© copyright 2006 ims/glc all rights reserved. page 1 ims collaboration with industry allyn j...
TRANSCRIPT
Page 1© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
IMS Collaboration with Industry
Allyn J RadfordIMS Global Learning Consortium
Page 2© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
IMS’s Enduring Purpose
•Innovation•Adoption•Learning
Page 3© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
The IMS Global Mission• In Service to the Community of
Organizations and Individuals Enhancing Learning Worldwide
• IMS/GLC is a Global, Nonprofit, Member Organization that
• Provides Leadership in Shaping and Growing the Learning Industry
• through Community Development of Standards,
• Promotion of High Impact Innovation,
• and Research Into Best Practices
Page 4© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
IMS Members• Greater than 75 members and
subscribers
• 28 new or upgraded members/subscribers in last 8 months
• The true leaders in the education and learning vertical markets worldwide
• Three tiers of members/subscribers– Contributing members (CMs)
– Developer’s network subscribers (DNs)
– Learning industry leaders forum (LILFs)
Page 5© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
IMS/GLC
• Yesterday– Established– Working groups and specifications
• Today– Re-invigoration, rejuvenation and growth
• Tomorrow– Understanding the “Road maps”– eFramework applied to the broader IMS context– Strategic fit for initiatives is important– Membership diversity is important
Page 6© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
IMS Specifications and Outputs
• Accessibility• Competency Definitions• Content Packaging • Digital Repositories • Enterprise• Enterprise Services• ePortfolio• General Web Services• Learner Information• Learning Design
• Meta-data (LOM)• Question and Test• Interoperability• Resource List• Interoperability• Shareable State Persisten
ce• Simple Sequencing• Tools Interoperability• Vocabulary Definition
Exchange • Plus other outputs…
Page 7© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
Collaborative Researchin Best Practices
• Online Learning• Open Source• Digital Content• Vendor Satisfaction
Page 8© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
How We Do It• Focus on high impact challenges
• Attract critical mass of key participants
• Define and manage end-to-end projects that support innovation and market needs
• Integrate and coordinate with existing and other standards work (cross fertilisation)
• Provide full cradle to grave lifecycle support
• Facilitate multiple types of participation
Page 9© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
IMS Activities
• Specification workgroups
• Maintenance - (bug reporting through to new work)
• Collaboration with ADL, IEEE, OUNL, AICC, JISC etc
• Demonstrators (Alt-i-labs - proof of the pudding)
• Learning Impact 2007 – towards maturity
– From prototypes to reality
– Evaluation of innovation (impact)
Page 10© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
InstitutionalLeaders inLearning
Page 11© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
LearningSoftware
and SystemsLeaders
Page 12© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
Publishing, Assessment,and Repository
Industry Leaders
Page 13© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
Rich Mediaand Collaborative
Learning ToolsSoftware
Page 14© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
Enterprise Software,Systems, and
Services Leaders
Page 15© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
Global GovernmentOrganizations& Associations
Page 16© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
Active IMS Work Groups• Common Cartridge - Announcements!• Accessibility & Personalization• Interactive Learning Environments & Rich
Media (formerly Tools Interoperability)• Question & Test Interoperability• Enterprise – (restarting)• Service Oriented Architecture for
Education• eFramework• Federated Architecture (New)• Content Packaging (Concluding)
Page 17© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
eFramework & IMS – (WIP)
IMS SOA modeling of IMS Enterprise
specificationsJISC & DEST eFramework
IBM and other IMS member business process modeling and middleware
platformsHigh value cross-
enterprise services identification by IMS
members
Education SOA open standards and reference
implementationsDemonstration
projects(e.g. Rice) Education SOA
best practice guidelines
= IMS Activity
Page 18© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
Value of Industry Collaboration
• Why work with vendors?– Personal relationships, trust and similar perspectives
– Vendor demonstrates good citizenship in the standards space
– SOA and eFramework needs real world focus and requirements to provide realistic and useful outcomes to inform specn work
– The eFramework encourages a business analysis of the services requirements and then using existing standards
– Early point of influence
– Shared cost
eFramework not interested in how you do the business analysis or the tools to do it
IBM not interested in re-inventing the wheel.
Synergy:
Page 19© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
Implications for eFramework in IMS
• Right mix of industry collaboration
• Situating the new work within the IMS scope of activities
• Clarification of interrelationships and needs
• Perspectives of higher education, mixed with private enterprise, vendors and other stakeholders
Page 20© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
… and here’s one we prepared earlier
Page 21© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
About Common Cartridge• Leading providers of digital content products,
learning systems, and services will be introducing Common Cartridge compatible products in the coming year
• Support from 35 education industry leaders, including– Publishing Industry: Digital Spirit, Elsevier, GTCO
Calcomp, Harcourt, Houghton Mifflin Company, Lason, LearningMate, McGraw-Hill, Pearson, Thomson
– Learning Platforms: ANGEL, Blackboard, Desire2Learn, eCollege, Giunti, HarvestRoad, Horizon Wimba, Moodle, Sakai, Tribal, uCompass
• Compatible products as early as Spring ‘07– Pearson, McGraw-Hill, ANGEL, Sakai
Page 22© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
What is IMS Common Cartridge?
