Learning standards: My experience - SCORM a must

Learning standards: My experience - SCORM a must

by Timothy Takemoto -
Number of replies: 24

Thanks to David Delgano and Martin Overy, other kind Moodlers I gave a low brow presentation of Moodle this afternoon. It is in Japanese and very un-attractive. I will post it to the Japanese language forum.

Sadly, due to the effects of a virus on our university server, I was unable to connect to my LAMP or the Internet at all, so I was only able to show a powerpoint slide show (using Open Office). This was a real shame. Added to the fact that my competition had a plug in wireless (mobile phone) internet connection to demonstrate his system, I don't think that shew Moodle in such a good light. (Not sure about archaic use of that past participle either).

However, as suspected SCORM is going to be a must.

For one it seems that there are *several* CMS being used or considered at my university alone.
1) Blackboard - I am not sure how come but perhaps one departement in the engineering faculty has a limited licence.
2) The well spring of learning (Manabi-no-izumi) made by a research assistant/ sys-admin who I cannot seem to persuade to take an interest in Moodle alas.
3) Web classroom, again made by members of our staff.
4) DotCampus this is being considered not by a research group within my university but by a research group sponsored by the Japanese government. They have a large "online materials development center" and they are trying to produce online stuff but the have yet to decide on a platform. The are considering dotcampus because it is a-subset-of-SCORM compliant.
5) Webexcercise.
6) And more perhaps

Okay, so which to use? It seems that the one that is standards compliant will be the one chosen. The rational?

1) When there are many systems being used, and there is a question of forcing teachers (that already have content made for one system) to use a single standard, then it is just not diplomatic to say "lets all use this guys standard." It is more diplomatic to say "Lets use this international standard" (which happends to be supported by this guy).

2) "We don't really know or trust this open source stuff," "We don't know if Open source, or Martin, or this community will keep going." "Producing course content is very time consuming." "We need to feel assured that content produced on the platform can be exported to others if the platform goes under. "

3) Number 2 above is magnified , since the people that are choosing the site wide CMS are not content makers but people whose job it is simply to choose. They don't care so much as users about which system is the easiest to use, but they do care a lot about not making a major boob by supporting a soon to be redundant system. Hence, they will choose a standard.

Hence, the chances that *my* university as an establishment supports a CMS that does not support a standard, and probably SCORM, is I would say minimal.

The good news is

1) that "dotcampus" costs 70,000 dollars a year for a licence for our university of 10,000 students.
2)  we will have SCORM by the middle of this year!

I suggested that for the $70,000 the university could employ one or two php programmers. And I also suggested that SCORM compliance is something that my university could give to Moodule, and that Martin would probably implement it for about 5000-10,000 dollars. I look forward to a rough quote.

However, when I suggested that we provide SCORM support for Moodle the dotcampus representative and at least one member of the audience laughed at me. I did not present things very well.

The dotcampus thing allowed users to drag and drop course a folders which are themselves the SCORM SCOs. I think that inside the folder there is a overall content definition and power point files (which the system converts to Html itself). The ability to create a lot of webpages out of a ppt seemed to be something that the audience liked. Powerpoint will do this anyway. I think that dotcampus is built using micorsoft .net stuff so I suppose that it uses dlls (?) from the office suite? Perhaps. 

Tim

Timothy Takemto 

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Timothy Takemoto

Re: Learning standards: My experience - SCORM a must

by Richard Treves -

Hi Tim,

This makes for interesting reading, sorry you didn't feel you did Moodle credit but I'm sure you did the best you could.  I think you are correct that SCORM compliance sounds like the most important feature as far as the University madarins are concerned and this is sad because it shows a lack of understanding.  But to be fair to the Mandarins, could they be expected to understand the importance of 1000+ users, an active developer community and a design that is looks first to serve the learner?  No, in their experience quality equates roughly with cost and they are immediately suspisious of anything 'free'.  They can get their head around a standard and thats what makes it important.

