Open Education 2011: A case study in OER within the LMS
•Descargar como PPTX, PDF•
1 recomendación•1,790 vistas
Recomendados
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
La actualidad más candente
La actualidad más candente (20)
Similar a Open Education 2011: A case study in OER within the LMS
Similar a Open Education 2011: A case study in OER within the LMS (20)
Último
Último (20)
Open Education 2011: A case study in OER within the LMS
- 1. Open Education 2011: A case study in OER within the LMS John Rinderle @JohnRinderle Bill Jerome
- 2. OER within the LMS Why the LMS? Interoperability standards Our approach and findings Looking forward Opportunities and challenges Discussion
- 3. Open Learning Initiative Produce courses and course materials which enact instruction and support instructors Provide open access to these courses and materials Develop communities of use, research and development that enable evaluation and continuous improvement
- 4. Why the LMS? Convenient for students and instructors Single sign on Single entry point Mix and match Coherent navigation Roster management Unified gradebook Learning analytics Frequently requested by students and instructors
- 5. Why the LMS? Increasing access is part of our core mission Easier to find Metadata and search Easier to consume Learning management systems To extend the reach of OER, we must bring it to where it is needed, where it is convenient to use
- 6. Standards? Not building blocks, modules, and plugins? Too many platforms to target otherwise Moodle, Sakai, Blackboard, Desire2Learn, Canvas, … Changing technology, changing standards Are they “standards” in name only? We should not be surprised when standards work! Confidence in mature, proven technologies
- 7. Which standard to choose? OLI courses provide User profiles Persistent state Multiple assignments Scores Student work products Learning Dashboard More than a simple content package!
- 8. IMS Learning Tools Interoperability Basic LTI Tool consumer, tool provider Trust relationship with the LMS Fields to identify user, course, etc. Simple, but powerful Full LTI Grade exchange Multiple tool endpoints Much more complex
- 9. Basic LTI Available for most LMS systems Easy to develop tools Simple web request Easy to consume tools No programming required Pathway to more advanced features Extensible Low-cost implementation
- 10. Two Clicks: LMS Link
- 11. Two Clicks: Research Consent
- 12. Your Course
- 13. OLI in the LMS
- 15. Challenges: Technology Some LMS products require an extension Requires institutional level support We want individual instructors to be able to adopt Some implementations are buggy e.g. Internet Explorer on Moodle We wrote patch for basiclti4moodle Basic LTI has few required fields Required, recommended, option fields Different products supply different data
- 16. Challenges: Process/Policy Security and privacy concerns e.g. data ownership questions, security audits Audit / control which tools instructors are using Helping instructors get support from their institution
- 17. User Experience • Why is good user experience critical to adoption?
- 18. User Experience • Why is good user experience critical to adoption? • Using complex systems is easy for some, but much harder than one may expect for average users, instructors and students alike
- 19. User Experience • Why is good user experience critical to adoption? • Using complex systems is easy for some, but much harder than one may expect for average users, instructors and students alike • Instructors may not adopt a technology if it gives the appearance of complicating their lives • Setup • Workflow
- 20. User Experience • Why is good user experience critical to adoption? • Students who struggle with interfaces experience negative affect and their meta cognitive resources are not spent where we’d like for learning
- 21. Challenges: User Experience • Roster Management • No record until first student access from their LMS • Students never dropped from roster • Teaching assistants often unsupported
- 22. Challenges: User Experience • Gradebook / Learning Dashboard Tools • Grade exchange is very limited • Aiding instructors and students in locating no longer centralized scores • Access to reporting tools richer than grades
- 23. Challenges: User Experience • Login • Removed the link as it does not fully reflect user expectation • This proved unpopular
- 24. Challenges: User Experience • Bookmarking • Leads to unauthenticated visits that require redirects to LMS • Basic LTI does not support the direct back
- 25. Challenges: User Experience • Desktop Support • Who do user questions gets routed to? • OLI questions need to reach OLI help desk • LMS questions need to reach LMS help desk
- 26. Challenges: User Experience • Where do users have accounts: OLI or LMS
- 27. Challenges: User Experience • Where do users have accounts: OLI or LMS • Carnegie Mellon solution: both • Existing users solution: both • All others: LMS-only
- 28. Challenges: User Experience • Where do users have accounts: OLI or LMS • Carnegie Mellon solution: both • Existing users solution: both • All others: LMS-only • Unless you’re not using an LMS at all, then OLI only
- 29. Challenges: User Experience • Where do users have accounts: OLI or LMS • Carnegie Mellon solution: both • Existing users solution: both • All others: LMS-only • Unless you’re not using an LMS at all, then OLI only • Did you just now learn you could use your LMS but already setup your course? We can merge your accounts for you.
- 30. Challenges: User Experience • Where do users have accounts: OLI or LMS • Carnegie Mellon solution: both • Existing users solution: both • All others: LMS-only • Unless you’re not using an LMS at all, then OLI only • Did you just now learn you could use your LMS but already setup your course? We can merge your accounts for you. • …unless you have students already registered through OLI which might confuse them.
