In the first part of this theme I provided an overview of some of the major developments in learning material repository development and outlined our needs. In this article I try to draw some conclusions and make some decisions about a practical way forward. First let me establish terminology. For our purposes and to avoid a protracted elucidation of 'what is a learning object?', the term as used here includes all digital learning resources, assets, artefacts, and process support tools used to facilitate learning. I'll use the term resources to cover both learning material and learning objects.
Let me be straight up front about this. I believe that rather than focus on the developmental cul-de-sac which is the current mainstream VLEs, the evolving repository models are what really matter; they are the foundations from which other and new models will grow.
Above all we need practical solutions which users will buy into because they perceive them as having a low barrier to entry and use, are efficient, provide benefits over current practices, and above all are flexible (note emphasis).
I'm not suggesting that such learning object repositories can't be complex, modular, scalable, and robust engines behind the scenes, i.e. the battleships of part 1, but that the means by which people and systems make inputs and acquire outputs from such systems shouldn't require at least a first degree in computer or information sciences to exploit the potential.
In previous articles I've suggested that the barrier to entry to e-learning technologies is becoming incredibly high. If you don't believe me then pop over to the CETIS article by Scott Wilson Using the Enterprise SDK to create a minimal IMS Enterprise web service (CETIS 24 June 2004). The argument here is of course that these are enabling infrastructure services from which all else will grow … but boy do IMS specifications appear to build complexity upon complexity!
Whilst recognizing the promise that standards can bring to, what otherwise can be chaos, a large part of this article will be devoted to exploration of a 'standard' and tools which provide a relatively easy way of passing information 'about' learning objects, how to access them and how they are used, rather than technical standards which attempt to rigorously define the structure and nature of a learning object per se. The intention here is not to be a polemic against rigorous technical definitions of learning objects, e.g. IMS Content Packaging, SCORM etc, but instead to recognize that the 'jury is still out' on the nature and benefits (or otherwise) of learning objects particularly within a higher education context. In this article, I'm not challenging the learning object concept but I am taking a pragmatic flexible view of what a learning object is.
Such a flexible view of course means that learning objects from different sources/repositories may have a different 'look and feel' but the benefits of diversity and spread of development effort probably outweigh the insurmountable challenge of achieving global consistency. Greater consistency is of course possible in a single repository or 'walled-garden' or development consortium model.
What this article does challenge, however, is the support for systems which effectively 'lock-in' learning objects, however they are defined, within any single learning object repository. If not we merely repeat what has happened with most learning management systems/virtual learning environments which claim standards compliance but in reality migration remains non-trivial in most cases.
What is required are tools and environments which don't assume that learning objects are necessarily contained within their repository system but which can either 'pull' objects from a variety of sources and repositories, or provide the means by which relevant objects can be found and accessed. What I'm proposing therefore is configurable tools and environments which can find, aggregate, display, and provide access to resources, tools, and services which are potentially distributed over a wide variety of repositories and sources; and which can respond to the user's current learning interests (note emphasis).
The JISC in its own description of the JISC Information Environment (JCIE) has said:
“… the Information Environment as it is proposed here aims to offer the user a more seamless and less complex journey to relevant information and learning resources … It is acknowledged that the Information Environment envisaged for the JISC is ambitious. This is primarily because this has evolved to embrace two key concepts which are by nature semantically and technically complex to advance through a process of investment these are:
- the view that digital resources are inherently distributed and will never be delivered by a single service provider (my emphasis)
- the view that users do not all want to access information in the same way but will require a diverse range of views of resources in order to satisfy their needs. A web based portal or VLE for example may operate as a specific window upon a set of distributed resources.” (my emphasis)
To me, examples of learning objects could be content, activities, or online discussions available from, or mediated via, the web, but also usable on the personal desktop. Because new tools and environments would not need to store content within their own architecture their success would depend on how efficiently and effectively they find, aggregate, or broker both quality-assured and 'non-assured' resources from elsewhere.