I think that Open Source software is on the rise, we can point to LAMP applications at the moment but to the non techie they are pretty abstract.  IMHO its when Open Office (or equivalent) really starts taking bites out of Mircrosoft Office that Mandarins will really see what we are on about and begin buying our arguments. 

You may have lost a battle but I'm sure the war will be ours smile

Richard

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Richard Treves

Re: Learning standards: My experience - SCORM a must

by Timothy Takemoto -

Dear Richard,

Thanks for your encouragement.
IMHO its when Open Office (or equivalent) really starts taking bites out of Mircrosoft Office that Mandarins will really see what we are on about and begin buying our arguments. 
Yes, I agree entirely. That is why I used Open Office Org's Impress (power-point clone) in my presentation and stopped it, at a pertinant point to show them that "I am using Open Source Sofware now." I think that OOo is one of the best tools to PR moodle.  

I think that Open source will win the battle. It is important to me though that THIS open source project wins the battle. In in that aim, I am now of the impression that SCORM or at least its veneer, is dead important. Please see my next post below.

Tim
Timothy Takemoto

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Timothy Takemoto

Re: My experience - SCORM a must - Easy way to put SCORM into Moodle

by David Delgado -
At http://moodle.com you can purchase specific developments that are then integrated into Moodle, and mantained forever. This was the way that the text file import was done for Quizzes, and also the backup system, groups and many other Moodle features. Some organizacions have paid for the development of these modules, as they were in a hurry to get them.

Your organization can get "Support of SCORM standard for packaged learning objects" developed for approx US $15,000. You can see all that at http://moodle.com/development/ . SCORM would become a priority on Moodle development for moodle.com that way.

It is really cheap, since just the license for a year of the tool you are considering to buy costs $70,000, and this way you and all Moodle users would have this new facility done and maintained in the main Moodle distribution. The cost of licensing Moodle for a year is just $0.00 . So, you win $55,000 ... your boss would love that point. wink

Just an idea, but I think it could be a good one to think of. This way, you could even ask for the specific needings of your organization in the development. And, of course, this way you contribute to Moodle development and to keep Martin working only for Moodle at moodle.com .

Hope this helps. smile
Average of ratings: -
In reply to David Delgado

Re: My experience - SCORM a must - Easy way to put SCORM into Moodle

by Timothy Takemoto -

Thanks David, (and no need to send a quote Martin)

I knew that there was a page someone about the cost of specific improvements but I did not think to look on Moodle.com, durrr. Sorry, I should have looked harder.

I shall put it to my university bosses. As you point out the price is very reasonable and a bargain compared to the ONE YEAR licence fee for the use of dotcampus. And as you point out, I guess we would be able to stipulate our needs, and specifically which subset of SCORM is actuallly implemented (although of course Martin, and other developers, may wish to take it further). There is I think a Japanese Government research group document stipulating which subset of SCORM compliance is important.

I will write with this proposal today. 

My budget request for creating listening quizes was turned down last night. The shortage of funds was very apparent.

Tim 

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Timothy Takemoto

SCORM kills social constructivism

by Timothy Takemoto -

I have been reading the mega thread below in this Learning Standards Forum and there is there is something about  the SCORM debate that reminds me of quizes. Martin writes

This is something here I hear a lot, but there's a fundamental assumption that all teaching aterial 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?

Martin also writes

Once concern I personally have about COMPLETE compliance is that all LMS systems will look the same, and promote one particular (military) pedagogy.

And Martin is right of course. Both Testing and SCORM do no lie well with the the social constructionist pedagogy.

There have been some that have been claiming that SCORM does not effect the being of the education, it is just a way of packaging it, but in a social-constructionist world, what is the point of so called "reusability" at all? Why import and export "Standards"?

I think that one can demonstrate the futility of SCORM and its ilk from the social constructionist perspective from two angles. I am not succeeding here, but I have attempted it.

