RE: [dita-learningspec] Strawman proposals for a top-level DITA design for learning content

Greetings,

 

I've 
been trying to discover constructs other than Gagne that could help entice 
the adoption of a top-level design model. One discovery I am reminded 
of going back to my graduate school daze is the distinction between 
"instruction" and "learning". Gagne is clearly oriented toward instruction. As 
is the Dick and Carey Model. See:

 

http://www.umich.edu/~ed626/Dick_Carey/dc.html

 

After 
much reading, ...reviewing the strawman, past minutes and past emails, I am 
beginning to question if certain references to the word "learning" 
best represents our design goals. This is why: Learning, I would suggest, really 
applies to propositions that account for how changes in human performance 
come about. Instruction describes conditions and objects that can be 
intentionally arranged for the learning to take place. Sprinkling 
guidance throughout content is an act of instruction, not learning. If DITA is 
seeking to offer a model on how to weave topics together, we are seeking a 
solution on the instructional spectrum, not the learning spectrum. 

 

Maybe 
its too fine a point, but I wonder if our top-level design should be for 
instructional content, rather than learning content. I feel more 
comfortable and at ease with designing for instructional objects than for 
learning objects. Instructional objects speaks more to its origins in systems 
theory. Educators design instruction, not learning (they hope for learning). The 
instructional design caters to learning styles.

 

The 
RLO model seems to be based on instruction, not necessarily on 
learning theory.

 

Just 
musing.

 

Wayne

 

 

From:  
[mailto:] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 
14:14
To: 
Subject: 
[dita-learningspec] Strawman proposals for a top-level DITA design for learning 
content 

Hello DITA learning content 
SC, 

Our review of structured designs 
for learning and how to apply them to DITA principles and best practices has 
generated good discussion and input from all of you. 

My sense is that after two months of good discussion and 
review, we've come to a point where we can confirm some general directions and 
identify the action steps needed to get to our Task 2 goal - "developing a plan 
for a DITA specialization for learning content, including the learning types, 
map domains, content domains, and processing support needed to support the 
design." 

To that end,  below 
are a series of proposals and related action items for our consideration, 
discussion, and action at the Thursday, 26 Oct 2007 meeting. 

Thanks. 

John Hunt
WPLC Education Development
Chair, OASIS 
DITA learning and training content sub-committee
IBM Software Group/Lotus 
Software

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Strawman proposals for a top-level DITA design 
for learning content 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Proposal 1. Adopt a top-level design for DITA 
topic-based learning content that is based on the Cisco/Clark learning objects 
approach, augmented by the IEEE Learning Objects Metadata (specifically the 
Learning Resource Types) and SCORM Sharable Content Objects. 

Working assumptions: 

  
A learning object comprises a set of 
  self-contained content that supports a single learning objective. 
  
A learning object consists of a) 
  instructional objects, which provide the structured framework for learning, 
  and b) information objects, which provide the learning content. 
  
DITA topics provide the basic building blocks 
  for learning objects. 
  
Specialized DITA topic types can define the 
  specific types of content needed for the instructional and information objects 
  that comprise a learning object.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Proposal 2. The specialized DITA topic types 
described below comprise the minimum set needed to support a learning 
object.
a) These topic types provide the content needed for Instructional 
objects: 

  
Learning Overview 
  
Learning Summary 
  
Learning Practice 
  
Learning Exercise 
  
Learning Assessment

b) A single topic type hosts Information 
objects: 

  
Learning Content

c) Learning Content topics allow for direct nesting 
of core DITA task, concept, and reference topics, in addition to other 
supporting topic content. 

d) Action item: Identify and define any additional topic types 
needed to support instructional or information content for learning, using as a 
starting point the Learning Resource Types identified in the IEEE LOM spec 
(Section 5.4.5.2). 

e) Action item: 
Identify specific requirements for the Assessment type. (See related Proposal 
6.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Proposal 3: Develop a DITA map domain to define 
a set of specialized DITA topicref elements, structured and sequenced to 
represent the specific topic types used for a learning object. 

Using a 
map domain for defining the structure of a learning object makes it possible to 
use this map domain in other DITA maps. For example, you could include a 
learning map inside a default DITA map, a specialized DITA bookmap, or some 
other specialized DITA 
map.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Proposal 4. Use a specialized DITA map type to 
define the organization of learning objects into higher-level structures, such 
as lessons, modules, and courses. 

Action Item: Identify the specific structures and 
metadata we need to support in a learning map type. 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Proposal 5. Prioritize SCORM as our primary 
processing and delivery target. 

a) Action Item: Identify and prioritize 
secondary targets, such as general e-learning or classroom-based 
training. 
b) Action Item: Identify the 
specific sub-sets of SCORM to support for a phase 1 pilot. 

c) Action Item: Identify the specific 
sub-sets of SCORM sequencing and navigation to support for a phase 1 
pilot. 
d) Action 
Item: Identify the specific sub-sets of IEEE LOM (learning metadata) to support 
for a phase 1 pilot. 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Proposal 6: Adopt a sub-set of QTI to drive 
assessments and interactions, and implement them as a DITA domain 
specialization. 

a) Action Item: Identify the specific sub-set of QTI to support 
for a phase 1 pilot. 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Action Item: Identify pilot content, starting 
with training content on how to use DITA (or some aspect of it), and identify 
one or two other sets of training content to pilot. 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

References 

  
Learning Objects Information 
  Types
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita-learningspec/200610/msg00001.html 
  
Recyling Knowledge with Learning 
  Objects
http://www.clarktraining.com/content/articles/LearningObjects.pdf 
  
Paul Barley's Term Comparison 
  Spreadsheet
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita-learningspec/200609/msg00009.html 
  
A DITA specialization design for 
  learning
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-dita9a/ 
  
Design patterns for information architecture 
  with DITA map 
  domains
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-dita7/