• A digital learning interoperability standard consisting of a suite of four interoperability specifications (formats of data exchange between cooperating software applications)
– Packaging of digital content (Content Packaging)– Question and test formats (QTI)– Metadata (tagging of content with descriptive attributes)
(LOM)– Launch and data exchange with standalone learning tools -
such as adaptive tutors, assessment systems, etc. (Tools Interoperability etc)
Page 23© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
Common Cartridge v1.0
LMS
LMSDBImport
Function
Runtime
Assessment
Tools Interop
Interface
Discussion
Forum
Authorization
SCORM
Engine
XML
Rendering
CommonCartridge
CommonCartridge
Example:3rd Party AssessmentProduct
Learner
–Packaging of digital content (incl. empty packages)–Question and test formats–Metadata (tagging of content with descriptive attributes)
-Launch and data exchangewith standalone learning tools
Digital ContentAuthorization Service
Page 24© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
What is Special About the Common Cartridge Effort?
• Likely to become the most widely supported educational digital content standard ever
• Shaping and support by the educational publishers
• Collaboration between open source and commercial communities
• Potential to reduce the lock-in that many CMS/LMS users fear
• Leadership of the higher education community in learning tech standards
Page 25© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
The Media
• Click here for the Dr. Chuck Common Cartridge videohttp://www.sakaiproject.org/media2/2006/altidemo06/altidemo06.htm
• Common Cartridge Brochure and other informationhttp://www.imsglobal.org/commoncartridge.html
• Comment on Common Cartridgehttp://insidehighered.com/news/2006/10/09/cartridgehttp://chronicle.com/wiredcampus/index.php?id=1625
• The release is here in case you did not see it:http://www.imsglobal.org/pressreleases/pr061009.html
Page 26© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
Publisher Challenges
• Today: the publisher quest to produce digital products at high quality and low cost is thwarted by costs and lack of standards.
• Their challenges include:– Multiple LMS cartridge formats to support– Production/conversion workflow complexity– A large number of platform+cartridge to QA– Integrating high quality learning applications and content modules
with local LMS systems– Scaling their ability to collect revenues in a digital world
• Thesis: these are industry problems and can best be solved by cooperation of publishers.
Page 27© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
LMS Provider Challenges
• Customers are demanding open standards for content management to preserve their investments.
• The subject matter challenge: – Publishers are beginning to innovate in vertical applications for
disciplines of very high quality– These require a hosted model and thus present challenge to linkage to
local LMS instances– This problem can be most effectively solved with a common standard
too (TI) • Thesis: these are industry problems, and the LMS vendors can
assist publishers to their mutual benefit– Redirect expense from conversion to innovation– Become more relevant for their high investment applications– Allow them to invest in upper division courses– Jointly with them create the open standards customers demand.
Page 28© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
CFO/CIO/Academic Technology Director
Challenges• Make wise investments in learning platforms and content
– Best of breed– Minimize integration and support costs– Avoid lock-in
• Innovate with and support new learning tools with their own self-contained learning models and environments
• Innovate with and support multiple forms of “content”– LMS generated– Publisher digital assets– Podcasts and other new “easy to record” digital media
Page 29© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
Thus the Goals
• Goal 1: get the best content to all who desire it, independent of the brand of elearning software purchased.
• Goal 2: improve the predictability of experience in playback of content across systems
• Goal 3: drive innovation in elearning products and improve user experience
• Goal 4: focus the costs on innovation, not production, integration, or support
Page 30© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
Common Cartridge IMS Roadmap
CommonCartridgeV1
CommonCartridgeV1
In Process IMS Specification Enhancements:• Content Packaging• QTI• Tools Interoperability V2• Accessibility
Related IMS Work:• Learning Design• Enterprise Content Management• Federated Repositories• Accessibility
• Mature• Stable
Page 31© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
Upcoming IMS Events• IMS/GLC Learning Impact Webinar Series
30 October 2006 - 1pm ESTIntegrated Assessment Products and Strategies: Gauging Student Achievement and Institutional Performance http://www.imsglobal.org/webinarseries/assessment10_06.cfm
• IMS Global Learning Consortium Quarterly Meetings and Learning Design Summit 6- 9 November 2006
Open University Netherlands http://www.imsglobal.org/ldsummit2006.html
Page 32© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
It’s about Interoperability, plus…
• A note about Interoperability– Exists at different levels– What is “True Interoperability”
• Don’t forget process!– Technology is PART, but not all of the solution– Lifecycle management of content and data is a
series of processes that need to be supported by both Integration and Interoperability
Page 33© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
Getting Involved• Learning Impact nominations:
http://www.imsglobal.org/learningimpact/• Become a Contributing Member:
http://www.imsglobal.org/members.html• Become a DN or LILF subscriber:
http://www.imsglobal.org/subscribers.html• Subscribe to the public IMS community
http://www.imsglobal.org/articles/index.cfm
• Sign up for October 30 Assessment webinar http://www.imsglobal.org/webinarseries/assessment10_06.cfm
Page 34© Copyright 2006 IMS/GLCAll Rights Reserved.
IMS Public CommunityResources
• Vancouver, British Columbia, April 16-19• Stay informed:
http://www.imsglobal.org/articles/index.cfm