The first is that social constructionism emphasises the process rather than the content. Or the content is the process. Social constructionist course are not something that can be exported since they are interactions between students, other students and teachers. There is little if any meaning in exporting student interactions. The important thing is that the students have these interactions. And these interactions will depend on the personality, interests and mind set of the individuals taking part in it.  Communication, interaction, discovery, and other such learning processes are not things that can be exported. The framework for communication, interaction and discovery might be exported as "methods" of an Object, but Moodle aims for irrestricted, non-standardised interactive methods to alllow a plethora of explorative pathways and interactions. How can the method called "discovery" be standardised?! The rub is, I think, that it cannot.

The second is that "importing" and "exporting" or moving Objects implies that the data is being kept back, privatised, hidden. If, as it should be from a social constructivist point of view, data is transparent, and freely available then what is the point of moving it from one place to another? Okay there a problems of copyright but is that the issue? If it were just copyright then one might buy a password to access some text book site somewhere else. The reason why people want to import stuff here, and that there cab be "reuse" in education, is because the Objects are being seen as tools, machines, for learning. Using a physical analogy they are weight-training machines. Using the analogy we have used here before, SCORM is providing a blueprint for a learning maze, for determined, successive revaltion of data dependent upon student behaviour. SCORM would, in SCORM ethos, replace interaction. It is "the interaction," or the death of it.

Okay, so if standards do not lie well with social constructivism, what does this mean for the future of Moodle?

What scares me is that when other systems are implementing tests, and standards and if Moodle is not then, we are not going to get our institutions to use Moodle. There are two reasons for this:
1) It just seems to be a fact that institutions, bosses, my bosses, want SCORM. But if I were Martin I would think, "nah, institutions are not that stupid. They, or a significant number of them will realise that they do not need bad pedagogical principles." But I am not Martin.
2) Some sort of Esotertic Buddhist justification for mazes. I don't think that there is any point in my going into this again, but I believe there is a philosophical justification for concealment (mazes) when framed as the esoteric, in a religious sense, that at times, untruth leads to enlightenment. I.e. that my bosses are philosophically correct in their emphasis upon SCORM. But this is too wacky, and unlikely to change Martin's stance.

So, I can see why Martin has less (than other) interest in supporting either Examinations or SCORM.

The main moodler and other moodlers may focus on "Marketing." SCORM and its ilk as political/marketing manouvre for ensuring the growth of Moodle. Will this veneer of standardisation be enough I wonder. I accept that most other systems are all veneers to one extent or another but those systems that are really trying (non-social-objectivistly) to implement standards are presumably going to be more effective in doing so.

So I remain scared. 

I think that  Martin needs to be paid for these kind of things.

Or other kind Moodlers, and lazy ones like myself, will need to make them.

Tim

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Timothy Takemoto

Re: SCORM kills social constructivism

by Mark Burnet -

I hope I am not stetching this analogy, but I look at SCORM modules as one form of a brick.  It is standardized content and the assessment for the delivery of that content.  It is not the course,  because the constructivist part is the mortar and labor.  That part is as essential to the learning process as the labor and mortar are to the construction of a building.

smile

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Timothy Takemoto

Re: Learning standards: My experience - SCORM a must

by Mark Burnet -
It is my estimate that in my humble experience with teachers in the K12 US market, only about 15% develop consistently good course materials in an electronic format and most of these in off the shelf products like Word and Powerpoint.  For many of the rest, the last twenty years didn't really happen.  Companies with commercial interests know this and mill out educational software that has mixed levels of benefit.  I am sure they expect to one day sell mass market content to school systems that have teachers who cannot or will not produce there own materials.  This may be a legitimate marketing strategy and therefore it is in their interest as well to have products that may be sold to the widest available market.  Therefore, an international standard: SCORM.
Average of ratings: -
In reply to Timothy Takemoto

Re: Learning standards: My experience - SCORM a must

by Martin Dougiamas -
Picture of Core developers Picture of Documentation writers Picture of Moodle HQ Picture of Particularly helpful Moodlers Picture of Plugin developers Picture of Testers
For goodness sake, Tim. Please rest your brain and fingers for a bit. wink

If you're going to quote me 20 times a day please try to understand the context - I feel quite misrepresented. My problems with some learning object standards are about COMPLETE compliance, which (as I understand it) basically defines the whole operation of the LMS (and thus the pedagogy).

