastic and tangential developments with XML this and that, but things need to start small and practical).
[the indents are getting a little crazy here .. maybe we should start some new discussions]
In reply to Martin Dougiamas
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Jenny Watt -
I still plan to finish my import of a Blackboard (Bb) package. I have seen several posts requesting such a thing and it will be useful to me as well. I have been swamped with work, side business and home so I have not had the time for my "projects". 
My business partner is floating around the Hawiian islands for the next two weeks and everything else seems stable at the moment so maybe I can knock out the rest one evening soon.
My business partner is floating around the Hawiian islands for the next two weeks and everything else seems stable at the moment so maybe I can knock out the rest one evening soon.
In reply to Martin Dougiamas
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Ger Tielemans -
Hi Martin.... thinking pragmatic: why not doing the mapping by hand? If you can identify the manifest in a SCORM-bundle, then you can create a visualisation of the TOC that is in that XMLmanifest? and the Moodle-user can do the mapping by hand with something like the channel-patch-pannel of a midi-interface: on the left the TOC, on the right the mappingpossibilies in A Moodle tree (like the move option is working now for objects on the Moodle-cards?)
Well about the S-word, If you want to be S-compatible like the big guys in the jungle of real commercial life and put S on the cover of your box, then the program that Martin writes must do the mapping, not the hand of Martin himself.Until that day: Ceterum Censeo
In reply to Ger Tielemans
Re: Learning standards: Online course supports SCORM, AICC?
by Mark Thompson -
This is a feverish and interesting debate. I have some experience of working with uploading IMS packages and SCORM compliance using another VLE. Despite that experience, I still find that there are features of these standards that elude me. However, I do want to join this discussion. My experience suggests that there is a lot of hype about the benefits, which are really some way off (not an unusual circumstance with IT).
From a learning object management perspective when there is a large volume of resources, the metadata is already a small benefit. My academic colleagues are typically very time pressured and properly catalogued resources can help in a resources search. If the key words and description are well chosen (and that depends on the person doing the packaging, as Jenny has already said), the cataloguing is easier. A hope would be for some emergence of real standards in this area, but I suspect the various projects that have been started for this still have a long way to go and that some complexity will always need to be managed. This is also about reuse or repurposing being able to discover that there are elements to be recombined or amended in the first place.
In addition, my experience is that compliance is elusive, even when claimed. Manifest files for most packages that I have dealt with have been faulty. This weakens another small benefit, which is the speed of upload or deployment. I would like to be able to upload a new version of an object quickly (needed when there are errors or necessary updates in the learning material!), but that isnt going to happen unless the manifest is correct in the first place.
Writing assessment results back to Moodle would be beneficial, but with small chunks of learning can introduce unnecessary complexity for the teacher when tracking (assessment types need to be distinguished, self-assessment, formative, summative). Another SCORM feature, bookmarks, could be helpful to learners, but I havent seen it work in an externally produced package, yet.
A point on which I need some clarification is: what will an unpacking create in Moodle? At what level of deployment: the Moodle resource level, topic level, course level? I have seen many very small chunks of learning object how can these packages be managed, so that they dont unbalance the system? Perhaps Jenny has already addressed this, but I havent been able to view her examples.
So, I do want the features that Martin has summarised. I believe that some degree of compliance is necessary for the continued success of Moodle. However, I dont expect this pathway to be smooth, nor do I anticipate the hype to be fulfilled for some years (if ever).