Reusable Learning Objects Project Monash University CeLTS CERG

Project Task Priority

Project home page Scoping Committee Project brief Project outline Project task priorities Data collected

1. “Is it worth bothering..” In the background of RLOR is the ‘why’ question. The project will have to be able to show that it is worth the trouble trying to utilise some form of RLOR. It may be that one project outcome is a form of index that weights RLOR on some of the issues mentioned below. The most likely form would be a weighted index involving: § Scaleability § Time Cost to staff § Educational cost to staff § Reusability of the system – including editable data § IP hassles § Recognition of user contribution § Potential scope and expandable functions § Flexibility in educational assumptions 2. Metadata systems A metadata system is one that formalises the top-level coding of variables that are used to indexing the objects in and RLOR. There are a number of systems from various sources that attempt to provide an objective systematisation of metadata. This includes: · Sharable Content Object Reference Model - SCORM · AICC CMI, · IEEE LTSC Learning Object Metadata - LOM · IMS, ADL and ARIADNE are based on LOM. · IMS QTI · Advanced Distributed Learning - ADL · Core Dublin As an alternative to formal metadata systems is the use of dynamic indexing where indexes are created from the actual words in the document. A form of metadata can be created through various methods of user ratings and collaborative filtering. A key task for the project is to look at the pros and cons of indexing systems and to relate these to educational intention. 3. Types of repositories The “physical” repository This type of repository stores electronic copies of the RLO in its data base. Every object is indexed in some way and a copy is then stored. The virtual repository This type of repository simply stores a pointer to each object as well as the indexing or metadata. The agent-based repository This type of repository uses software agents as managers of routine functions such as establishing that links between the repository and external objects are active. Agents can also take on roles associated with how the inexing system function best. An agent-based repository can be either physical or virtual. Federated repository This type of repository brings together a number of repositories, linking access. Such a repository may have issues associated with IP etc. The project needs to evaluate the most efficient and acceptable way in which a repository is constructed in order to best meet the needs of users. 4. Intellectual Property The intellectual property issue is a complex one involving not only internal issues but also external ones. For example, a teacher is using a journal article retrieved from an electronic resources and is using it within the study environment. How will this be contained so that the material does not break IP laws? This is a large topic that must be addressed by the project although the project could not be expected to produce solutions. The project will be able to highlight the main areas of concern. 5. Scope and function An RLOR can have multiple functions within an educational environment. For example, it can provide support in literature indexing and it can index relevant research project materials that are used in project work. The project will need to look at the views potential users have on scope and how priorities can be set. 6. Interface with other RLOR Many RLOR may have been built in ways that preclude interfacing with other related systems – eg research repositories. Economies of scale may be achieved if systems are selected that have good interface capacity. One task in looking at all systems will be their relative isolation versus their ability to 'talk to' other similar systems. 7. Reusable Learning Object Repository (RLOR) A means by which the RLO are stored so that they can be readily accessed by both teachers and learners. RLOR come by a number of names including Learning Resource Catalogue, the term used by both Melbourne and Macquarie Universities. 8. Reusable Learning Objects (RLO) An educational item that is used in a teaching and learning environment that can be made available for reuse by either the creator or other teachers and learners. One definition from the literature says: “Learning objects are self-contained instructional units which content accommodates heterogeneous learning sources (text, presentation, audio or video) or a combination of any of these media.” This is a more restrictive definition than might be used by others. RLO appear to have been generated from the ICT area and there is, in fact, a limited literature on them. There are some project issues involving defining a common frame of reference or, at least, presenting the range of possibilities and their implications for future action. 9. Pedagogical Issues There is very little discussion of the pedagogical issues associated with RLO's and their RLOR. A task in the project is to identify likely pedagogical points that will support or militate against possible RLO/RLOR systems. The Project has been contracted by the Resusable Learning Objects Scoping Committee under the management of CeLTS. The project is being run by the Computing Education Research Group (CERG) from the Faculty of Information Technology. Monash University