All these standards (ie under the SCORM and IMS umbrellas) have many levels. Basic support for SCORM content packages is already on the roadmap and has been for a year at least - sharing content is always a good thing and not at all detrimental to good teaching practice.

If someone wants a completely SCORM-compliant LMS with everything included then they will have to go elsewhere - it's that simple. Moodle does not have to be everything to everyone. wink
Average of ratings: -
In reply to Martin Dougiamas

Re: Learning standards: My experience - SCORM a must

by Timothy Takemoto -

Martin,

I am very sorry if I quoted you out of context.

I am aware that this is only a question of degree, and that Moodle is already moving towards standards complicance.

I am resting my fingers contemplatively.

Tim

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Martin Dougiamas

Re: Learning standards: My experience - SCORM a must

by Ger Tielemans -

COMPLETE compliance, yes that is the fear.

If 100% SCORM compliance means that you must rule your course according to the SCORM/AICC rules and have to give up the extra's of Moodle (One day the stockholders of Moodle.com force M. to decide that... (I am joking, I am joking)) then I really start to learn PHP, study Moodle day and night and start my own fork of Moodle, and M. will be the first one to join me (I hope, I need then a brilliant head for the design department..)

We can jump low or high, managers want SCORM, I lost at least one big battle on that point, before I moved to Moodle. But I am realistic: Moodle must support SCORM.

...but if you can convince the managers that all these SCORM packages can be played in a Moodle-exercise-room AND YOU CAN SHOW IT TO THEM ON THE SPOT (that's now under development ) then you have them halfway.

AND if these SCORM things can communicate/map their progress and results to the gradebook of Moodle, then you can say that you have not only SCORM but also modern teaching approaches as extra for FREE. (RING RING RING in the head of your ambitious managers.)

From that day on the slogan will be Moodle is SCORMplus compatible knipoog

Students have a free will, as human-coach you should respect that, so the name for my fork will be: Free Willy

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Ger Tielemans

Re: Learning standards: My experience - SCORM a must

by Aaron Silvers -
I hate to interject on an interesting debate, but being familiar as I am with SCORM, I'd like to point out a few things that might straighten this thread out.

1) SCORM is a reference model -- it's a specification if you can even call it that. It's not a standard (yet). It is based on several widely adopted standards -- IEEE, IMS, AICC, et cetera. Since SCORM itself is not a standard, there's no way you can be "compliant." I don't mean to nitpick semantics, but hopefully you'll soon see my point.

2) There IS no 100% compliance. There is only "conformance." Does your content "conform" to the SCORM specification? Does your run-time environment (your Learning Managment System -- in this case, Moodle) conform? Sure, you can spend some money to get it certified by a third party, but at the end of the day, if you can run the Conformance Test Suite (Version 1.2 or 2004) and pass, you can print out a screen shot and have it posted on ADL -- voila, you're publicly and visibly SCORM conformant.

There is nothing in SCORM that says by creating SCORM conformant content you MUST buy the whole kit and kaboodle. If you create SCORM-conformant content that relies on extra functionalty that Moodle supplies, I would advise creating meta-data on the content aggregation that clearly states what it takes to run this content, and describe what functionality may be lost if your content package is run in another, alternative environment.

SCORM is a methodology for many differnet technologies to work together. It sets the table for content developers and software vendors (Moodle in this case) to talk to each other. Just because it sets the table doesnt mean it forces you to eat a certain way.

