So, what did I learn? It’s difficult to express exactly what I learned, but here’s a listing of the items that caught my attention:

• Reusable Learning Objects (RLO)
• Cisco’s RLO Strategy
• SCORM, AICC
• Metadata
• Functions of Learning Management Systems (LMS) and Learning Content Management Systems (LCMS)
• Accessibility of e-learning to people with disabilities

The bottom line to this course was that learning, delivered by electronic means (e-learning defined), can be flexible, reusable and accessible if a strategy is carefully planned out and applied.

It’s on now to the next course, IPT 523 – Authoring Skills for Instructional Multimedia.  It’s a hard-skills course where we’ll be using Adobe Captivate and applying it to e-learning.  It should be fun and I’m currently using it for other projects.  It’s a powerful tool and capable of doing many things and I’m looking forward to learning more about it and applying it back to the work I’m doing.

Related posts:

1. Drawbacks to Online Education When I decided to dedicate this blog to my experience...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Let’s begin by looking at SCOs. SCOs are a component of the Content Aggregation Model (CAM) which is a component of the SCORM. The CAM is comprised of Learning Objects divided into three categories:

• Assets
• SCOs
• Content Organizations

The contents of the learning objects are described by metadata. In addition, CAM includes a definition of how RLOs can be packed, delivered, and used.

Now, let’s look at RLOs and RIOs.  Discussions about RLOs and RIOs have occurred in many posts throughout this blog.  RLOs were discussed in Reusable Learning Object Strategies and RIOs were discussed in Expanding on E-Learning: Instructional Architectures and Learning Objects.  The bottom line is RLOs are comprised of RIOs.  RIOs by themselves do not have any context.  They are simply “chunks” of information.  When gathered together under a RLO, they create context meaningful to the learner.  This is illustrated in Cisco System’s Reusable Object Strategy.

It may be safe to conclude that although SCOs and RLOs are not the same, SCOs contain RLOs.  That’s the way I see it, but I’m open to correction on this. After all, that was the purpose of this blog – to create a discussion with other students of E-learning and professionals working in the field.

Related posts:

1. 5 Ways to Jump Into Rapid E-learning Looking back at the first course I took this year,...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

I guess this means I’m at the official half-way point of my first full semester of higher education in so many years.

Yes, it’s time for Spring Break!

I’m 34 years old (at last check) and my liver can’t withstand the commitment it takes to enjoy fun in the sun and the unpredictability of life that comes with youthful indiscretion.  Instead, I’ll be using the time to reflect and catch up on blog posts I should have been making over the course of the IPT 525 class.

I’ve got at least three posts in mind for this week:

• Compare and contrast LMS and LCMS
• A breakdown of the differences between RLO, RIO and SCO
• Praise for a fellow student in a paper she wrote on the benefits of adopting a SCORM-Conformant E-Learning Strategy

I’m looking forward to the time off and catching up.  I know this blog hasn’t necessarily turned out the way I wanted to, but with less pressure from completing class assignments hopefully I can get back on track.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

I made mention of SCORM in a previous post but didn’t get into too much detail about it.  SCORM is a very detailed subject when it comes to E-learning, but here’s my attempt to define it based on what I learned these past couple weeks and put it into its proper context.

SCORM is the Sharable Content Object Reference Model.  It is a set of standards and specification for web-based E-learning.  It’s actually the product of the Advanced Distributed Learning Initiative (ADL) founded in 1997 by the The United States Department of Defense (DoD) and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP).

The ADL Initiative’s overall vision is to provide access to high-quality learning that can be tailored to individual needs and delivered cost-effectively anytime, anywhere.  To accomplish these goals, SCORM was created to foster the creation of reusable learning content as “instructional objects” within a common framework.