If learning object repositories are to have an impact on e-learning the mechanisms by which they communicate with each other and with the end-users needs to be easy to implement. The author has previously highlighted RSS as one easy to implement syndication technology which can be used to enrich a learning environment.
UKOLN's contribution to uptake of RSS is of particular note here by the introduction of their RSSxpress pilot. I'll provide some examples of RSS in actual practice later in the article.
One of the major advocates for syndication technologies in the e-learning arena is undoubtedly Stephen Downes, senior research officer for the Institute for Information Technology, National Research Council, Canada.
I was in the audience at an IMS meeting and conference in Vancouver in February 2003 when Stephen gave his keynote speech No, Really, This is What We Want in which he presented an alternative model to the complex IMS/SCORM content packaging approach. Now credit is due to IMS for providing a platform for an 'alternative' and well argued viewpoint, but I'm not convinced the audience wanted to hear the message which I can distill as “hang on why are you doing all this really complex stuff when we can already do this?”
The 'alternative' model is based on the premise that whilst information about learning objects could be centralised, the actual object itself does not need to be stored in some centralised repository, or even necessarily have a complex descriptive wrapper based on IMS or SCORM specifications. That is not to say that such 'packaging' would not sometimes be desirable; just that it is not always essential.
Many Auricle readers may already be familiar with Downes' prototype DLORN (Distributed Learning Object Repository Network). For those of you who haven't come across it yet there's a useful summary within his notes for a presentation he gave to Open-Education.org Open Education Moving From Concept to Reality (April 2003). To me, Downes merits major plaudits for illustrating how a simple, self-registration, minimum maintenance, online broker system, which utilizes the grassroots syndication technology RSS, has the potential to become a powerful hub of a distributed repository system. DLORN doesn't care about the nature of the underlying systems used to produce the information about learning objects as long as that information is formatted in the relatively simple RSS format which can then be read by the multitude of 'readers' or web applications already out there.
To illustrate the point I've added a new 'Syndicated Learning Objects' menu at the top of Auricle's home page.
Without a DLORN (or equivalent) how would I know what sites were offering their learning objects? Given time and effort, I envisage automatic updates between say a DLORN and an Auricle. I also see some potential for a network of DLORNs based on, say, regions or subject specialisms? A more sophisticated DLORN could even go on to offer resource links and information specific to a particular part of a course or module.
The example below shows three RSS feeds from different sources displayed in one web page. Ok, I've used a frameset to do this, but I'm only wanting to illustrate a point. Because RSS is an XML-based format, feeds cannot be displayed directly in a web page; but here UKOLN’s RSSxpress service has been used to convert the output from an RSS url, e.g. http://www.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.rss into output which can be rendered by a standard web browser.
But all of this may not be music to the ears of those convinced the World needs more sophisticated solutions.
In RSS: Disruptive Technology Hiding in Plain Sight (Seidl FA, 2003) RSS is described as a 'disruptive technology' which will become an attractive alternative to existing solutions.
“Generally, disruptive innovations were technologically straightforward, consisting of off-the-shelf components put together in a product architecture that was often simpler than prior approaches. They offered less of what customers in established markets wanted and so could rarely be initially employed there. They offered a different package of attributes valued only in emerging markets remote from, and unimportant to, the mainstream.” (Christensen C, 2003, The Innovator’s Dilemma, HarperBusiness)
In a more recent polemic by Downes Whither the Semantic Web (Downes S, 17 June 2004) he contends that:
“The most successful part of the Semantic Web is RSS (Rich Site Summary, or Really Simple Syndication). That RSS is successful is beyond dispute; there are millions of sites using RSS worldwide and millions of people reading RSS. But what is ironic is that RSS developed outside the Semantic Web development infrastructure; if the Semantic Web is what the W3C is building (and only that), then RSS is not a part of the Semantic Web.”
