Using IMS Learning Design Tools in UK Higher Education

Mark Barrett-Baxendale

Liverpool Hope University, UK

Background

• Using IMS Learning Design (IMS LD) tools in a real Higher Education context

• Tutors drawing up and using IMS LD with support

Learner

TutorPublishes designs

Runsdesigns

Discovers/sharesdesigns

SLeD Interface

Learning Design repository (OpenDocument.net)

A Learning Design System

Reload Editor

Creates/modifies designs

Learning Design server (CopperCore/SLeD)

The Learning Designs

• Level B• Used properties to control progress e.g.

– Tutor monitors activities and allows to progress– File upload triggers progression

• Group work• QTI• Granularity of UoLs was an issue

– Flexibility– Global properties used to link UoLs

• (e.g. can’t start week 3 until completed week 2)

The authoring process

• Tutors attend an authoring workshop• Subsequently author designs to IMS LD

level A using Reload– Some support

• Designs authored to level B (properties & conditions) using Reload

Case: Mythologies of Loss

• English tutor at Liverpool Hope University (LHU) • Supported in drawing up an IMS LD unit of

learning (UoL) • Using the Reload IMS LD editor • UoL supports a six-week topic: “Mythologies of

Loss” within a second year HE module “Twentieth-Century Readings”– Run using SLeD/Coppercore

Demonstration: authoring

Authoring to level B

• Reload well suited to tasks• Collaborative authoring

was a problem– Reference clashes - used

XML editor - time consuming

• Viewing/setting properties- producing form in XML– “form builder” within editor

would have been useful

• Scripting (conditions) was easier in XML editor

Tutor experience

• “The advantage [of LD] is that both the tutor and the student can see an overview of the route through the course” Sebastian Groes, English Tutor

• “… the most pedagogical sound method I have used …” - Amanda Oddie, Computer Science tutor

• “I like the way we can structure the learning so that students have to respond to feedback before progressing” – Chris Beaumont, Computer Science tutor

Running with students

• UoL published to the SLeD/Coppercore IMS LD player

• Running on a server at LHU

• Made available to learners attending the tutor’s module.

Demonstration: running

Learner experience

• Generally positive about:– Guidance offered – Ease of navigation – Ease of use– Usefulness

Learner experience

• “SLeD much better than [the institutional VLE], but would be even better if there was a forum”

• “I have contributed to discussions set by the lecturer and was able to download readings for class, after some difficulty at first”

Developing the tools

• JISC LD4P (Liverpool Hope University, University of Bolton)– New user interface for the Reload IMS LD editor.

• JISC D4LD (UK OU)– Improving IMS LD runtime for institutional use

• JISC DesignShare (Liverpool Hope University, University of Bolton)– Sharing, discovery & re-use of IMS LD

D4LD project (run-time)

SLeD/Coppercore

DesignShare project (discovery and sharing)

OpenDocument.net

LD4P project (authoring)

Reload

The Valkenburg architecture

Specifying environments (e.g. learning objects, services)

Setting up properties andconditions

Reload interface

Improved administration

• Users• Runs• Roles• Groups

DesignShare plug-in

Sharing

Summary

• Need more usable authoring tools for experts• Non-experts need to use these tools with less

support.– Maybe through simpler tools such as LAMS– Need to be able to make use of more sophisticated

tools when they need them

• Need (more) services– Widget server

• Need more flexible tools- especially when running courses