The high-level requirements of the SCORM, often referred to as their “-ilities”, highlight the importance of this model in standardization of online learning:

• Accessibility – the ability to locate and access instructional components from one remote location and deliver them to many locations.
• Adaptability – the ability to tailor instruction to individual and organizational needs.
• Affordability – the ability to increase efficiency and productivity by reducing the time and costs to deliver instruction.
• Durability – the ability to withstand technology changes without costly redesign, reconfiguration or recoding.
• Interoperability – the ability to take instructional components developed in one location with one set of tools or platform and use them in another location with a different set of tools or platform.
• Reusability – the flexibility to incorporate instructional components in multiple applications and contexts.

As an instructional designer, I feel the ability to create E-learning under a set of guidelines such as the SCORM keeps the content relevant, easy to update and transferrable.  Some people may see the SCORM as restrictive, but the beauty of such standards is that even though the technology to deliver E-learning may change, the standards by which it is designed and developed remain unchanged.  ADL’s commitment to standards and regularly updating them helps with accessibility and interoperability.

Related posts:

1. Learning Styles in Synchronous E-Learning We’ve completed the first full week of IPT 511 where...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

There are many different strategies centered on RLO’s.  On a more basic level are the strategies discussed by Hodgins in his paper The Future of Learning Objects.  According to Hodgins, there are three RLO strategies that will determine success.  These are either being used currently or will be in the near future:

1. Make it relevant, make is easy- for RLO’s to be readily adopted they must be deemed by learners as high-value.  They must be conceptualized, designed, constructed and selected quickly and easily.  The technology to facilitate this must be easy to use, but the underlying complexity of the technology doesn’t have to be rudimentary, nor should it. Learners are primarily concerned only with what is being presented to them and in context to their learning needs.
2. Connect everything to everything – RLO’s by their nature have a high potential for digital connectivity.  Leveraging technology can bring connectivity to a whole new level through the use of metadata (descriptive information to categorize and catalog content) by supplying a basis for making connections between RLO’s and people.  Technically, new paradigms emerge of sharing information by promoting blended learning solutions.
3. Everything is “just” a node – Learning content, or RLO’s, are decentralized, thus leaving the decision and control of what needs to be learned in the hands of the learner.  Because everything (the RLO’s) are on their own, yet connected to one another through relational metadata, learners approach their learning needs in a contextual fashion whereby based on their need they are able to pull together the “nodes” or RLO’s they need, assemble them and consume the learning when needed.

Cisco Systems have long been using RLO’s in their learning and have created detailed strategies that have evolved over the years to become more effective.  Their RLO’s are structured to give objects the necessary context to ensure a meaningful experience for the learner.  It also allows for RLO’s to be leveraged in problem-based learning, exploratory environments, performance support systems, job aids, help systems or blended learning solutions.  The strategy Cisco employs is focused on design, development and implementation of RLO’s with the underlying philosophy that if these areas are taken care of, the training will be effective creating a better learning experience and accommodate multiple approaches to learning.  This strategy is expressed in Learning Object Development (LOD) stages:

1. Granular analysis – determining performance objectives based on specific audience(s).
2. Design and mine – where the training solution is structured, objectives captured and content types identified.  It’s also an opportunity to find what is currently out there on the subject and leverage from the content if possible.
3. Reuse and develop – actual development of the training solution, reusing (if possible) learning objects in existence and forming the training in context to the training need.
4. Delivery and reference – the training solution is delivered in a variety of formats and chosen learning architectures.
5. Lifecycle maintenance – once a learning object is created, it can then be maintained over the course of its lifecycle.  A change to a single learning object that is shared among many different training solutions can be updated in one location and published to many destinations.

All throughout these stages, evaluation takes place to make improvements to the development process or impact of the overall learning experience.

Whether the strategy is the basic model illustrated in the Hodgin’s paper or the detailed Cisco Systems model, they do work and make an immediate impact when applied.  In 2003, ASTD awarded General Motors an Excellence in Practice Citation for illustrating their blended approach to performance-based training among auto mechanics at their dealerships.