Or in RSS: Grassroots Support Leads to Mass Appeal Downes suggests that the bottom-up origins of RSS means that already it is already having a practical effect, although this does not necessarily map to what was intended by infrastructuralists :
“Although RSS is not the semantic Web originally dreamed of in the laboratory, with finely grained and standardized element descriptions and canonical vocabularies, it is a technology that has proved itself, and evolved roughshod, though the much grittier practice of grassroots development. There is, I think, a lesson in that.”
But more optimistically he also suggests that:
“It is only a matter of time before the RSS and OAI worlds merge.”
Harking back to my first article on this theme, the Open Archives Initiative has been the launch point for initiatives such as DSpace.
RSS adoption continues to increase and is now a core part of many services and markets, e.g. weblogs, news syndication, and corporate portals. Weblogs, portals, and RSS are viewed in some quarters as potential parts of a knowledge management infrastructure, e.g. Myst Technology.
“Portal and KM vendors could learn a few tricks from emerging technology segments like RSS, RDF, and the blogging community. These initiatives have stumbled upon [what I consider] the single most important aspect of network dynamics - the discrete addressability of information objects.”
RSS support is already being integrated directly into some e-learning tools/environments. For example CourseForum is web-based e-learning software that enables students to interact by creating, posting, share or discuss course content. The product now supports RSS feeds natively, i.e. without the intervention of other services like UKOLN’s RSSxpress, so that web forums can be enhanced by external information or resources. Other mainstream VLEs tend to offer RSS only at the enterprise or portal level of their products range and then view it only as a news distribution solution. Pity! They are missing a feature which deserves to be more core than peripheral.
There are other examples of RSS being used as a means of learning object dissemination. For example, as shown below the Macricopa Learning eXchange or MLX.
At the time of writing the MLX offers over 900 learning items to its participating colleges with searches being offered as RSS feeds which can integrated into academics' blogs or web sites. At the time of writing, for instance, a search on the MLX for items relating to 'heart' provides an RSS formatted search result of several items one of which is Ventilation and Perfusion on the Web. Selecting this item takes us to a descriptive packaging slip which provides the provenance, original pedagogical purpose/context of the item and a web link to the actual item.
Interestingly, the MLX packaging slip also enables 'sharebacks' (also known as trackbacks) on the item. Trackbacks are one solution to learning about the reuse of learning objects since they provide either comment upon, brief descriptions of who is reusing, or how a learning object is being reused. Further consideration of using weblog trackbacks to provide context for learning objects can be found at either D'Arcy Norman's Learning Commons blog or Alan Levine’s article Backtrack to Trackback.
As shown below, the MLX site offers an example of how one academic integrates MLX's and other syndicated learning objects into his personal humanities-oriented web site.
Important point, the MLX is going open source and so will be available to us all in the near future. It's based on a LAMP model (Linux, Apache, MSQL, PHP) so the cost of getting our hands dirty shouldn't be too high. I don't know about the underlying robustness or quality of code e.t.c. but what has always impressed me is the clarity of concept, its apparent ease of use, and the community oriented spirit of its creators.
I think the MLX solution deserves a lot more attention on this side of the pond than it has been getting. It's not unusual to talk to UK repository oriented folks who have never heard of the MLX. Hopefully this article will help disseminate their good work a little more.
Meanwhile back in the UK, MedWeb at the University of Birmingham provides us with some further examples of RSS disseminated learning objects in use. One example shows how RSS formatted resource discovery can facilitate integration into a host environment (below).
In the syndicated learning object menu at the top of the Auricle home page I link to a second MedWeb example, an RSS feed of prototype MedWeb learning objects; these can be viewed directly in RSS enabled sites like Auricle, a standalone RSS Reader, or converted to html for display in a standard web browser by a conversion service, e.g. UKOLN’s RSS-xpress-Lite.
David Davies of MedWeb is leading the Learning and Teaching Support Network mini-project investigating pragmatic approaches to resource discovery and collaborative development.
