1. LCMS: What is thriving the Dutch, hype or need? Jocelyn Manderveld Educational Technology Expertise Centre Open University of the Netherlands

2. Overview ­Introduction ­Definition of a LCMS ­Using a LCMS: Hype or need? ­Use of LCMS in the Netherlands ­Challenges ­Questions and discussion

3. Definition of a LCMS ­Question: How would you define a Learning Content Management System? ­Problem: Difficult to define ­My point of view LCMS’s do not exist! ­Better to speak about Content Management Systems

4. Why this perspective? Content Management Systems: ­Software for authoring, storage, use, reuse, search and management of content Content in this case ­Learning Objects (articles, questionnaire, books etc.) ­Units of learning (courses, modules, tasks) ­Assets (e.g. pictures, video, audio, simulations) ­All materials needed to create learning experiences What happened with learning?

5. What happened with Learning in CMS? ­Content in a Content Management System needs to be delivered to users ­Users in this case learners and staff ­The actual learning takes place outside de CMS ­Delivery through Virtual Learning Environments as Blackboard, WebCT, N@tschool, print, PDA’s etc

6. Overview of LCMS Authoring of contentStorage of contentDelivery of content Metadata Check in / out Repository Workflow Search, use, reuse VLE Print PDA Etc. Content ManagementLearning Thanks to Johan Vesseur

7. Using LCMS hype or need?

8. Gartner’s market perspective: ‘Hype cycle for emerging technologies’ time expectations over-enthusiasm disillusionment gradual improvement LCMS Virtual Learning Environments

9. Over-enthusiasm ­1995-2000 ­Possibilities for flexible delivery of content through internet ­Many off-the-shelf products ­Many providers ­Less focus on business cases, what do we really need????? ­Institutes start to implement VLE’s

10. Disillusionment ­2000-2002 ­Many implementations, every institute of education uses own VLE ­Getting a clearer picture, on what we want ­Developing a lot of content, which can not be adequately managed ­Need for use, reuse of content between different institutes and VLE’s ­Need for standards

11. Gradual improvement ­2002-2003 ­Institutes for higher education notice, that they have the same problems, start working together eg Digital University of the Netherlands ­VLE’s start tackling the problems with content management ­Several (L)CMS available on the market ­Integration of VLE’s with CMS ­Several learning technology specifications and standards

12. Use of LCMS in the Netherlands ­Clearly a need for LCMS in the Netherlands ­Within Digital University pilots with LCMS Important questions: ­What are technical possibilities of LCMS? ­How can a LCMS communicate with VLE’s as Blackboard, N@tschool? ­Testing Learn eXact ­HIVE (Harvest Road) ­Other institutes for higher education start to implement own solutions, technologies e.g. WebPlatform by University of Groningen

13. Use of LCMS in the Netherlands ­Other institutes focus on development of learning technology specifications e.g. Educational Modelling Language, IMS Learning Design by the Open University of the Netherlands ­Other institutes are developing content together

14. How do we prevent disillusion? time expectations LCMS ?

15. Challenges VLE’sCMSAuthoring

16. Challenges ­Important role for learning technology specifications ­Metadata for searching in CMS ­Content Packaging for importing content into VLE’s ­QTI for developing assessment items ­LD for developing units of learning ­LIP recording student information

17. Where specs fit in an architecture VLE Learner Record - Transcript - PDR Learning Development - Curriculum - Courses - Modules Course Catalogue Student Record System Enrolments ISO Collaborative Learning Learning Design SCORM, Simple Sequencing QTI Results Enterprise HTML, XHTML, XML PNG, SVG, SMIL JPEG, MPEG Digital Repositories Metadata Content Packaging QTI Outcomes LIP Transcript LIP Search & Retrieve Content Packaging Content Authoring Test Authoring Learning Activity Design Content Packaging Metadata Tagging Content Management / Digital Repository Publish Learning Design SCORM, Simple Sequencing Learning Set-up Learning Activities Results Search & Retrieve Co- ordination Content/ Sequencing Collaboration Assessment Thanks to Bill Olivier

18. Challenges ­Not all specifications are implemented in VLE”s ­Or parts of specifications are implemented ­If we really want to have the benefit of a LCMS, to use, reuse, share content between VLE’s and institutes, VLE”s must implement the specifications ­Remember: IMS Compliancy does not say enough!

19. Dealing with these challenges ­Convince VLE and LCMS that we need a full adoption of specifications or ­Developing ‘open source’ tools which implement the specifications

20. International initiatives ­Tooling ­ALFANET: European project building an open source LD engine ­RELOAD project (Reusable E-learning Object Authoring and Delivery): Building open source SCORM player, IMS LD editor, open source IMS CP ­TOIA project (Technologies for Online Interoperable Assessments): Building tools for using and implementing QTI ­ALOHA: University of Alberta, online digital repositories, Building an IMS LD implementation ­SPLASH: open source peer to peer content management ­LAMS: Learning Management Activity System: EML inspired authoring environment and player ­Edutella: University of Hanover: open source peer to peer metadata sharing ­Etc…….

21. Dutch keen on participating in international initiatives ­YES, we must work together to meet the challenges ­These are not typical Dutch challenges

22. Questions and discussion Thank you! jocelyn.manderveld@ou.nl