The problem that faced GM in 1999 was that mechanic training became too expensive.  Traditionally, it was instructor-led training over the course of several days.  The training grew far too complex as GM began introducing more models into the marketplace.  With more models came more demand for training that would have forced GM to expand its training infrastructure nationwide at a cost too great for the company to meet and continue to support.

The solution was to restructure the delivery of training by using E-learning as a delivery method including the use of video, web-based, computer-based and interactive distance learning.  This reduced the number of training facilities needed and increased the availability and effectiveness of the training.

Although there as no mention of the use of learning objects in the paper highlighting the reasons behind awarding the citation, it is conceivable that GM made use of learning objects in a strategy to accomplish their goal of reducing training costs and creating effective performance-based learning among their mechanics.

RLO’s may have been used for web-based and computer-based instruction where the “basic building blocks” of mechanics are developed (such as Electronic Fuel Injection or ABS Breaking Systems), but when accessed by the mechanic who is taking a service course on a specific model of vehicle, the RLO’s are assembled and presented in an organized fashion in context to the model they are studying.

—–

On their own, RLO’s are just “nodes”, as mentioned in Hodgin’s paper, but if they are brought together in a strategy (whether basic or detailed), the learner has a better experience resulting in better performance.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Defined in a previous post, RLO’s are the equivalent to lessons, a collection of Information Objects (chunks of content) compiled in context to a learning objective.

The move to learning objects over these many years offers the promise of capturing knowledge, organizing it and enabling it to be shared and reused among many learners to create new knowledge.  H. Wayne Hodgins from Autodesk, Inc., wrote a whitepaper titled The Future of Learning Objects.  In his paper he discussed how RLO’s increases the effectiveness of learning and human performance by offering up such objects in a defined content model.

This model comprises a strategy that consists of the following:

• Common component-based approach
• Structured content based on a common hierarchical data model
• Metadata at each level of the content hierarchy
• Process methodology
• Technical infrastructure for developing, assembling and managing granular content objects written independently of the delivery media and accessed dynamically through a database

The end result is a database-managed repository of reusable information objects and metadata that can be used for all forms of learning and media delivery types (Hodgins, 2002).

These repositories are commonly known as learning management systems (LMS).  When the chosen model brings together objects in a relevant, meaningful manner and applied strategically, learners have a better experience.  Better experiences lead to better performance.

In the next post, I’ll discuss how when these content models are applied they increase learner performance with some specific examples.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Sometimes, my trial balloons are like the Hindenburg – they float, and then they crash and burn.  This time, the idea I’d like to float might be crazy enough to work.

I have a short paper due for my IPT 525 course this Sunday.  The topic is on Performance-Based E-Learning with RLO’s. It’s been quite a while since I had to write an academic paper – for a grade no less.  Blogging has been my thing in recent years, but it occurred to me, “Why can’t I blog my way to the completion of this paper?”  Blogging comes naturally to me and it allows me to freely express my thoughts and ideas.  If this theory holds true, I can have this paper hammered out in no time, plus I have additional content to contribute to my blog.

Here’s the strategy for this week – 4 blog posts on 4 key points in my paper by this Friday or Saturday.  I then write the introduction and summary, cite my sources and then I’m done!

The topics you can look forward to this week are:

• Why even bother with e-learning – let alone why make it performance-based?
• To maximize performance and efficiency of development in e-learning, make use of RLO’s – better yet, what are they?
• What are some RLO strategies in e-learning?  We know about Cisco, but who else has strategies and can they be easily explained?
• What are the pro’s and con’s of applying RLO’s for information design and instructional design to improve learning and performance?

I’ve often wondered if this would be the best use of a blog while I participated in formal classes.  Let the experiment begin!