RSS feeds, like MedWeb's, can be incorporated into many different types of container, including mainstream virtual learning environments. While I believe this to be an enrichment of the otherwise closed world of the VLE, it does raise the spectre (for vendors) of such VLEs becoming devoid of their own learning objects and merely being relegated to the role of relatively expensive delivery vehicles or front-ends. In such a scenario it becomes a moot point whether it is cost-effective to support a proprietary VLE for this purpose at all:)
It’s also interesting how VLE vendors allocate RSS a relatively minor role. Whilst RSS is enabled via the News module in the Blackboard Portal System, the same does not appear to be the case in the Blackboard Learning System. In the Blackboard Portal a University can syndicate content through the portal (once the user activates the News module on their customizable portal page and selects which of the defined feeds and number of headlines to subscribe to. This solution doesn't appear to offer a native mechanism that allows a user to subscribe to any feed they want, but that's something that Blackboard's Building Blocks technology model may make possible.
I know I repeat myself but what is key in all of the above examples is the recognition that learning objects do not need to be centralised or locked in a single repository to be accessible and useful. Many of the examples do require a flexible interpretation of what a learning object is. RSS is, however, pedagogically neutral and is simply the vehicle which carries information about, and provides access to, the object via a link.
The UK lags behind North America in the development of RSS capable learning object repositories (which could be viewed as an opportunity). Apart from the previously mentioned Distributed Learning Object Repository Network (DLORN) current RSS capable learning object repositories and sources include:
CAREO Campus Alberta Repository of Educational Objects) is a collaboration between the Universities of Alberta and Calgary in co-operation with CANARIE (Canadian Network for the Advancement of Research in Industry and Education), and BELLE (Broadband Enabled Lifelong Learning Environment) …
and …
MERLOT has a long track record as an online learning materials repository now also offers RSS feeds. For example any of the following RSS feeds will return information about the ten most recent MERLOT assets in a particular domain:
- http://rss.merlot.org/publish/Physics.xml
- http://rss.merlot.org/publish/History.xml
- http://rss.merlot.org/publish/Chemistry.xml
- http://rss.merlot.org/publish/Biology.xml
For a summary of other known repositories Scott Leslie’s EdTech Post article is a useful source or Bill Brandon’s blog. Again, a liberal interpretation of what constitutes a learning object is necessary when viewing these examples.
It's even possible to have the results of Amazon searches returned as RSS feeds for incorporation into whatever container is preferred. A similar result can be achieved with Google by using using a third-party, currently free, service Google.RSS but the caveat with any service but particularly free ones is 'here today gone tomorrow' so building course dependencies using such services is probably not wise.
The pity is that some sections of the e-learning community haven't seemed to grasp the potential. For example, the National Learning Network learning materials repository for the post-16 sector appears to eschew RSS feeds as does the UK’s National Electronic Library for Health which apparently only offers its headlines, what's new and 'document of the week' as RSS; not RSS formatted search results (which could be incorporated into an online learning resource).
There's also a new syndication contender on the block called Atom which offers richer features than is 'officially' possible in RSS (with readers becoming available for both) but in this article I'm arguing for a principle rather than a specific solution. Syndication solutions like RSS and Atom meet the 'low barrier to entry' criteria I identified in part 1 and can be used by a variety of containers or clients. They are certainly don't require the design and development effort required for battleships but yet like rafts they can be built and used by the grassroots developer/author while battleships can also release rafts … I hope the metaphor is holding up … if it doesn't make sense read part 1:)
In conclusion, if learning object repositories are to have an impact on e-learning then I've proposed that the mechanisms by which they communicate with each other and with the end-users needs to be easy to implement. I've attempted to highlight RSS as one easy to implement syndication technology which can be used to enrich and populate a learning environment.
An excellent resource with useful links to RSS tools and validators is RSS - A Primer for Publishers and Content Developers by M.Moffat, at EEVL.
A graphical representation of the growth of RSS is usually available from Sydic8.com.
