An alternate classification of ld authoring approaches
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 13

An alternate classification of LD authoring approaches PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 72 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

An alternate classification of LD authoring approaches. Bottom-up and Top-down. TENCompetence Workshop, Barcelona Tim Sodhi, Yongwu Miao, Francis Brouns, Rob Koper. Outline. Introduction Existing classification Alternate classification Bottom-up Top-down

Download Presentation

An alternate classification of LD authoring approaches

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


An alternate classification of ld authoring approaches

An alternate classification of LD authoring approaches

Bottom-up and Top-down

TENCompetence Workshop, Barcelona

Tim Sodhi, Yongwu Miao, Francis Brouns, Rob Koper


Outline

Outline

  • Introduction

  • Existing classification

  • Alternate classification

  • Bottom-up

  • Top-down

  • Salient features of the approaches

  • Conclusions and discussion


Introduction

Introduction

  • Today‘s LD tools too complex for non-experts

  • No concept of support with

    • Learning Design rules

    • Specification formalisms and constructs

    • Modeling based on educational scenarios

  • Need for authoring tools for non-experts in spec.

    • Domain specific knowledge of their fields

    • No knowledge of the specification

    • Relatively low IT Skills


Existing classification

Existing Classification

  • (Griffiths et al., 2005)

    • General Purpose vs. Specific Purpose

    • Those targeted at experts, vs those at novices

  • Does not take into account how design actually takes place

  • Does not classify tools on the basis of support offered

  • Large corpus of tools that belong to either classification


An alternate classification

An Alternate Classification

  • Classification based on

    • how authors approach the design task

    • Guidance and support afforded by the tool

  • We classify these approaches as

    • Bottom-up

    • Top-down


Bottom up approach

Bottom-up Approach

  • Emphasis on emergence of design from lower level details

    • Does not emphasize on the type of learning to be modeled

    • For instance for IMS LD

    • Relies on the author being fully cognizant of underlying pedagogies

    • Design activity is relegated to mere editing UoLs

  • Support offered is minimal

    • At most with the specification constructs.

    • No higher level support


Bottom up approach contd

Bottom-up Approach (contd.)

  • Potential users

    • Authors with considerable design experience

    • Authors with clear idea at the inception about the design


Top down approach

Top-down approach

  • Emphasis on elicitation and selection of learning scenario, and guidance based on that.

    • Provision of learning design rules (Koper, 2005)

    • Choice from among educational scenarios encapsulating sound educational principles and learning theories

    • Flexible modeling order, starting point of design

    • With regard to IMS LD

  • Support offered throughout the design process

    • Targetted support with design rules

    • Context sensitive support & support with specification


Top down approach contd

Top-down approach (contd)

  • Potential users

    • Non-experts in the specification

    • Non-experts in learning theories

    • High IT skills not a requisite


Salient features of the approaches

Salient features of the approaches

  • Scenario-based modeling

    • Underlying learning design theories taken into consideration?

  • Inception of the design activiy

    • Where does the activity start – blank learning design or tweaking existing designs, etc

  • Support and guidance during the design phase

    • What kind of support is provided to the non-expert

      • Specification constructs and formalisms

      • Learning design rules, etc


Salient features contd

Salient Features (contd)

  • Proximity to the IMS LD specification

    • Close to the specification in metaphors and structure?

  • Authoring approach followed

    • Overall learning design to lower level details, or vice versa?


Conclusion discussion

Conclusion & Discussion

  • An alternate classification presented

  • Views creation of UoLs as a conglomeration of processes

  • Basis for evaluation to clearly demarcate today‘s IMS LD authoring tools on the basis of their suitability for non-experts

  • Inform the development of a new generation of IMS LD authoring tools


Questions

Questions?


  • Login