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

It’s definitely a different experience to the traditional form of learning I am used to.  Most of my education was spent in classrooms on campus.  The WELPS class I’m taking is entirely online, taught in an asynchronous manner.  Think of it as one big discussion board like the old online newsgroups.  The instructor posts topics, questions and assignments to the bulletin board and the class interacts through discussion threads and we’re graded on our participation and quality of our content.

The upside to this experience is that I can participate in the class at times that are convenient to me, so I’m not bound by the traditional schedule of “class is every Tuesday and Thursday evenings at 6:00 p.m.”  The downside is that the discussion threads in the online classroom environment eventually resemble e-mail overload.  While the start of the discussion threads may be of value initially with feedback and insight about the topic from fellow students (including myself), they tend to taper off into responses of “I agree”, or “good point”, with less and less value.  This is not a criticism of my fellow classmates, but merely a simple observation about the class.

I’m enjoying the class and learning a tremendous amount of information about e-learning.  The field has changed a lot since I graduated with my Master’s in Instructional and Performance Technology 8 years ago and I hope to immediately apply what I’m learning back into my current work and consulting endeavors.

This week we are on the topic of SCORM and I’m sure I’ll have thoughts and ideas about how this impacts my current work.  Also, there is a paper that needs to be submitted on resuable learning objects (RLO).  Not a big one, but the beauty of the assignment is I believe about 1/3 for the content for the paper has already been written by me via this blog.  It’s been an objective of mine from the start to see if blogging will help with my papers and assignments.  By the end of the upcoming week, we’ll see if my experiment works.

Related posts:

1. 5 Things You Should Consider Before Taking Online College Courses For the last few months I have been on hiatus...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

An interesting thing occurred over the course of the week, as often they do in online forums.  The class began to draw their own conclusions about the subject being taught.  Our instructor, Bruce Kennedy, offered up his own insights that I thought was worthy of presenting here on this blog.

Regarding Instructional Architectures

As illustrated in a previous post, there are four different instructional architectures to choose from when designing instruction.

• Receptive
• Directive
• Guided Discovery
• Exploratory

Looking at these architectures, from the top down, the Receptive architecture tends to take an objective approach.  Learners are passive while receiving instruction and this form of learning is easy to develop and deliver.

The Exploratory architecture takes a constructivist approach.  Learners aren’t necessarily guided to a conclusion.  They form their own conclusions from the content presented to them to form a mental model that is meaningful to them.  Learners take an active role in their learning and for developers this form of instruction tends to be more difficult to develop.

Regarding Reusable Learning Objects

There was much discussion about Learning Objects over the course of the week.  Learning Objects are really the equivalent to lessons, a collection of Information Objects (chunks of content) compiled in context to a learning objective.

The discussion shifted to what is the difference between E-learning and web-based training (WBT).  I agree with our instructor with his conclusion, which is the two are not the same.

E-learning is not the same as WBT. I would consider this class an E-learning class, but would not say that it is WBT. An E-learning course can mimic most, if not all, of the same interactions that a F2F course has based on the technology and strategies used.

In other words, think of WBT as stand-alone, perhaps a Learning Object in and of itself, and E-learning as a collection of Learning Objects.  E-learning is really an environment, or platform, learners enter to draw from the available Learning Objects to construct meaning, relevance and solutions to problems they encounter.

—–

The beauty about such conclusions (including my own) is that they are not necessarily right or wrong.  The only way to confirm or disprove such conclusions is to actually apply them and learn from the results.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Learning objects are blocks or chunks of information and content. It could be a procedure, principle, concept, process, fact, etc. The objects alone may not mean much to someone unless they are put into proper context. The article closed with the following quote:

Perhaps the greatest challenge of all is how can we as people also become more effective and efficient as “learning objects” ourselves.

That’s an interesting concept (a-ha, a learning object). Are we as people individual walking, talking repositories of learning objects? When we exchange our tacit knowledge with others are we exchanging learning objects where the recipient of the object applies it to their personal mental model?

This is something I’m sure I’ll be pondering throughout the week.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.