Requirements for BECTA project to improve VLE interoperability -

Crispin Weston · Status: Offline

Requirements for BECTA project to improve VLE interoperability

Simon King · Status: Offline

How does this differ from the aims of JISC's LEAP 2 (and LEAP 2a)? http://wiki.cetis.ac.uk/LEAP_2.0

DifferentGravy · Status: Offline

..and how does it differ/replace/adopt... SCORM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharable_Content_Object_Reference_Model) or SIF(http://www.sifinfo.org/us/index.asp)

Crispin Weston · Status: Offline

Hi Simon and DifferentGravy,

Thanks for these questions. The general answer is that there is not a single interoperability silver bullet, but many different interlocking requirements. It is very important not to fragment standards by duplicating functionality which is already out there, but to complement them in an modular framework.

Re. Leap2A, this is an e-portfolio spec. I happen to have spent yesterday morning with Simon Grant, the champion of Leap2A, working out a conceptual framework for competency definitions with traffic cones and string at the JISC conference in Birmingham. But this is a digression because competency definitions (which both Simon and I have also been discussing at ISO) are yet another piece in the jigsaw.

Leap2A / e-portfolio is about organising learner product (i.e. things the learner has produced) and other bits of evidence of learner achievement, cross-referencing this with reflective comments, targets, validation by assessors and measures of student competency (e.g. certificates). Different people have different takes on the relative emphasis which should be placed on portfolios for learning and portfolios for assessment etc.

The content packaging spec that we are working on is about packaging up learning "content" - which I would define broadly as the inputs for learning, including applications and tools, rather than the outputs of learning. Of course there are overlaps because one person's outputs could be recycled as the next person's inputs and packaged creative tools could well be the things that produce the artefacts that go onto the portfolio.

I am keen that SALTIS should bring either Leap2A or a profile of Leap2A into an overall framework of standards for schools - but this needs to be done on the back on the content packaging work we are doing now. Simon has come to SALTIS meetings in the past and I shall be at Simon's next Leap2A workshop on 23rd Nov.

SIF covers another different but complementary area, managing the circulation of administrative data about the student. Generally, it is the MIS system that is a key player in the SIF system. My two concerns about SIF are (1) that it has taken so long to get off the ground, and (2) that it has been represented as *the* solution to school interoperability - when in fact it is just one fairly small part of the interoperability solution required for schools.

I do not see any direct overlaps between SIF and the content packaging work, except that VLEs (which are the managers of learning content) also need to read student grouping data from the MIS - and this still cannot be done reliably in many places in the country. When e-portfolio gets off the ground, I would expect that much high-level e-portfolio data could be passed around using SIF.

Our work is heavily based on SCORM. There are some issues with SCORM. (1) it is not the only content packaging spec in the space, IMS having brought out Common Cartridge, so publishers and VLEs don't know which spec to use; (2) there are some aspects of SCORM, notably its sequencing model, which have never really worked in the sense of delivering interoperability, and there are other aspects of SCORM which are looking a bit long in the tooth; (3) there is not an adequate conformance regime so that many people say that they implement SCORM when they only implement a very small piece of SCORM - this gives SCORM a bad name, and (4) having come from a military training background, SCORM does not cover some of the creative and social pedagogies which are so important in schools.

So SALTIS is working with ADL (again, I was talking all this through with their technical people yesterday) and with IMS (ditto on Monday) so that we can aim for something that is convergent, that fulfills the pedagogical requirements of teachers, and works.

If you are able to come along to the webinar tomorrow, we can discuss further. And let me know if you are interested in coming to the meeting next Tuesday 17th Nov.

Crispin.

Simon King · Status: Offline

Crispin,

having now read the SALTIS strategy doc, it's now quite a bit clearer (I recommend that everyone reads this doc before posting comments here - unlike myself!).

I really do like how the doc uses some very simple diagrams to make some of the technical relationships clear to a relatively non-technical person such as myself and I would like to congratulate the authors on the piece "Imagining an interoperable future". This is the first time I've seen a non-technical vision for interoperability and should help generate a lot of excitement and enthusiasm for interoperability - if you can get it out to the relevant people.

It's unfortunate that it's buried on page 19 as (I believe) this vision should be driving all the technical work and therefore be at the beginning of the document. This would also have the benefit of 'helping' non-technical people to work through the rest of the document. As a reasonably experienced project manager I know the benefit of keeping the non-technical vision very much visible in order to make sure the project doesn't veer off-course, which is a very present threat especially in projects such as these.

Mind you, it's a gripe that's easily remedied!

I look forward to the webinar this afternoon.

Thanks

Simon

Crispin Weston · Status: Offline

Hi Simon,

Thanks very much for these comments. I have 1000 copies of the document still around somewhere - and am very happy to distribute these free to the right people. So if you have any ideas for getting this message out, do let me know.

As for the "Imagining an interoperable future", the kudos is due to Ray Tolley who suggested the need for this section, which was not in the first draft at all. As you say, the text of this section could be reused online in some way, either by SALTIS or by others.

I look forward to seeing you at the webinar this afternoon.

Best, Crispin.