-a-

Aaron Silvers,
Senior Developer
Concurrent Technologies Corporation
Average of ratings: -
In reply to Aaron Silvers

Re: Learning standards: My experience - SCORM a must

by Ger Tielemans -
  • In Moodle we have groupactivities with descriptions/prescriptions for groupscenarios
  • On this moment SCORM can only describe individual scenario's.
  • For exchange of complete Moodles to other platforms with SCORM we need two things:
    • SCORM must be extended for groups: for example absorb IMS/LD 
    • The other platforms must have/build moduls that can import these prescriptions
      (easy examples: glossary, forums, quizz, resource, polls,journals,  assignments)   
      (difficult examples: exercises, scales, workshop, lessons, filters..)

And to be honoust: the Moodle scenario's for groups are less complex then IMS/LD is trying to describe, so Moodle itself needs to grow in the future also.  

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Ger Tielemans

Re: Learning standards: My experience - SCORM a must

by Aaron Silvers -
You are, of course, correct. Note, however, that just because something isn't in SCORM doesn't mean you can't do it.

In other words, SCORM is intentionally ambiguous on a lot of details -- I don't believe it's ADL's intention to limit creativity and innovation in the e-learning field. Rather, SCORM simply outlines a common ground so that content you write for one LMS may be portable to other LMSs.

If you want to throw in support for collaborative learning, by all means, I say do it! And document that experience and share it with ADL. If the community wants SCORM to grow in a certain way, the community needs to let ADL know in what ways it needs to grow and how it can do it.

If the need is there, I think ADL will respond. They certainly did with the outcry for sequencing and navigation.
Average of ratings: -
In reply to Aaron Silvers

Re: Learning standards: My experience - SCORM a must

by Ger Tielemans -

Good point,

European members (from Scotland and Holland) had the same influence on IMS, one of the results is the adaptation of LD in that organisation.

But what does it then really mean when a product passes the SCORM-tests and is allowed to wear the cerificate? Is that product allowed to do extra things without SCORM?

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Ger Tielemans

Re: Learning standards: My experience - SCORM a must

by Timothy Takemoto -
Generally I think that that is the way of things - software is only partially SCORM compliant. Partially in the sense that both the software does not fulfilil all of SCORM and that the SCORM it not big enough to systemise all of the software.

After I wrote my article about SCORM being a must, based upon conversation with higher level managers at my university, the technical people and users came to the rescue saying that, as is pointed out above (and by everyone who knows about it) that nothing is fullly SCORM compliant, only partially, and that as a result, what ever system one uses there is always going to be a movement cost should there be a need to move to a new system.

So, I would like to modify my first post.

I don't think that SCORM is a "must" but that SCORM is a powerful weapon when the decision of which system to use is in the hands of adminstrators that want to be fair and are not entirely sure about the real costs  of moving content from one system to another. The system that at least can claim to be conforming to a standard enablying resuability is going to be very attractive in such cases.

Tim
Takemoto
Average of ratings: -
In reply to Timothy Takemoto

Re: Learning standards: My experience - SCORM a must

by Ger Tielemans -
It is more difficult toexplain to managers that we have stored resources in structures: XML and that that is the key for lover cost of exit, then to say we are SCORM compliant..
Average of ratings: -
In reply to Ger Tielemans

Re: Learning standards: My experience - SCORM a must

by Timothy Takemoto -

SCORM just reared its ugly head again. After having collected a lot of really good quotes for content production for moodle, my boss says that a competitor system has SCORM and moodle does not so it would not be a good idea to import the content to moodle. And this just two days before the budget meeting. Oh fudge.

Any idea how long it is going to be before quizes are SCORM exportable?

