Author-Defined Storage in the Next Generation Learning Management Systems

One of the current trends in E-learning is the development of student-activating learning material. In four research projects aiming at the design of high quality learning material, a large body of student-activating learning material is being developed. During the development of this learning material, the limitations of the current generation learning management systems became obvious. The forthcoming SCORM 1.3 standard will resolve some of these limitations, but we have identified six additional functional requirements. The learning management system should enable adaptivity, the retrieval of history and state, comparison of results, tracking for pedagogical research, shared reference databases, and problem scenario databases. Each requirement will be illustrated with examples from learning material developed in one of the research projects. Also an overview is given of temporary workarounds we have developed to deploy this learning material in the current generation of learning management systems. However, we argue that future learning management systems with an author-defined storage facility will satisfy all six requirements. Introduction One of the current trends in E-learning is the development of student-activating learning material. In the Food and Biotechnology (FBT) program at Wageningen University, a large body of digital learning material is being developed. Most courses are supported by simple static objects, but in four research projects more advanced learning material is being developed [7]. One of the results of these projects is the articulation of new requirements for a next generation of learning objects as well as learning management systems. These projects aim to exploit the pedagogical possibilities of digital learning material, resulting in the development of activating learning material [2]. This learning material has been used for the last years and is appreciated both by students and lecturers [4][5][6]. Most of the student-activating learning objects, developed in these four research projects, process data, and these data are often related to a user action (e.g. a mouse click in a specific region or text submitted in a form). We will call these objects active objects. One of the results of these research projects is a highly increased awareness of the limitations of the current generation learning management systems (LMSs). Future learning management systems are likely to implement the forthcoming SCORM 1.3 specification with the Simple Sequencing Specification from IMS [1]. Once learning management systems support SCORM 1.3, some of the most pressing shortcomings will be resolved, but six Sessink ODT, Beeftink HH, Tramper J, Hartog RJM (2003) Author-Defined Storage in the Next Generation Learning Management Systems. Proceedings of the Third IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), 2003, pp. 57-61 requirements will remain. The LMS should enable adaptivity, retrieval of history and state, comparison of results, tracking for pedagogical research, a shared reference database, and a problem scenario database. This paper will give an overview of these requirements, and why each of the requirements is neither met by the current generation LMSs nor by the SCORM 1.3 standard. Each requirement will be illustrated with examples from learning material developed in one of the research projects. Next, the paper will give an overview of workarounds we have developed to deploy this learning material in the current generation of learning management systems. Finally, the paper will describe a single solution for all requirements, the author-defined storage. This is a database where the data structure is to be defined by the author. We will argue that future standards should include this feature to overcome the mentioned problems when deploying advanced learning material.