LongTerm Retention

1
Long-Term Retention Reuse of E-Learning Objects
and Materials

• Dr Roger Rist
• Director ICBL
• Heriot-Watt University
• Edinburgh

2
Team of ICBL and AHDS

• Institute for Computer Based Learning
• Roger Rist
• Ed Barker
• Colin Milligan
• Arts and Humanities Data Service
• Hamish James
• Gareth Knight
• Malcolm Polfreman

3
JISC Requirement

• The Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC)
  commissioned this study on long-term retention
  and re-use for e-Learning Objects and Materials.
• Part of the implementation of the JISC Continuing
  Access and Digital Preservation Strategy 2002-5
  and its support for e-learning programmes.

4
ICT for Learning

• There is growing recognition that Information and
  Communications Technology (ICT) has a
  considerable amount to offer as a tool to support
  many areas of learning and teaching from its
  administration, through to face-to-face or remote
  delivery.

5
E-Learning

• The perceived potential of ICT to help colleges
  and universities address the challenges presented
  by increased student numbers, new student
  demographics and widening participation has
  brought the concept of E-Learning to the fore.

6
Still in early stages

• E-Learning is at an early phase of evolution and
  current research and  development is focussed on
  the creation of materials and implementation and
  inter-operability of current systems.

7
Study Aims

• Complementary to JORUM
• Focusing on
• Creation and use of useful e-learning materials
• Infrastructure for long-term management of
  e-learning materials
• Digital preservation issues with e-learning
  materials

8
Intended Audience

• Study on three major levels
• Findings and recommendations for three
  constituencies
• JISC as a central agency within UK HE/FE
• Individual HE/FE institutions
• Individual teachers and staff

9
Creation and Reuse

• Why no large banks of E-Learning resources?
• New and experimental a lot of hype, plus some
  substance
• Development has been driven by technology, not
  pedagogy
• Technology itself is evolving
• E-Learning is not yet commonly accepted by FE
  HE staff
• Still the domain of a small number of early
  adopters

10
History

• Since 1990 many Learning Technology initiatives
  e.g. CTI, TLTP, Use of MANs, 5/99, ...
• Little evidence that outputs of UK projects have
  been retained and reused on a significant level
  to date

11
Some Long-Lived Projects

• Developed with clear short term advantages
• SCRAN, COLEG, EUROMET
• What these projects have in common
• Focus on distinct market areas
• Responsive to end users
• Clear and specific aims about what sort of
  materials they are accepting/producing
• Emphasis on quality and evaluation of outputs
• Avoid reliance on external websites or other
  resources

12
Long-Term Implications

• Custodianship
• Coherent funding strategies
• Who assesses quality, how is quality assessed
• Maintaining pedagogical relevance
• Other sustainability and preservation activities

13
Current Developments

• Focus is on development of interoperable
  repository infrastructure to support e-learning
• Development of standards for E-Learning
• Repository Projects are being set up HLSI,
  JORUM, institutional repositories, NLN etc
• VLE use is increasing
• Repositories to manage learning objects

14
A Learning Object is

• an aggregation of one or more digital assets
  incorporating metadata which constitute an
  educationally meaningful stand-alone unit,
  Dalziel
• Defined here as any resource that can be used to
  facilitate learning and teaching and has been
  described using metadata, JORUM

15
E-Learning Objects

• are Learning Objects comprised of digital
  resources
• Reusability the aim to reduce duplication of
  effort and improve quality

16
Factors Affecting Reusability

• Granularity
• Technical dependency
• Content dependency

17
Granularity

• If a LO is too large or conceptually complex it
  may be difficult to reuse in different contexts.

18
Technical and Content dependency

• Technical dependency is the LO technically
  dependent on other resources? E.g. HTML linked
  in a linear navigation sequence, interactive
  content with server side scripts.
• Content dependency does the content of the LO
  reference other related, but external, resources?
  E.g. a glossary or the next module in a sequence.

19
-abilities

• Interoperability
• Re-usability
• Manageability
• Accessibility
• Durability
• Scalability
• Affordability

20
Technical Considerations

• Learning objects may contain any type of content
• Wide range of preservation problems, and
  potential solutions
• Need more connections between digital
  preservation work and e-learning work

21
Repositories and Learning Objects

• Facilitate movement of resources
• Allow cross searching
• Support long term retention of materials,
  packaged as learning objects
• Be able to cater for the varying different end
  user groups in FE and HE
• Interoperability with institutional VLE

22
Model
23
Key Elements

• E-Learning coordination
• Institutions
• National/regional/consortia?
• Multiple implementations
• National archival repository
• Institutional other types of repository

24
Current Work

• IPR
• Pedagogy for e-learning
• Social and practical issues
• May be implemented through metadata attached to
  e-learning objects

25
IPR

• Institutions recognise value of learning
  materials and will want to control access
• Individuals want rewards
• Need to allow for variety of IPR scenarios e.g.
  sharing, buying etc
• Need clarity and simplicity for end user
• Needs to be considered at creation and publishing
  phase
• Needs to be retained in the long term

26
Pedagogy

• Learning Object Theory
• Granularity, disaggregation/ reaggregation
• Brick and Mortar analogy
• Dangerous to enforce pedagogy
• Experimentation necessary for different purposes
  (especially for face to face teaching)

27
Future Quality Assurance

• Users want quality assurance
• A publishing process is needed
• Peer review
• Establishment of rights
• Standardised quality mark?

28
Summary of Requirements

• Creation of E-Learning objects needs to be
  focussed on requirements of end-users
• Encourage uptake of E-Learning objects
• Plan and build a sustainable infrastructure for
  discovery, delivery and management of E-Learning
  objects

29
Recommendations End Users

• More awareness of the limitations of e-learning
  resources and this may mean large-scale end-user
  studies that start from a non-technical
  perspective before looking at how technology can
  help.
• Work has been done into looking at reusing
  resources for distance learning by the Open
  University.
• Research still needed into the practicalities of
  reusing learning materials in Face-To-Face
  situations.

30
Recommendations Uptake

• Studies into how end users make use of existing
  e-learning objects
• Efficient methods of resource discovery must be
  established
• Development and promotion of portals
• Adoption of standards for descriptive metadata
• Improved communication between end-users and
  resource creators.

31
Recommendations Infrastructure

• Greater communication between e-learning
  activities and digital preservation activities.
• Support for a distributed network of repositories.

32
Contact

• Dr Roger Rist
• Institute for Computer Based Learning
• Heriot-Watt University
• roger_at_icbl.hw.ac.uk
• Report on JISC website www.jisc.ac.uk/index.cfm?
  nameprogramme_preservation