Tim

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Timothy Takemoto

Re: Learning standards: My experience - SCORM a must

by Martin Dougiamas -
Picture of Core developers Picture of Documentation writers Picture of Moodle HQ Picture of Particularly helpful Moodlers Picture of Plugin developers Picture of Testers
It doesn't make sense to say "SCORM-exportable quizzes" ... and Moodle does have SCORM support ... what exactly are the requirements?
Average of ratings: -
In reply to Martin Dougiamas

Re: Learning standards: My experience - SCORM a must

by Timothy Takemoto -

Hi Martin,

There is a system here in Japan which is called "SMART-HTML"  (or that is the part of it that we are interested in). It has a very Moodle-like quiz creation GUI where one can select a text, photo, or audio file and then set up various types of questions about that text, photo or audio file. Additionally SMART-HTML has the ability to save the content/quizzes thus created in a SCORM format.

I here tell that the SCORM format is not all that it is cracked up to be. For example there was one person on the net somewhere that was experiementing with importing and exporting SCORM content from one system to another and finding that they did not run. In theory at least however, SCORM created using the "SMART-HTML" system should run for example in the Moodle SCORM module.

Now then... we are thinking of creating a whole lot of TOEIC* style english language education materials.  People in the US will write dialogues and texts, other people will provide voiceovers, and yet others(me?) will integrate such content into a LMS.

But which one. Just before the budget meeting my boss brings up the SCORM issue. In discussion with him before his reasons were simple

Any system, commercial or open source can become obsolete, hence when spending loads of money on a content, it is import that that content be exportable to other LMS to insure against the event that that system becomes obsolete.

I thought that the SCORM solution had been rejected due to the problem mentioned above -- that SCORM promises more than it delivers -- but anyway it certainly promises a lot, to people whose job it is to make management decisions.

If my boss choosese Moodle and moodle flops then he has wasted loads of money. If he chooses SMART HTML and SMART HTML flops then he can port the content straight into Moodle or other open source LMS.

(By obsolete I mean can fail to meet future requirements, the makers can get ill and the system lacks support, the system can be found to be in breach of copyright somewhere, the system can be come expensive, it can become prone to viruses, or some combination of these things. )

That is the state of play. I thought I can jumped the SCORM hurdle.

Recently I have developed an ucler!

Tim

*TOEIC = Test Of English for International Communication

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Timothy Takemoto

Re: Learning standards: My experience - SCORM a must

by Ger Tielemans -

You have a clever boss: he does not want SCORM, he wants portability: So play with that:

  • Moodle has a player for SCORM: show him that he can import all these SCORM-resources from the other creators
  • Moodle can play all these HOTPOTATOES quizzes, show websites with tons of hotpot examples
  • Moodle can handle algebra and TeX, and someone is working on a Chemical-XML-3D-modul..(for the other faculties) ask if the other tools can do that?
  • Moodle can import several quizz formats (WebCT, BB...), show it
  • Moodle can present the interim results for SCORM modules and integrate the final  scores from SCORM and HotPot in the LMS gradebook, even with calculated colums.... ask if these other LMS can do that too?

Add then the strong (language) points of Moodle to that:

  • All these tunable communication tools, like forum, chat, wiki, dialogue, journal, choice
  • Moodle has very low-entry-level editors to create in an easy way multimedia language resources, like Book and the HTML-editor (save on training costs!!)
  • Your boss wants quality garanties... Moodle has a very good multimedia quizz system, with tools for quality analysis to improve the test-sets (question difficulty, answer-spread, item-respons-indicator..)
  • Your boss wants quality garanties...Show him also how he as manager can use the surveys for student quality checks of courses..
  • Show him the Titanic (language) example and explain/show him how easy you can create these with moodle's lesson (as action matrics) or show the Flash-card version...
  • Then show him the great glossaries: how students can create their own dictionaries with multimedia (your VOICEOVERS?)  in it ... 
  • and then last but not least....,show him how in a fresh running text - let your boss do the typing!!..the words are searchable in that multimedia glossary..

