Reusing

1
Reusing Repurposing Learning Objects___________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
_________________________ Issues of Granularity
in the Texas Course Redesign Repository

• William E. Moen
• ltwilliam.moen_at_unt.edugt
• Texas Center for Digital Knowledge
• University of North Texas
• Denton, Texas

Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
2
Texas course redesign project

• Statewide initiative, funded by Texas legislature
• Original RFP requested proposals
• To redesign developmental and entry-level
  academic courses
• To develop other related projects that would
  advance the statewide course redesign initiative

3
Texas courses being redesigned

• 23 redesign projects in development including
• Developmental writing, reading, and mathematics
• Biology I II, Chemistry I II
• College Algebra, Calculus, Math for Business
  Social Science Majors, Statistics
• Computer Literacy
• English Composition I II
• Fine Arts Appreciation
• Introduction to Engineering
• Spanish
• U.S. Government
• U.S. History I II

4
Redesigning first year curriculum
Core Curriculum Component Area Redesigned Courses
Communication English Composition, Spanish
Mathematics Algebra, Calculus, Statistics
Natural Science Biology I II, Chemistry I II
Humanities/Visual Performing Arts Fine Arts Appreciation
Social/Behavioral Science U.S. History I II, Government I
Institutionally Designated Option Computer Literacy
5
The learning object repository

• Two phase project
• Phase I Proof-of-Concept (May 07Sept 07)
• How course content can be decomposed into
  discrete learning objects (LOs)
• How LOs can be individually described through
  metadata
• How users can use the LOR to search, browse,
  retrieve, and download LOs
• How LOs can be packaged to import into learning
  management systems
• Phase II Research Development (Sept 07Aug 09)
• Moving towards a near-production level system
• Primary means to disseminate redesigned courses

For more information, see project website
http//thecblor.unt.edu
6
THECB LOR components

• Repository platform DSpace
• Stores the LOs and metadata describing each
• Provides authenticated user interface for
  submission of LOs and creation of metadata
• Provides public user interface for searching,
  browsing, access
• Manakin XML user interface tool
• Course content and learning objects
• Our definition of a LO A digital resource
  (simple or complex) that can be used to support
  learning

7
THECB LOR components

• Metadata
• Serves in managing the repositorys content
• Serves users to
• Find (searching and discovering LOs)
• Identify (comparing similar LOs)
• Select (evaluating LOs for specific needs)
• Access/Acquire (downloading selected LOs)
• Using metadata elements from two standards
• Dublin Core
• IEEE Learning Object Metadata
• Approximately 40 elements

8
Context for THECB LOR

• Courses and course content
• Developed by separate projects
• No standard or common logical structure
• Quality of content
• Competitive grant process for redesigned courses
• Intended audience
• Instructors/instructional designers at public
  institutions of higher education in Texas
• Intellectual property
• Belongs to Texas Higher Education Coordinating
  Board

9
Basic organization of LOR

• Discipline (e.g. History)
• Sub-discipline (e.g., U.S History)
• Courses (e.g., U.S. History I, U.S. History II)
• Course content (Collections of learning objects
  at varying levels of granularity)

10
(No Transcript)
11
From courses to LOs

• Courses not designed in terms of
• Learning objects
• Storage in a repository
• Challenges
• How to decompose complete course into meaningful
  LOs
• How to decide on levels of granularity
• How to represent such levels
• How to show relationships among/between related
  LOs at different levels of granularity

12
U.S. History I Course

• Structure as designed
• Course
• Units (four Units in Course)
• Lessons (two or more lessons per Unit)
• Topics (two or more topics per Lesson)
• Structure served to guide levels of granularity

13
U.S. History I Course

• Other course components as designed
• Case studies
• Teacher and student guides
• Assessments (primarily at the Lesson level)
• Free-standing learning objects
• Derived from course content
• Have value outside the context for which they
  were created
• Interactive flash animations, video clips, etc.

14
(No Transcript)
15
Characterizing LOs

• Netg
• Topic single learning objective, a learning
  activity, and an assessment
• Cisco
• Reusable Information Object content items,
  practice items, and assessment items aimed at
  single learning objective
• SCORM Content Package
• Sharable Content Objects packaged together in
  larger units of learning related to learning
  objectives
• IMS Learning Design
• Learning Object object needed to perform an
  activity

16
Assumptions for the THECB LOR

• Users may be in need of different sized LOs
• No common logical structure for courses
• No common terminology across courses for labeling
  structural components of course
• Different courses may dictate different levels of
  granularity
• Context for some LOs more important than others
• Our definition of a LO
• A digital resource (simple or complex) that can
  be used to support learning
• Not tied to specific learning objectives

17
Spanish course

• Course content consists of
• Introductory web page
• Podcast
• Organized by topics, subtopics, specific topics
  e.g.
• Verbs
• Present tense
• Present tense AR
• Present tense ER/IR
• Present tense Irregulars
• Nouns, articles, adjectives and agreement
• Articles
• Definite and indefinite articles

18
Developmental writing course

• Course content consists of
• Web pages of textual information
• Assessments and activities
• Organized into
• Categories
• Lessons
• Topics

19
LOs at multiple levels of granularity
The Russian Doll Approach Separate learning
objects are created at all levels course,
lesson, topic, page, page element (media), with
each level contained in the one above it. G.W.
Matkin
20
Russian Doll in context of courses

• History
• Topic LOs
• Topics aggregated in a lesson
• Lesson LOs
• Lessons aggregated in a unit
• Unit LOs
• Units aggregated into course level

• Writing
• Topic LOs
• Topics aggregated in a lesson
• Lesson LOs
• Lessons aggregated in a category
• Category LOs
• Categories aggregated into course level

• Spanish
• Specific topic LOs
• Specific topics aggregated in a subtopic
• Subtopic LOs
• Subtopics aggregated in a topics
• Topic LOs
• Topics aggregated into course level

21
This approach

• Addresses our lack of knowledge of granularity
  levels appropriate for intended users
• Offers LOs at multiple levels of granularity
• Provides a testbed for empirical investigation
• BUT lots of challenges, including
• Terminology for levels of granularity
• Use of metadata to describe/represent levels of
  granularity
• Use of metadata to show relationships (part of,
  is part of)
• Addressing sequencing and context where that is
  important
• Ill appreciate your ideas and suggestions!

22
References

• Disaggregation and reutilization of sharable
  content objects. Figuerua, A. Kaufmann, M.
• Learning object repositories Problems and
  promise. Matkin, G.W.
• Transforming existing content into reusable
  learning objects. Doorten, M., et al.
• THECB LOR Project http//thecblor.unt.edu