- 31. Challenges: User Experience • Where do users have accounts: OLI or LMS • Carnegie Mellon solution: both • Existing users solution: both • All others: LMS-only • Unless you’re not using an LMS at all, then OLI only • Did you just now learn you could use your LMS but already setup your course? We can merge your accounts for you. • …unless you have students already registered through OLI which might confuse them. Not easy to communicate to novice users
- 32. Challenges: User Experience Configuring / enabling tools in LMS is complex Above and beyond what an instructor should have to do Figuring out if a system is compatible is complex Which vendor, product, version are you using? Are the appropriate extensions installed and enabled? We built a test and configure your LMS page
- 34. What’s next for OLI? Configurable Entry Points Instructors customize LMS links to OLI Full LTI Report outcomes to LMS gradebook Tool Consumer Enable Basic LTI tools within OLI courses?
- 35. Looking Forward: Opportunities Learning analytics Data for continuous improvement Better user experience Anyone should be able to do it
- 36. Feedback Loops for Learning
- 37. Comprehensive View of Learning
- 38. Learning Analytics How do we get there? Standards for data Data exchange API Platforms and tools Policy for data exchange LMS interoperability and learning analytics should be automatic, not an afterthought.
- 39. Better User Experience What about a familiar model?
- 40. OER App Store Find OER from within the LMS One click access to add to course A basis for choice Evaluation, context of use information Built in communities
- 41. Why hasn’t this happened [sooner]? Publishers are now preparing offerings – Pearson OpenClass – Commercial and open content
- 42. Why hasn’t this happened [sooner]? Technology? Standards? Institutional Policy? Licensing? Data Ownership?
- 43. Why hasn’t this happened? We need platforms which makes it easy to create, share, find, use and evaluate OER The user focus needs to be on the educators and learners consuming OER
- 44. Discussion How does OER make greater inroads to the LMS? Do you agree with the app store approach? What should an OER app store offer? Does the app model extends or replace the content package? Open and “closed”, free and commercial, side by side? Next steps to make this happen?
- 45. Thank You
- 46. User Experience • ISO definition : a person's perceptions and responses that result from the use or anticipated use of a product, system or service. • Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_experience#Definitions
- 47. User Experience • ISO definition : a person's perceptions and responses that result from the use or anticipated use of a product, system or service. • Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_experience#Definitions • We incorporate usability study into the design, development, and evaluation of user experience
Notas del editor
- Increase access, improve outcomes; educate more, better.
- One URL to rememberSign in with your university credentialsAdd your own assignmentsWhy duplicate/recreate these features in every new OER environment?
- Metadata: LRMI, Dublin Core, LOM, …Increasing access is part of our core mission. Bringing OLI to the LMS lowers another barrier to adoption: ease of use, in a familiar context.Whatever your feelings about LMS systems, the LMS is the familiar information hub of a course.A key factor in OER uptake is the ability of resources to be easily accessed, combined with other course materials, and presented in an appropriate context for learning. For many instructors, the learning management system (LMS) is the information hub of their course. To extend the reach of OER we feel it is critical for resources to be made easily accessible from within the LMS. This need is greater than providing a simple link. From the LMS, OERs should be discoverable to students and instructors who want to use them, support a single sign on interface, provide coherent navigation between LMS and OER, and seamlessly exchange key data (e.g. roster, grades, learning analytics).
- Standards can now accommodate applications (tools), not just simple content packages.Differences in how vendors have implemented standards in the past.
- OER is becoming increasingly sophisticated.
- Basic LTI: REST based, OAuth authentication, simple browser form POST
- Click 1: LMS navigation, Click 2: research consent formFall 2011: pilot (60 instructors, 1500 students)Spring 2012: general availability
- Did it work as expected?Standards designed as a technology, not to serve end user needs.Current standards lean towards content publishers and institutional needs, instead of instructors and learners who consume content.
- OER is no longer under the security radar (which, in a way, is good). Even though no new information is changing hands as compared to when OLI is used outside the LMS, institutions are more concerned about information security where systems connect. An advantage of Basic LTI is that there is no direct communication between the LMS and tool (e.g. OLI). The information comes from the LMS, but is exchanged through the user’s web browser. Privacy settings allow institutions to control what data is exchanged.
- There is UX work to do for entry points. Multiple links could be confusing.Allow instructors to choose the assignments for which we send scores back to the LMS.
- The most powerful feature of technology based instruction is the ability to embed assessment in each learning activity and use the resulting data to drive powerful feedback loops to the learner, the instructor, the course development team, and learningscience.
- While today’s standards allow learning environment to report simple score outcomes to the LMS, the more robust measures of learning required to drive learning analytics remain locked up in individual tools. The result is that it is difficult to mix resources and achieve a unified view of how learning is progressing and the overall effectiveness of the learning design. We feel this is a missed opportunity. The next generation of standards and LMS systems will need to simplify the discovery and adoption of OER and facilitate finer grained data exchange.
- Ease of Development:LMS interoperability and learning analytics should be automatic
- LMS systems and OER need a renewed focus on user experience. Acknowledge the work of OLI, Sakai, and others.