So explain him that users of Moodle fill structures, compatible with the future by the XML-SKELETON of that structure: then show him how you can export a complete course of Moodle, open the zip and show him the XML-skeleton in it.

Then make him hungry after XML: give him a demo where you create from one XML-file different spinn-off-products (a PDF, a HTML-set-of pages, a downloadable zip-file etc..).

I prefer the old Toot-o-matic from IBM: make one change in the source: for example show in front of him how you change the name of the author in his name, then press one button and update your html-pages, the attached pdf-files (in A4 and Letter-format) and all the files in one zip-file for upload onanother server, allon the fly... Show his name in all these files...

Tell him that version 2 of Moodle will fulfill this XML-dreams (ask Martin for version 2 details? By the way where is that open forum-discussion around version 2smile )

What isan ucler?

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Ger Tielemans

Re: Learning standards: My experience - SCORM a must

by Timothy Takemoto -

Dear GER

Thank you for a your advice.

My boss wanst EXPORT not import.I think that Moodle does not have a lot of that.
Recently it became possible to export one quiz question format to the GIFT format.
http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=9029
http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=7803&parent=37335
I hear that the quiz has started to export (at least internally) to an XML format.
http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=8342&parent=53913

Yes... it has just been added to Moodle 1.4 now.


There is the moodle-unuique back up format. But there is very little in the way of export.
Who needs export when we have such a great system? Answer: a manager who wants to insure himself against choosing the wrong system with a LOT of cash at stake.

Timothy

Ps did I write ucler? I meant ulcer, but it was probably hurting at the time.

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Timothy Takemoto

SCORM versus our lovely HTML editor, a blessing or a graveyard?

by Ger Tielemans -

Yes, export to other LMS-systems is not possible

The weakest spot in Moodle - I think - is that thing we love more and more: the ever better html-editor. instead of refining the fill-in-forms from all the moduls with more and more fields, derived from these standards, we drop more and more content in that wonderful:

HTML-GRAVEYARD... 

for exchange between Moodle-systems no problem, for exchange with others a disaster.

So tell your boss to use Moodle as free LMS and let him buy for the money he saves, the best (= structures like XML supporting,) content creation tools he can get and import their children into your free Moodle LMS..

Spending your money on a system that supports one of these moving targets, called proposed standards (like SCORM, IMS/QTI, IMS/CP, IMS/LD and all these standards in the past years that did not make it....) would be really....clown

All these standards expect well-structured content with prescribed XML-label names, Moodle can not deliver that:..
(look for example at the maps with pointing device questions in the original QTI specs.
In theory that is what you need to do if you want to exchange complex-interaction-structures...)

(the question is if you must want that, but that is an other story)

Quizzes and glossaries are most close to export of structure, but fall also short as soon as they allow to use the html-editor: only humans can read these filled html-boxes..

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Ger Tielemans

Re: SCORM versus our lovely HTML editor, a blessing or a graveyard?

by Jurgis Pralgauskis -
Ger wrote:
Quizzes and glossaries are most close to export of structure, but fall also short as soon as they allow to use the html-editor: only humans can read these filled html-boxes..
but its possible to wipe out html format with html2txt or probably some other stuff (and there ish html_tidy in php5, as I know)
ps.: I was searching for IMS-CP issues, as in our country some processes of making up VLE specifications are going on..  those VLE would be for use at schools. Do You guys have something analogical in your countries (I mean VLE's specification)?
Average of ratings: -
In reply to Aaron Silvers

Re: Learning standards: My experience - SCORM a must

by Natalia Foronda Velásquez -

Hi Aaron! wink

We´re still reading about SCORM and we have several questions related with the specifications and the tools (communication tools, Student Involvement Tools, Support Tools, Course Delivery Tools, etc.) that the LMS provide.

Is there any relationship between them?

Can you help us?

Thanks!

Average of ratings: -