1. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 1 IEEE LTSC (P1484) Learning Technology Standards Committee Work Program and Process, 1999-12 Plenary http://ltsc.ieee.org (Note: This presentation is regularly updated and presented at each quarterly plenary meeting of the LTSC — The intended audience is the participants of the LTSC) Frank Farance, LTSC Vice Chair +1 212 486 4700, frank@farance.com Edutool.Com, a division of Farance Inc.

2. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 2 Overview Standards Process Overview IEEE LTSC (P1484) and other organizations Applying/using LTSC standards in learning technology systems Summary of LTSC working/study groups –Extended presentations for 1484.1, 1484.2, 1484.6, 1484.11, 1484.12, 1484.14, 1484.17 Contact information Future meeting schedule

3. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 3 IEEE LTSC (P1484) Learning Technology Standards Committee Formed in 1996-09; currently 20 working groups Chair: Jim Schoening, US Army (CECOM)Jim Schoening Vice-Chair: Frank Farance, Edutool.ComFrank Farance IEEE: accredited standards development org. LTSC is part of IEEE Computer Society: >100,000 members Sponsor Executive Committee (SEC) is comprised of all WG chairs, makes decisions for LTSC

4. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 4 IEEE is an Accredited Standards Development Organization The Standards Process Accreditation affords consistent process Committees don’t reinvent wheel Choosing a “process” can take years itself Accredited process is well- tested and “off the shelf” Development Consensus Building MaintenanceReview

5. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 5 Standards vs. Specifications [2/3] Standards: –developed by accredited standards bodies Features: –Open forum –Due process, fairness –Specification development and maintenance –Membership for: individuals non-profit small/medium enterprises (SMEs) large companies –Voluntary standards vs. involuntary standards –Treaty organization vs. non-treaty organization

6. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 6 Standards vs. Specifications [3/3] Specifications: –developed by non-accredited organizations Features: –Membership: open or closed? –Due process: fair conflict resolution methods? –Specifications, reference models, conformance tests, branding, products, etc. –May/may not operate like standards body Both specifications and standards are useful Collectively: standards and specification development organizations (SSDOs)

7. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 7 Goals of Standards Process Standards that are well-defined: –Consistent implementations, high interoperability –Coherent functionality Commercial viability: –Standards allow range of implementations –Commercial products are possible: All conforming products interoperate, yet... Different “bells and whistles” Consumer can choose from range of conforming systems Wide acceptance and adoption Few bugs: –Consistent requests for interpretation (RFIs) –Low number of defect reports (DRs)

8. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 8 Standards are Developed In Working Groups Developing Standards Source: “from scratch” or “base documents” Create “standards wording” (normative and informative), rationale for decisions Technical committee: in- person or electronic collaboration Development

9. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 9 The Working/Study Groups of IEEE LTSC General Activities 1484.1 Architecture and Reference Model 1484.3 Glossary Learner-Related Activities 1484.2 Learner Model 1484.4 Task Model 1484.13 Student Identifiers 1484.5 User Interfaces 1484.19 Quality System for Life-Long Learning 1484.20 Competency Definitions Content-Related Activities 1484.10 CBT Data Interchange 1484.6 Course Sequencing 1484.17 Content Packaging Data and Metadata 1484.12 Learning Objects Metadata 1484.9 Localization 1484.14 Semantics and Exchange Bindings 1484.15 Data Interchange Protocols 1484.16 HTTP Bindings Mgmt. Systems & Applications 1484.11 Computer Managed Instruction 1484.18 Platform and Media Profiles 1484.7 Tool/Agent Comm. 1484.8 Enterprise Interfaces

10. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 10 Formal and Informal Consensus-Building Among Standards and Specification Development Orgs Consensus-Building Steps Collaboration, harmonization with other organizations Public reviews as soon as possible Public comments Resolution of comments Approval stages (refinement): –Working Draft –Committee Draft –Draft Standard –Approved Standard Development Consensus Building

11. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 11 OLD: Related Standards/Specification Development Orgs In Education & Learning Technology LTSC (P1484) Specs submitted by Consortia/Fora IEEE, ANSI, ISO: Accredited Standards GEM PROMETEUS GESTALT Stds/ Specs Sampling of Organizations

12. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 12 NEW: Related Standards/Specification Development Orgs In Education & Learning Technology LTSC (P1484) LTSC & JTC1/SC36: Close Collaboration ISO/IEC JTC1/SC36 GEM PROMETEUS GESTALT Current, existing Future possibilities Sampling of Organizations

13. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 13 URLs For Accredited Standards Development Organizations ISO: International Standards Organization http://www.iso.ch http://www.iso.ch ISO/IEC Joint Technology Committee 1, Information Technology, http://www.jtc1.org http://www.jtc1.org ANSI: American National Standards Institute, http://www.ansi.org http://www.ansi.org IEEE: Institute for Electrical and Electronic Engineers, http://www.ieee.org http://www.ieee.org IEEE LTSC (P1484): Learning Technology Standards Committee, http://ltsc.ieee.org http://ltsc.ieee.org

14. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 14 URLs For Related SDOs/Consortia/Fora/Orgs European Committee for Standardization (CEN), Information Society Standardization System (ISSS), Learning Technology (LT) Workshop http://www.cenorm.be/isss/workshop/lt http://www.cenorm.be/isss/workshop/lt AICC: Aviation Industry CBT Committee, http://www.aicc.org http://www.aicc.org IMS: Educause’s Instructional Management Systems Project, http://www.imsproject.org http://www.imsproject.org ARIADNE: Alliance of Remote Instructional Authoring and Distribution Networks of Europe http://ariadne.unil.ch http://ariadne.unil.ch

15. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 15 Standards vs. Specifications [1/3] A standard is a specification produced by an accredited standards development organization Difference between standards and specifications: accredited vs. non-accredited Non-accredited organizations: consortia, fora, trade organizations, user groups Accreditation doesn’t imply quality or usefulness, but implies process Accredited process is important for Requests for Interpretation (consistency) and antitrust

16. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 16 URLs For Related Consortia/Fora/Orgs PROmoting Multimedia access to Education and Training in EUropean Society http://www.prometeus.org http://www.prometeus.org GESTALT: Getting Educational Systems Talking Across Leading-edge Technologies http://www.fdgroup.co.uk/gestalt http://www.fdgroup.co.uk/gestalt GEM Project: Gateway to Education Materials http://www.geminfo.org http://www.geminfo.org ADL: DoD Advanced Distributed Learning http://www.adlnet.org http://www.adlnet.org

17. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 17 JTC1 (Joint Technical Committee 1) — Information Technology TC1 Screw Threads TC2 Fasteners SC02 Coded Character Sets SC35 User Interfaces SC22 Programming Languages & Environments SC22/WG20 Internationalization SC31 Automatic Identification and Data Capture SC17 Cards and Personal Identification SC32 Data Management and Interchange SC34 Document Description/Processing Languages SC11 Flexible Magnetic Media for Digital Data SC23 Optical Disk Cartridges SC29 Coding of Audio/Picture/Multimedia/Hypermedia SC24 Computer Graphics and Image Processing SC28 Office Equipment SC27 IT Security Techniques SC07 Software Engineering SC36 Learning Technology CAI-RG Conformity Assessment and Interoperability IIT-RG Implementing Information Technology JTC1 (Joint Technical Committee 1) Information Technology TCnnn... ISO International Organization for Standardization IEC International Electrotechnical Commission

18. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 18 JTC1/SC36 and LTSC Will Collaborate Closely — Co-Located Meetings Will Help Significantly LTSC (P1484) LTSC & JTC1/SC36: Close Collaboration ISO/IEC JTC1/SC36 GEM PROMETEUS GESTALT Current, existing Future possibilities Sampling of Organizations

19. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 19 Collaboration Within JTC1 Direct collaboration/liaison with ISO stds: –SC2: character sets –SC22: programming languages –SC24: computer graphics and image processing –SC27: security –SC29: coding of audio, picture, multimedia and hypermedia –SC32: database and metadata –SC34: document description and processing languages –SC35: cultural adaptation Widespread international participation

20. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 20 Liaisons To/From JTC1 Direct liaison with: –Object Management Group (OMG) –Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) –World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) –Digital Audio Video Council (DAVIC) –VRML Consortium –VESA Consortium –The Open Group

21. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 21 Life Cycle: Maintenance Phase Maintenance of Standards Requests for Interpretation (RFIs) Defect Reports (DRs) and Record of Responses (RRs) Amendments (AMs) and Technical Corrigenda (TCs) Development Consensus Building Maintenance

22. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 22 Conformance Testing: Insures Interoperability LTSC (P1484) DITT: Conformance Testing for approved standards Note: Conformance testing involves: (1) interpretation of standards (2) development of test suites (3) testing vendor products/services ISO/IEC JTC1/SC36 GEM PROMETEUS GESTALT ADL: Conformance Testing for AICC CMI Learning Management Systems

23. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 23 Assertion, Inquiry, Negotiation, and Testing (AINT): Documents that transform Standards words to specific tests Users Vendors Other LTSC (Public) AINT Document Test Developer Test Suite 3 2 1 4 “AINT documents are critical for uniform and thorough testing” Development Consensus Interpretation Test Creation Standards (specifications)

24. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 24 (Proposed) LTSC Testing Process: Advice, Certification, Testing, and Branding LTSCTest SuiteNISTIEEE/ISTOVendor Advisory Board Test Lab (DITT) DITT: Test Developer Licensed Test Suite Branding LTSC Branding Authorization NIST Lab Certification IEEE Proc. Admin. Test Suite Test Suite Licensed To Vendors Dispute Resolution Vendor Products Results 123456

25. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 25 End Of Standards Life Cycle Review Cycle: Revise, Reaffirm, Withdraw Review Cycle: Revise: new work item, incorporate new technology Reaffirm: no changes, stable technology Withdraw: little use, obsolete technology Typically: 5 year cycle Development Consensus Building MaintenanceReview

26. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 26 Typical Usage Scenarios Market adoption is necessary for standards... –Standards are withdrawn if little or no market adoption –Standards are withdrawn if technology is obsolete Following scenarios are expected, typical use of LTSC standards Note: All characters are fictional

27. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 27 Typical Usage Scenario: The Student Kris is working at home today. In school he uses a Macintosh, but at home he uses an IBM PC. Kris operates on both platforms because he uses a “standard” learning technology web browser (1484.18). His learning content is available in a portable format (1484.10) The content is sent to his workstation in a portable “packaging” format (1484.17). 1484.10 1484.17 1484.18 IBM PC Macintosh 1484.18

28. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 28 Typical Usage Scenario: The Student Kris’ learning progresses via a “learning management system” (1484.11), also known as an “LMS”. The LMS moves him through lessons based on optimal sequencing (1484.6). 1484.6 1484.11 Learning Management System Sequencing

29. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 29 Typical Usage Scenario: The Employee Kirsten is interested in a better job. Kirsten collects her transcript and portfolio (1484.2). Kirsten publishes it so that employers may discover her skills and work experience (1484.4). 1484.2 1484.4 Employers Student Records, Transcripts, Portfolio

30. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 30 Typical Usage Scenario: The Employee While searching for job opportunities, Kirsten discovers a job opportunity that requires certain skills and competencies (1484.20). As a life long learner she keeps track her “learning quality” (1484.19) and adjusts for her strengths and weak- nesses to meet the new learning objectives 1484.20 1484.19 1484.2 Student Records, Transcripts, Portfolio Job Opportunities Learner’s Self-Maintained History

31. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 31 Typical Usage Scenario: The Researcher Kathy is working on research that correlates student performance to specific types of learning materials. Although Kathy speaks Russian, she is able to search and discover learning materials in a variety of languages (1484.12) and correlate the metadata to terms that are familiar in her Ukrainian culture (1484.9). Kathy works with institutions to extract the de-identified student records and results (1484.2) so research continues without any privacy concerns. 1484.2 1484.12 EnglishFrenchRussian 1484.9 Researcher Kathy

32. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 32 Typical Usage Scenario: The Developer Erik wants to develop a course. Erik bases the course on some new material he authors (1484.6, 1484.10). Additionally, Erik incorporates existing material found on the web (1484.12). 1484.10 1484.12 1484.6 A New Course Existing Material & Cataloging Info New, Authored Materials Erik

33. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 33 Typical Usage Scenario: The Developer With the newly created course, Erik wants use the existing tools (1484.7) on the user’s workstation, such as the word processor, spreadsheet. Erik incorporates the user’s preferred learning-specific icons (1484.5). The New Course 1484.7 Existing Tools On Workstation 1484.5 Learning-Specific Icons Erik

34. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 34 Typical Usage Scenario: The Developer Erik creates a small JavaScript application that: –determines if the prerequisites have been met (1484.14, 1484.2) –then launches the content (1484.11) –and interacts with the tools (1484.7). 1484.14 Learning Content 1484.2 Query Student Records, Determine If Prerequisites Have Been Met 1484.11 Launching Content Interact With Existing Tools On Workstation 1484.7 Erik

35. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 35 Typical Usage Scenario: Institutional Admin Geoff wants to make sure that his students have registered and are assigned classes (1484.8). Geoff assigns student IDs (1484.13) to registered students. Before starting a lesson, the courseware checks for tuition payment (1484.14, 1484.8). 1484.14 Verify Enrollment 1484.13 Assign Student Identifiers Launching Content Geoff 1484.8

36. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 36 Typical Usage Scenario: Institutional Admin Geoff exchanges records among campuses using one protocol (1484.15, 1484.2). Geoff exchanges records outside his state-wide college using web-based technology (1484.16, 1484.2). Inter-Campus Exchange Other Campus Records Exchange 1484.15 1484.2 1484.15 1484.2 1484.16 1484.2

37. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 37 Typical Timeline Of Standards Summary of Standards Process Development Phase: 12-48 months Consensus Phase: 9-24 months Maintenance Phase: 3-6 years Review Cycle: revise, reaffirm, or withdraw — every 5 years Typical time: from committee formed to approved standard: 18-48 months Realistic schedule ==> Good results Development Consensus Building MaintenanceReview

38. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 38 Approximate Timeline/Schedule of LTSC 1996, new projects (LTSC formed):.1.2 1997, new projects:.3.4.6.7.10.11.12 1998, new projects:.9.13.14 1999, new projects:.5.8.15.16.17.18.19.20 2000, draft standards approved: –.1 (LTSA),.2 (PAPI),.3 (Glossary),.11 (CMI),.12 (LOM),.13 (SID) 2001, draft standards approved: –.6 (SEQ),.8 (EI),.10 (TCL),.14 (SDA),.15 (DCTP),.16 (HTTP),.17 (Packaging),.18 (PMP)

39. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 39 LTSC WG Details Scope: –What’s in –What’s out Highlights of LTSC working groups –WGs are independent of each other –WGs are complementary –Collectively, WGs have fairly complete functionality

40. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 40 “The IEEE LTSC (P1484) Roadmap” Scoping Statement IEEE LTSC (P1484) working groups (WGs) and study groups (SGs) each involve certain areas of learning technology Some learning technology components/features should not be standardized, e.g., evaluation methods, delivery systems, applications Some learning technology components/features should be standardized outside LTSC (P1484), e.g., multimedia, education standards, cultural adaptation Strategy: Standardize smallest, useful, doable specification that has technically feasibility, commercial viability, and widespread adoption

41. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 41 Learning Content (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t Learning Technology That Should Not Be Standardized Example: Evaluation Evaluation should not be standardized because: –Process/methods are not well-defined or agreed upon –Value-added feature of learning technology systems However... inputs and outputs should be standardized: –Behavior coding methods –Learning content formats –Performance information –Assessment information Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) MultimediaBehavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

42. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 42 Learning Content (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t Learning Technology That Should Not Be Standardized Example: Delivery Delivery should not be standardized because: –Value-added feature of learning technology systems –Commercial vendors provide “implementation quality” with delivery systems However... inputs and outputs should be standardized: –Multimedia formats –Learning content format –Locator index and launch methods –Standards profiles for browsers Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) MultimediaBehavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

43. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 43 Learning Content (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t Learning Technology Should Be Standardized Outside LTSC Example: Multimedia Formats Multimedia formats should be standardized outside LTSC because: –Not specific to learning technology –Other committees have more expertise However... standards “profiles” (collections) should be identified: –Can point to collections of existing standards, e.g., JPEG, GIF, MPEG –Don’t lock into a single format to allow varying “implementation quality” Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) MultimediaBehavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

44. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 44 Learning Content Multimedia (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t Learning Technology Should Be Standardized Outside LTSC Example: Education Standards Education standards should be standardized outside LTSC because: –Not technology standards –Highly political process –Local, national, and regional preferences... unable to build consensus However... education stds should build on learning technology using: –Common indexes (query, content, locator) for search/retrieval –Common formats for exchanging assessment/performance info –Common learning content structures for prerequisites and content aggregation Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) Behavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

45. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 45 Learning Content Multimedia (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t Learning Technology Should Be Standardized Outside LTSC Example: Cultural Adaptation Cultural adaptation should be standardized outside LTSC because: –Not specific to learning technology, e.g., color blindness, language preference –Other committees have more expertise, e.g., ISO/IEC JTC1 SC35 –Local, national, and regional preferences... unable to build consensus However... learning preferences can be identified independently, e.g.: –Learning styles –Mentoring/coaching/hinting preferences And... LTSC should collaborate with cultural adaptation committees Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) Behavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

46. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 46 LTSC Guidelines for Working Groups Choosing a new working group (WG): –smallest, useful, doable specification –technically feasibility –commercial viability –widespread adoption LTSA describes technology, not WG structure No “grand framework” for new WGs (not ISO OSI) Large number of WGs, but many “small” standards Quick schedule: WG formation  draft standard

47. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 47 IEEE LTSC (P1484) Working/Study Groups General Activities 1484.1 Architecture and Reference Model ** 1484.3 Glossary Learner-Related Activities 1484.2 Learner Model ** 1484.4 Task Model 1484.13 Student Identifiers 1484.5 User Interfaces 1484.19 Quality System for Life-Long Learning 1484.20 Competency Definitions Content-Related Activities 1484.10 CBT Data Interchange 1484.6 Course Sequencing ** 1484.17 Content Packaging ** Data and Metadata 1484.12 Learning Objects Metadata ** 1484.9 Localization 1484.14 Semantics and Exchange Bindings ** 1484.15 Data Interchange Protocols 1484.16 HTTP Bindings Mgmt. Systems & Applications 1484.11 Computer Managed Instruction ** 1484.18 Platform and Media Profiles 1484.7 Tool/Agent Comm. 1484.8 Enterprise Interfaces ** Extended slide presentation for this WG

48. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 48 IEEE LTSC (P1484) General Activities IEEE 1484.1 Architecture and Reference Model ** IEEE 1484.3 Glossary ** Extended slide presentation for this WG

49. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 49 IEEE 1484.1: Architecture and Reference Model WG Chair: Mike Collett, Education Online Technical Editor: Frank Farance, Edutool.Com URL: http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg1 http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg1 Documents: –“Learning Technology Systems Architecture (LTSA)” http://edutool.com/ltsa http://edutool.com/ltsa –Status: Base Document 1998-06 –Summary: Component architecture –Target: Draft Standard by 2000Q2

50. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 50 IEEE 1484.1: Technical Summary Excerpt from LTSA 5.0, http://edutool.com/ltsa “In general, the purpose of developing systems architectures is to discover high-level frameworks for understanding certain kinds of systems, their subsystems, and their interactions with related systems.”  More than one architecture is possible “An architecture isn't a blue print for designing a single system, but a framework for designing a range of systems over time, and for the analysis and comparison of these systems.”  Architecture used for analysis and communication “By revealing the shared components of different systems at the right level of generality, an architecture promotes the design and implementation of components and subsystems that are reusable, cost-effective, and adaptable.”  Critical interoperability interfaces/services identified

51. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 51 Summary of Five LTSA Abstraction-Implementation Layers 120+ Stakeholder Perspectives/PrioritiesLayer 4 Human-Centered/Pervasive FeaturesLayer 2 Environment Interactions Layer 1 Learner/ Environment Interactions L L L Learner Entity Layer 3 LTSA System Components L CI LP B M PP P A D LE E C LR R IC Q LC L Layer 5 APIs, Codings, & Protocols Requirements  Functionality  Conceptual Model  Semantics    APIs Codings Protocols    Calling Data Comm. Conv. Formats Layers

52. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 52 Learning Technology Systems Architecture (LTSA) Layer 3: System Components Processes: Learner Entity, Evaluation, Coach, Delivery Stores: Learner Records, Learning Resources Flows: Behavior, Assessment, Performance/Preferences (past, present, future), Query, Catalog Info, Locator, Learning Content, Multimedia, Interaction Context, Learning Preferences Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources MultimediaBehavior Learning Preferences Learner Records A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Learner Entity Query (new) Performance (current) Performance/ Preferences (history) Catalog Info Locator Learning Content Interaction Context

53. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 53 LTSA Layer 3 Analogy: Stereo Component Architecture Well-defined components: tuner, CD-player, tape loop, pre-amp, amplifier, speakers Well-defined critical interfaces: media, phono jacks, unbalanced inputs, 4-16 ohm outputs Not all components need exist, e.g., stereo system without a CD-player Engineering/business rationale for highly integrated subsets (receivers, “boom box”), yet all have interoperability at critical interfaces, e.g., aux inputs, speakers

54. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 54 Interaction Context Query Catalog Info Learning Preferences Learning Content Example Mapping #1: Web-Based Learning Demonstrates Tightly Integrated Components Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources (new) MultimediaBehavior Learner Records Performance (current) (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t Human Human Interface e.g., X Windows Win95 Presentation Tool (browser) Courseware Database (web servers) Student Records (database) Learner Entity * Note: Other mappings may co-exist. Performance/ Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Locator  Abstraction  Implementation

55. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 55 Interaction Context (new) (history) Performance/ Preferences Query Catalog Info Learning Preferences Learning Content Example Mapping #2: Flight Simulator, Flight Instructor Demonstrates Shared Component Responsibility: Coach Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources MultimediaBehavior Learner Records Performance (current) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t Flight Instructor Flight Simulator Pilot’s Logbook Pilot Learner Entity * Note: Other mappings may co-exist. L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Locator  Abstraction  Implementation

56. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 56 Interaction Context (history) (new) Performance/ Preferences Query Catalog Info Learning Preferences Learning Content Multimedia A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t Example Mapping #3: Home Study Course Demonstrates Student Can Have Multiple Roles/Responsibilities Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Behavior Learner Records Performance (current) School Home Study Course Student Learner Entity * Note: Other mappings may co-exist. L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Locator  Abstraction  Implementation

57. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 57 Interaction Context (history) (new) Performance/ Preferences Query Catalog Info Learning Preferences Learning Content Multimedia A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t Example Mapping #4: Non-Electronic, Traditional Classroom Limiting Case: No Technology Involved Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Behavior Learner Records Performance (current) Teacher Report Cards, Transcript Student School Library Student Uses Library Teacher Points Student To Books (A Locator) Retrieves Teaching Materials Grades Learner Entity * Note: Other mappings may co-exist. L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Locator  Abstraction  Implementation

58. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 58 LTSA Layer 4: Stakeholder Perspectives Each stakeholder has a view, but not complete picture Show each stakeholder perspective within LTSA Stakeholder perspectives used to validate views and subsets of LTSA components 120+ stakeholders analyzed and incorporated “It’s in there!” (if not, let us know!)

59. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 59 LTSA Layer 4: Stakeholder Perspectives Global Information Infrastructure (GII) Experience Common technology does not imply common architecture Stakeholder perspectives analyzed by: –Primary design issues: LTSA components that greatly affect design and implementation for stake holder (shown as red/bold) –Secondary design issues: LTSA components that affect design and implementation of stake-holder, but not critical (shown as blue/dash ---) –Other LTSA components: insignificant design issue or not applicable (no highlight/green fill)

60. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 60 LTSA Layer 4: Stakeholder Perspectives Consensus-Building Stakeholders, typically, have different and/or incompatible priorities Differing priorities: obstacles to consensus Non-technical (political, business) issues just as important as technical issues Recognizing technical/business/political priorities AND common technology can lead to common architecture Cataloging stakeholder perspectives is critical for building consensus

61. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 61 LTSA Layer 4: Stakeholder Perspectives A Sampling of Stakeholders “Isolated” stakeholders Learner-Centered, Institution-Centered, Assessment-Centered, Records, Certifications, Task Model, School-to-Work, Content-Centered, Content Developers, Metadata, Ontologies, Expert Systems, Digital Libraries, Learning Objects, Multimedia Search/Retrieval, Collaboration, Peripheral Devices, Asynchronous Learning, Multiple Role, Team Learning, Icon Conventions “Parallel” stakeholders Parallel Sessions/Same Learner Student-Teacher Multi-Tier Process Improvement: principal  teacher  student “Overlapping” stakeholders Mentoring, Coaching, Electronic Performance Support Interactive Environment, Simulation Tool-to-Tool Communication, Sequencing, Pre-Requisites, Curriculum-Centered, Experimentation, Discovery, Intelligent Tutoring Tools, Distance/Distributed/Nomadic Learning Related Industries Human Factors/User Interfaces, Data Collection/Analysis, IT Decision-Support Applications, Expert Systems/Intelligent Systems, Entertainment/Multimedia Industry, Control/Feedback Systems

62. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 62 LTSA Layer 4: Stakeholder Perspectives A Sampling of Stakeholders Same technology scope, differing priorities: stakeholders have common technology but differing design priorities –#1 Metadata vs. Ontologies (demonstrates GII consensus issues) “Isolated” stakeholders: simple, limited scope –#2 Assessment-Centered; #3 Records, Certifications; #4 Multimedia Search/Retrieval “Overlapping” stakeholders: complex, large scope –#5 Experimentation, Discovery; #6 Intelligent Tutoring Tools; #7 Distance Learning, Distributed Learning “Parallel” stakeholders: multiple applications of LTSA –#8 Parallel Sessions; #9 Student Teachers; #10 Multi-Tiered Process Improvement “Related Industries” stakeholders: similar technology, overlap –#11 Human Factors/User Interfaces; #12 IT Decision-Support Apps; #13 Entertainment and Multimedia; #14 Control/Feedback Systems Counterintuitive: isolated stakeholders are better starting point for developing architecture; overlapping stakeholders are a poor starting point

63. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 63 Learning Content (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t “Same Technology Scope, Differing Design Priorities” Example #1: Metadata (compare next slide) Primary design issues: query, catalog info (metadata), locator index (e.g., URLs), and associating locator indexes with catalog info Secondary design issues: knowledge organization, learning content (presentation) Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) MultimediaBehavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

64. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 64 Learning Content Multimedia (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t “Same Technology Scope, Differing Design Priorities” Example #1: Ontologies, Expert Systems (compare prior slide) Primary design issues: knowledge design and knowledge representation in learning resources, learning content (presentation) Secondary design issues: query, catalog info (metadata), and locator index (e.g., URLs) Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) Behavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

65. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 65 Learning Content (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t “Isolated” Stakeholder Example #2: Assessment-Centered Primary design issues: educational standards, behavior, evaluation, assessment records, learner records reporting Secondary design issues: learning preferences, learner, system control (adaptive administration) Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) MultimediaBehavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

66. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 66 Learning Content (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t “Isolated” Stakeholder Example #3: Records, Certifications Primary design issues: learner records, performance info, assessment info Secondary design issues: evaluation, coach Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) MultimediaBehavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

67. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 67 Learning Content Multimedia (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t “Isolated” Stakeholder Example #4: Multimedia Search/Retrieval Primary design issues: delivery, multimedia, query, catalog info (metadata), locator index (e.g., URLs), hardware limitations Secondary design issues: coach, learning resources, learning content format, behavior Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) Behavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

68. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 68 Learning Content Multimedia (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t “Overlapping” Stakeholder Example #5: Experimentation, Discovery Primary design issues: learner chooses direction, acquires knowledge during experimentation, learner, coach, query, catalog info (metadata) Secondary design issues: learner does self evaluation, tools and delivery support experimentation, behavior, assessment info, locator index (e.g., URLs), delivery, multimedia Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) Behavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

69. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 69 Learning Content Multimedia (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t “Overlapping” Stakeholder Example #6: Intelligent Tutoring Tools Primary design issues: learner/tutor choose direction, acquires knowledge during use of tutoring tool, learning resources may be implicit (not explicitly defined) in tutor Secondary design issues: tutor does evaluation, tools and delivery support experimentation Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) Behavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

70. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 70 Learning Content Multimedia (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t “Overlapping” Stakeholder Example #7: Distance/Distributed/Nomadic Learning Primary design issues: distributed and nomadic communication of all “flows” (behavior, performance, multimedia, etc.) Secondary design issues: processes and stores components NOTE: Take note of primary design issues (red/bold) –How does this slide differ from all others? –Answer: All flows are primary, everything else is secondary –A technical definition of distance/distributed learning: primary design issues concern “flows”, all other LTSA components are secondary Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) Behavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

71. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 71 “Parallel” Stakeholder Example #8: Parallel Sessions for Same Learner Primary design issues: multiple, simultaneous learning experiences; multiple flows of behavior, learning preferences, multimedia Secondary design issues: multiple evaluation, coach, and delivery processes Example: flight simulator — simultaneous training of flying skills, navigation skills, communication skills, cockpit resource management Example: Aviate Example: Communicate Example: Navigate

72. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 72 Student Teacher “Parallel” Stakeholder Example #9: Student Teacher Primary design issues: student teacher as a teacher Secondary design issues: student teacher as a learner entity

73. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 73 Principal Teacher Student “Parallel” Stakeholder Example #10: Multi-Tiered Process Improvement Student is evaluated by teacher, teacher coaches student Teacher is evaluated by principal, principal coaches teacher Principal is evaluated by school board, school board coaches principal Teacher is also evaluated by performance of his/her students Principal is also evaluated by performance of his/her students

74. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 74 Learning Content (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t “Related Industries” Stakeholder — “The LTSA Top Half” Example #11: Human Factors/User Interfaces Primary design issues: human interfaces, human inputs (behavior), systems that interpret human inputs (evaluation), machine outputs (multimedia), systems that generate machine output (delivery) Secondary design issues: responsiveness (interaction context), adaptation (learning preferences) Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) MultimediaBehavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

75. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 75 Learning Content Performance (current) (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t “Related Industries” Stakeholder — “The LTSA Bottom Half” Example #12: IT Decision-Support Applications Primary design issues: processing of information (coach), supporting databases (learner records, learning resources), information formats and their storage/retrieval (learning preferences, assessment info, performance info, preference info, query, catalog info, locator) Secondary design issues: front-end, back-end, second-tier, and agent processing (evaluation, delivery, learning content) Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) MultimediaBehavior Learner Records Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

76. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 76 Learning Content Multimedia (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t “Related Industries” Stakeholder — “The LTSA Left Half” Example #13: Entertainment and Multimedia Primary design issues: content (learning resources, learning content), delivery stream (delivery, multimedia) Secondary design issues: content selection (query, catalog info, locator), user/viewer/subscriber (learner entity) Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) Behavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

77. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 77 Learning Content Multimedia (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t “Related Industries” Stakeholder — “The LTSA Center” Example #14: Control/Feedback Systems Primary design issues: system (learner entity), sensor (behavior, evaluation, assessment info), controller (coach), actuator (locator, delivery, multimedia) Secondary design issues: second-order/alternative feedback (interaction context, learning preferences) Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) Behavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

78. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 78 LTSA Layer 4: Stakeholder Perspectives A Sampling of Stakeholders Outside LTSC CEN/ISSS/LT activities Reusability and Interoperability, Metadata, Taxonomies, Vocabularies, Bindings, Profiles, Internationalization, Structure of Learning Resources, Architectures, Rights Management, Data Protection and Privacy, Accreditation and Access PROMETEUS activities Interchange/Reusability/Portability, Corporate/Higher Ed/Cooperative/Open/ Distance/Broadcast-Based Learning, Primary/Secondary School Environments ARIADNE activities Metadata, Multi-Cultural Metadata, Tools For Remote Authoring/Teaching/Learning AICC activities Digital Audio/Video, Icon Standards, CBT Peripheral Devices, Glossary, Computer Managed Instruction, Courseware Interchange, Digital Electronic Library, Smart Graphics IMS Project activities Metadata, Content Packaging, Profiles, Question/Test Interoperability, Enterprise Interfaces GESTALT activities LOM and PAPI Implementations GEM activities Cataloging and Tools ADL activities Sharable Course Objects Ref. Model

79. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 79 LTSA Layer 4: Stakeholder Perspectives IEEE LTSC (P1484) Working/Study Groups General activities 1484.1 Architecture and Reference Model 1484.3 Glossary Learner-related activities 1484.2 Learner Model 1484.4 Task Model 1484.13 Student Identifiers 1484.5 User Interfaces 1484.19 Quality System for Life-Long Learning 1484.20 Competency Definitions Content-related activities 1484.10 CBT Data Interchange 1484.6 Course Sequencing 1484.17 Content Packaging Data and metadata 1484.12 Learning Objects Metadata 1484.9 Localization 1484.14 Semantics and Exchange Bindings 1484.15 Data Interchange Protocols 1484.16 HTTP Bindings Mgmt. systems & applications 1484.11 Computer Managed Instruction 1484.18 Platform and Media Profiles 1484.7 Tool/Agent Comm. 1484.8 Enterprise Interfaces

80. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 80 Sampling of Collaborations Among Orgs Metadata: IEEE 1484.12 LOM  IMS Metadata  ARIADNE Metadata  GEM  NCITS L8  ISO-IEC/JTC1/SC32 Computer Managed Instruction: IEEE 1484.11  AICC AGR006 PAPI/Student Profiles: IEEE 1484.2  IMS Student/Patient Identifiers: IEEE 1484.13  OMG CORBAMED Platform Profiles: IEEE 1484.18  ADL CBT Data Interchange: IEEE 1484.10  AICC AGR007 Content Packaging: IEEE 1484.17  IMS Course Sequencing: IEEE 1484.6  IMS Question/Test Interop. Tool/Agent Communication: IEEE 1484.7  DoD DMSO HLA User Interfaces: IEEE 1484.5  AICC AGR009 Glossary: IEEE 1484.3  ISO-IEC/JTC1/SC1

81. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 81 Learning Content (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t IEEE 1484.1: Architecture and Reference Model WG Primary design issues: all components Secondary design issues: none Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) MultimediaBehavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

82. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 82 IEEE 1484.3: Glossary WG Chair: Katherine Sinitsa, IRTC ITS UNESCO/IIP Technical Editor: Joshua Tonkel URL: http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg3 http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg3 Documents: –Glossary (check above URL for latest draft) –Status: Working Draft, 1998-09 –Summary: Glossary of terms for learning technology standardization –Target: Draft Standard by 2000Q2

83. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 83 Learning Content Multimedia (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t IEEE 1484.3: Glossary WG Primary design issues: none Secondary design issues: all components Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) Behavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

84. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 84 IEEE 1484.3: Sampling of Glossary Terms abstraction abstraction- implementation boundary abstraction- implementation layer actual implementation assignable unit computer managed instruction course course content course pre-requisite course structure courseware curriculum implementation instructional objective

85. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 85 IEEE 1484.3: Sampling of Glossary Terms learner learner history learning objective lesson lesson sequencing metadata performance information personal information portfolio information preference information prerequisite refinement layer router score session student test training objective transcript

86. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 86 IEEE LTSC (P1484) Learner-Related Activities IEEE 1484.2 Learner Model ** IEEE 1484.4 Task Model IEEE 1484.13 Student Identifiers IEEE 1484.5 User Interfaces IEEE 1484.19 Quality System for Life-Long Learning ** Extended slide presentation for this WG

87. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 87 IEEE 1484.2: Learner Model WG Co-Chairs: Frank Linton and Brad Goodman, MITRE Corporation Technical Editor: Frank Farance, Edutool.Com URL: http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg2 http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg2 Documents: –“Public and Private Information (PAPI)” http://edutool.com/papi http://edutool.com/papi –Status: Base Document 1997-09 –Summary: Portable student records –Target: Draft Standard by 2000Q2

88. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 88 Learning Content (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t IEEE 1484.2: Learner Model WG Primary design issues: learner entity, learning preferences, evaluation, performance info, assessment info, coach Secondary design issues: behavior Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) MultimediaBehavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

89. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 89 Learner/Profile Information — PAPI Spec and Extensions — Data Repositories General Learning Technology Information Learner Information Extensions PAPI Learner Personal Extensions PAPI Learner Performance Extensions PAPI Learner Preference Extensions PAPI Learner Portfolio Learner Profile Information Extensions PAPI Learner Relations Extensions PAPI Learner Security Learner Relations InfoLearner Portfolio Info Learner Preference InfoLearner Security Info Learner Performance Info Learner Personal Info

90. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 90 Profile Information in Distance/Distributed Learning Content Delivery vs. Records Exchange Learner Remote CampusHome / Home Campus User Interface, Browser Learning Content Back Office Profile Server Back Office Profile Server Content Delivery (e.g. via web) Records Exchange Via PAPI Content/ Mgmt. Server * Ad Hoc Notation

91. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 91 Types Of Profile Information and Their Movement (Conceptual Model) Remote Campus N = Personal Info (e.g., Name, address) W =Portfolio Info (e.g., Works) G =Performance Info (e.g., Grades) G M = Preference Info (e.g., My config.) Legend / Mnemonic: Home / Home Campus M M M M Request Preferences 2 G G Requests performance history from its (remote) profile server and other (home, etc.) profile servers 3 G G Grades can be sent to back office (e.g., registrar) 4 W Portfolio: links to work/accomplishments 5 Back Office Learner Learning Content Profile Server User Interface, Browser Content/ Mgmt. Server S = Security Info R = Relations Info N S R Login, Enrollment Check N N 1 S R S R

92. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 92 Records Exchange: Scales to Multiple Tier Campus Both main campus and remote campus can serve content Performance: stored, forwarded, retrieved on all profile servers Tier 2: Main Campus Tier 3: Remote Campus Tier 1: Learner at Home Learner Learning Content User Interface, Browser Content/ Mgmt. Server Back Office Profile Server Back Office Profile Server Content/ Mgmt. Server Main campus may “front end” content for remote campus * Ad Hoc Notation

93. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 93 Compilation of Profile Information Flows Back Office Profile Server Back Office Content/ Mgmt Server Learning Content, free Learning Content, pay Learning Content, etc. Learner Browser, User Interface Secure Local/Home IntranetSecure Remote Intranet Internet NOTATION: X,N,S,R,M,G,W PAPI Info WithinPAPI Info Outside Out of Scope Info (X) Conceptual ModelConceptual Model Schematic of PAPI Learner Data Flows and Uses

94. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 94 IEEE 1484.4: Task Model WG Chair: Tom Probert, US Dept. of Labor Technical Editor: To Be Assigned URL: http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg4 http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg4 Documents: –Various presentations –Expect submission by 2001-06 –Status: Reorganization under new chair –Summary: Information technology for searchable resumes

95. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 95 IEEE 1484.4: Problem Statement [1/2] With stored learner model records, how do organizations find students/employees with specific skills? How do students/employees discover available jobs, projects, and micro assignments? How do employers know records have not been changed? How can students/employees “advertise” their skills?

96. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 96 IEEE 1484.4: Problem Statement [2/2] Technical problem: general taxonomies of skills Solutions feed into 1484.2 Learner Model WG and 1484.20 Competency Definitions What is relationship to 1484.2 & 1484.20? Are these Learner Model (PAPI) queries?

97. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 97 Learning Content (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t IEEE 1484.4: Task Model WG Primary design issues: learner records, performance info (history) Secondary design issues: performance info (current, new) Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) MultimediaBehavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

98. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 98 IEEE 1484.13: Student Identifiers (SID) WG Chair: Mike Collett, Education Online Technical Editor: Frank Farance Edutool.Com URL: http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg13 http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg13 Documents: –“Simple Identifiers (SID)” http://edutool.com/sid http://edutool.com/sid –Status: expect SID submission by, 1999-12 –Summary: Formats and data typing for student IDs

99. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 99 IEEE 1484.13: Problem Statement Need common method for identifying students Need identifier that can be entered by humans Identifiers are key for linking several types of learner information Social security numbers — problem: both identity and authentication Old thinking: need common, singular student identifier New thinking: need unique identifier, students may have multiple identifiers

100. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 100 IEEE 1484.13: Technical Constraints Identifiers are strings with limited character set for wide compatibility Identifiers support international character sets Identifiers can be embedded in filenames Identifiers can be embedded in URLs Identifiers can be embedded in E-mail addresses Identifiers might be embedded in domains

101. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 101 Learning Content (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t IEEE 1484.13: Student Identifiers (SID) WG Primary design issues: performance info, learner records Secondary design issues: learner, coach Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) MultimediaBehavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

102. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 102 IEEE 1484.13: “Simple Identifiers” Strings With Limited Character Set Identifiers may include the following characters: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z a b c d e f g h I j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 _ -. % Example: “ john.doe.ps217.nyc.ny.us ” or “ id6374980 ” International characters are based on ISO 10646 name and described as 8-, 16-, or 32-bits: 8-bit characters: %hh 16-bit characters: %uhhhh 32-bit characters: %Uhhhhhhhh Allows any international character, example: “ Côté” ==> C%e2t%dc

103. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 103 Embedding Simple Identifiers In Other Namespaces Compatibility with other namespaces is critical for widespread adoption Binding to OMG CORBAMED PIDS spec Filename example: /home/C%e2t%dc URL example: http://www.xyz.edu/users/C%e2t%dc E-mail example: mailto:C%e2t%dc@xyz.edu Domain example: C%e2t%dc.users.xyz.edu

104. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 104 IEEE 1484.5: User Interfaces WG Chair: Ian Wright, Vega (UK) Technical Editor: To Be Assigned URL: http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg5 http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg5 Documents: –AICC AGR009 “Icon Guidelines” http://www.aicc.org/docs/AGRs/agr009.zip http://www.aicc.org/docs/AGRs/agr009.zip –Status: Reforming with new PAR and chair –Summary: Catalog of common icons

105. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 105 Learning Content (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t IEEE 1484.5: User Interfaces WG Primary design issues: multimedia, behavior Secondary design issues: learner entity, learning preferences Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) MultimediaBehavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

106. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 106 IEEE 1484.5: A Sampling of User Icons Forward arrow Backward arrow Menu Close Pause Exit Audio on Audio off Audio ctl panel Video ctl panel Text on Text off Repeat sequence Progress indication Help button Modify options Access glossary Student comments Audio Panel Video Panel Based on AICC AGR009

107. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 107 IEEE 1484.19: Quality System For Life-Long Learning WG Chair: Jim Schoening, US Army Technical Editor: Maja Pivec URL: http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg19 http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg19 Documents: –Expect submission by 2000-03 –Status: WG is forming –Summary: A traditional quality standard focused on the process of technology-based, life-long learning –Target: not a standard, but a “recommended practice”

108. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 108 IEEE 1484.19: Project Authorization Request (PAR), Scope This will be a typical quality standard. It will focus on the learner-centered processes of life-long learning. It will specify the required elements of a user- centered quality system (e.g. goal-setting, planning, execution, tracking, documentation, continuous process improvement, etc.) for life-long learning.

109. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 109 Learning Content Multimedia (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t IEEE 1484.19: Quality System For Life-Long Learning WG Primary design issues: learner entity, evaluation, performance info, assessment info Secondary design issues: learning preferences, coach, learner records Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) Behavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

110. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 110 IEEE 1484.19: Project Authorization Request (PAR), Purpose [1/3] This Recommended Practice will help the following stakeholders in the following ways: –It will help students, employees, and other types of learners improve their learning performance, whether they are part of institutional learning or in a self-directed mode. –It will provide structural guidance for learners to assume primary responsibility for their own learning progress. –It will help prepare K-12 learners for the post-secondary world of work/continuous education. –It will enable learners to provide proof of their track-record in life-long learning to prospective employers or follow-on schools.

111. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 111 IEEE 1484.19: Project Authorization Request (PAR), Purpose [2/3] –Employers and schools will be able to assess an applicant's potential for continued life-long learning, based on his or her documented system and past performance. –It will help schools help their students become life-long learners. –It will prompt managers of learning programs to focus performance assessment of their programs on self-learning and life-long learning outcomes. –It will help learner guardians (instructors, parents, trainers) to monitor the learning progress and provide assistance for continuous improvement.

112. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 112 IEEE 1484.19: Project Authorization Request (PAR), Purpose [3/3] –It will help employers support the life-long learning of employees. –It will help developers of learner-centered management systems provide quality products to learners, either directly or through schools or employers. –It will help assessors and evaluators of learner-centered management systems develop analytical tools for measuring self-learning and life-long learning progress.

113. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 113 IEEE 1484.20: Competency Definitions WG Chair: Claude Ostyn, Click2Learn.com Technical Editor: Not yet assigned URL: http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg20 http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg20 Documents: –None –Status: WG is forming

114. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 114 IEEE 1484.20: Project Authorization Request (PAR), Scope [1/5] This standard shall specify the mandatory and optional data elements that constitute a Competency Definition as used in a Learning Management System, or referenced in a Competency Profile. This standard is intended to satisfy the following objectives: –Provide a standardized data model for reusable Competency Definition records that can be exchanged or reused in one or more compatible systems

115. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 115 IEEE 1484.20: Project Authorization Request (PAR), Scope [2/5] –Reconcile various existing and emerging data models into a widely acceptable model –Provide a standardized way to identify the type and precision of a Competency Definition –Provide a unique identifier as the means to unambiguously reference a reusable Competency Definition regardless of the setting in which this Competency Definition is stored, found, retrieved, or used. For example, metadata that describe learning content may contain a reference to one or more Competency Definition records that describe the learning objectives for the content.

116. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 116 IEEE 1484.20: Project Authorization Request (PAR), Scope [3/5] –Provide a standardized data model for additional information about a Competency Definition, such as a title, description, and source, compatible with other emerging learning asset metadata standards –Provide a controlled vocabulary to express how competency definitions are semantically related

117. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 117 IEEE 1484.20: Project Authorization Request (PAR), Scope [4/5] This standard specifically does not cover: –A data format, bindings or coding, except as minimally required for the purpose of exchange between compliant implementations –Quality and accuracy in the data itself, although it will describe recommended best practices. For example, this standard does not cover the quality or validation of the various parts of a learning objective statement. –A competency model, or a taxonomy of competencies. –How the relationships between competencies are stored in a database or learning management system.

118. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 118 IEEE 1484.20: Project Authorization Request (PAR), Scope [5/5] –Certification data models. However, Certification records can reference Competency Definitions. For example, an accredited authority may grant certificates that acknowledge that an individual meets the requirements for a particular competency. –Individual competency records, as would be found in the competency profiles of individuals or groups. However, such records can include references to specific Competency Definitions. For example, a competency profile for an individual may include a collection of certificates which in turn reference Competency Definitions, as well as a collection of references to the definitions for competencies to be acquired.

119. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 119 Learning Content (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t IEEE 1484.20: Competency Definitions WG Primary design issues: performance info, assessment info, learner records Secondary design issues: learner entity, learning preferences, evaluation, coach Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) MultimediaBehavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

120. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 120 IEEE 1484.20: Project Authorization Request (PAR), Purpose [1/4] The purpose of this standard is to define a universally acceptable Competency Definition model to allow the creation, exchange and reuse of Competency Definition in applications such as Learning Management Systems, Competency or Skill Gap Analysis, Learner and other Competency profiles, etc.

121. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 121 IEEE 1484.20: Project Authorization Request (PAR), Purpose [2/4] The standard is needed because there are currently many definitions of the terms "Learning Objective", "Competency" and "Skill", and very little agreement between how those definitions can be used to define reusable data models. This standard uses a general definition that can be semantically "tightened" or "loosened" in the data itself, while conserving the same data model regardless of how strictly a particular organization or institution requires the data to be formulated.

122. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 122 IEEE 1484.20: Project Authorization Request (PAR), Purpose [3/4] This standard also addresses the following needs: –A common data model that allows the building of various competency models, hierarchies and maps (however, the definitions for such applications are outside the scope of this standard). –A standard that allows persistent, long lived Competency Definitions to be created, exchanged among systems, and maintained. –A standard method by which Competency Definitions can be identified as globally unique among compliant systems and repositories.

123. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 123 IEEE 1484.20: Project Authorization Request (PAR), Purpose [4/4] –A standard method to mark a superseded or obsolete Competency Definition, and to point to a more current Competency Definition. –A common data model for the metadata that give a reusable Competency Definition its value in a reuse environment, such as the source of the Competency Definition, validation information, and other meta-information useful to locate an objective in a repository or collection. –Correspondence with the Learning Objects Metadata Standard developed by a parallel group.

124. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 124 IEEE LTSC (P1484) Content-Related Activities IEEE 1484.10 CBT Data Interchange IEEE 1484.6 Course Sequencing ** IEEE 1484.17 Content Packaging ** ** Extended slide presentation for this WG

125. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 125 IEEE 1484.10: CBT Data Interchange WG Chair: Bill McDonald, FlightSafetyBoeing Technical Editor: Frank Farance, Edutool.Com URL: http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg10 http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg10 Documents: –Various presentations –Status: expect Tcl syntax submission by 1999-12 –Summary: Text-based data interchange to facilitate courseware transfer

126. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 126 IEEE 1484.10: Problem Statement As described by an airplane manufacturer: “We have planes that last 30 years, but technology for our training systems lasts only 5-7 years” Describe learning content in a text-based format to facilitate use, reuse, import, and export. Comparison to word processing: “the RTF of learning content and authoring systems”

127. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 127 Learning Content (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t IEEE 1484.10: CBT Data Interchange WG Primary design issues: coach, performance info, assessment info, query, catalog info (metadata), locator index (e.g., URLs), invocation of learning content Secondary design issues: learning preferences, behavior, learner records, learning resources, learning content, delivery Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) MultimediaBehavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

128. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 128 IEEE 1484.10: Tcl as CBT Data Interchange Language — Why Tcl? Tcl is a very simple syntax: words separated by spaces with braces {} for grouping Tcl’s syntax greatly facilitates import/export tools Has execution support on all platforms, can be embedded in C/C++ code, browser plug-ins See http://www.tcltk.com XML can provide equivalent, but different coding Both should be used Currently, only XML parsers but no semantics, thus Tcl is currently a better choice

129. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 129 Tcl Sample set w.puzzle catch {destroy $w} toplevel $w wm title $w "15-Puzzle Demonstration" wm iconname $w "15-Puzzle" positionWindow $w label $w.msg -font $font -wraplength 4i -justify left - text "A 15-puzzle appears below as a collection of buttons. Click on any of the pieces next to the space, and that piece will slide over the space. Continue this until the pieces are arranged in numerical order from upper-left to lower-right."

130. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 130 Tcl Sample pack $w.msg -side top frame $w.buttons pack $w.buttons -side bottom -fill x -pady 2m button $w.buttons.dismiss -text Dismiss -command "destroy $w" button $w.buttons.code -text "See Code" -command "showCode $w" pack $w.buttons.dismiss $w.buttons.code -side left - expand 1

131. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 131 IEEE 1484.6: Course Sequencing WG Chair: Jim Schoening, US Army (CECOM) Technical Editor: Frank Farance, Edutool.Com URL: http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg6 http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg6 Documents: –Various presentations –Status: expect submissions by 1999-12 –Summary: Library services for courseware and content sequencing, based on work of IEEE 1484.10

132. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 132 IEEE 1484.6: Pedagogical Sequencing Sequencing systems, examples: –Type #1: Content is linked via pre-requisites and co-requisites –Type #2: Simple navigation algorithm –Type #3: Rule-based –Type #4: Programming/scripting language Sequencing may be internal (embedded) or external (attached) For internal sequencing, method to extract sequencing component Sequencer System Learning Resources Content Retrieve (metadata) Content Search History A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t L a u n c h C o n t e n t Content Internal Sequencing External Sequencing Content

133. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 133 Learning Content (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t IEEE 1484.6: Course Sequencing WG Primary design issues: coach, performance info, assessment info, query, catalog info (metadata), locator index (e.g., URLs), invocation of learning content Secondary design issues: learning preferences, learner records, learning resources, delivery, learning content Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) MultimediaBehavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

134. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 134 IEEE 1484.6: Sampling Of Common Sequencing Features Page turning Linear sequence Motion algorithms Prerequisites Embedded code Object-based (hidden implementation) Ontology-based Add missing knowledge Multiple choice Fill in blank Choose M of N True-false Write sentences Submit project Randomized content Content templates

135. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 135 IEEE 1484.6: Sequencing Is Independent Of Granularity Sequencing can be used at any granularity level: –Sequencing among “courses” –Sequencing among “blocks” –Sequencing among “modules” –Sequencing among “lessons” –Sequencing among “assignable units” –Sequencing within “assignable units” –Page turning Sequencing can vary among levels, among “units” within a level

136. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 136 IEEE 1484.6: Sampling of Sequencing Methods At Various Granularities PrerequisitesPage turner, linear Low-level template Motion algorithm Ontologies (Add missing knowledge) Embedded Code (“Are you ready?”) GranularitySequencing Types Coarse Medium Fine Sample Course Sequencing: Coarse granularity (e.g., prerequisites) sequencing for medium granularity components; medium granularity sequencing (e.g., motion algorithms, ontologies, embedded code) for fine granularity components; and so on...

137. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 137 IEEE 1484.17: Content Packaging WG Chair: Mike Fore, US Army (ATSC) Technical Editor: Thor Anderson, IMS Project URL: http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg17 http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg17 Documents: –Various presentations –Status: expect submissions by 2000-03 –Summary: Content aggregation/disaggregation based on extending JAR files with learning object manifests

138. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 138 IEEE 1484.17: Scope This standard will describe the packaging of learning content. Learning content, typically, is a collection of components that a copied, transmitted, purchased, executed, and used as a single unit. Units may be combined to make larger units. This standard will describe the format, coding, encoding, environment, attributes, and interactions of this content. This standard will not describe portable content, but will describe a portable method for packaging content.

139. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 139 Learning Content Multimedia (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t IEEE 1484.17: Content Packaging WG Primary design issues: learning content, catalog info (metadata) Secondary design issues: coach, locator index (e.g., URLs), delivery, learning resources Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) Behavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

140. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 140 IEEE 1484.17: Purpose [1/2] The nature of web-based learning, internet delivery, intellectual property rights, and electronic commerce motivate the need for a single unit of transmission for these learning systems. A single unit would allow, for example, a simple click of a URL in a browser to activate learning content.

141. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 141 IEEE 1484.17: Purpose [2/2] This packaging format would allow the compilation of not only media components (text, graphics, audio, video), but would support the common packaging of metadata, attributes, and supporting materials — all within a single transmission unit. Higher quality would be possible because the user or system is no longer responsible for piecing the components together — the common packaging format would eliminate mistakes and would increase interoperability.

142. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 142 IEEE 1484.17: Technical Requirements The packaging file format must be widely known and supported, across platform boundaries. The structure of the package shall be determined solely by the manifest, not by an implied directory or nesting offered in some manner by the package file format. Deeply nested metadata and content does not require recursive extraction, i.e. resources for extraction of specific elements from a package are kept to a minimum. Metadata, organizational data, and other types of related information must be enclosed in a package such that the associations between these are properly maintained.

143. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 143 IEEE 1484.17: Packaging and Interchange Interoperable method of packaging and shipping content Bundles content elements, meta data and supporting materials in the same package Exposes both physical and logical structure of content package Content - Web pages, etc. Media - JPEG, etc Installation Programs Content Maps Manifest Package Metadata

144. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 144 IEEE 1484.17: Sample Packaging Manifest Info [1/2] <tocr ref="0" type="alphabetical" title="An alphabetical overview" name="000A.md" size="510" sourcename="index.md" default/>

145. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 145 IEEE 1484.17: Sample Packaging Manifest Info [2/2]

146. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 146 IEEE LTSC (P1484) Data and Metadata Activities IEEE 1484.12 Learning Objects Metadata ** IEEE 1484.9 Localization IEEE 1484.14 Semantics and Exchange Bindings ** IEEE 1484.15 Data Interchange Protocols IEEE 1484.16 HTTP Bindings ** Extended slide presentation for this WG

147. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 147 IEEE 1484.12: Learning Objects Metadata (LOM) WG Chair: Wayne Hodgins, Autodesk Technical Editor: Erik Duval, ARIADNE Tech Leads: Tom Wason, IMS; Erik Duval, ARIADNE URL: http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg12 http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg12 Documents: –“Learning Objects Metadata (LOM), Draft 2.5” –Status: Working Draft #2, 1999-01 –Summary: Search/cataloging information –Target: Draft Standard by 2000Q1

148. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 148 Metadata, What Is It? [1/5] Literally, “data about data” –Literal definition applies to most data In practice: –many definitions... some conflicting –many systems overlap usage, e.g., “metadata” describes both attributes and search/retrieval info

149. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 149 Metadata, What Is It? [2/5] Definition #1: “Metadata is a description of elements that comprise an aggregate type” Example: An address label contains: name, address, city, state, zip. The metadata is: five elements, the first is a string of maximal length 20, …, the fourth is a two character string from a limited set of values, the fifth is string of exactly five numeric characters. Metadata is the type, not the values or instances

150. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 150 Metadata, What Is It? [3/5] Definition #2: “Metadata is the elements that comprise an aggregate” Example: An address label contains: name, address, city, state, zip. The metadata is: name: “John Doe”, address: “123 Main Street”, city: “Anytown”, state: “DC”, zip: “20000”. Metadata is the data elements

151. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 151 Metadata, What Is It? [4/5] Definition #3: “Metadata is information that helps or facilitates search and retrieval” Example: An address label contains: name, address, city, state, zip. The metadata might feature a “personal” or “business” attribute (many address labels might share); or “home” or “office” (only one address label associated with each). Metadata is info that facilitates search/retrieval This definition describes IEEE 1484.12 usage

152. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 152 Metadata, What Is It? [5/5] Definition #4: “Metadata is information that is associated with an object” Example: An address label contains: name, address, city, state, zip. The metadata might be features such as access permissions, last modified date, internal references. Metadata is the set of associated attributes

153. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 153 Learning Objects, What Are They? [1/5] In practice: –many definitions... some conflicting –many systems overlap usage, e.g., “learning objects” describes both reuse and containerization Work still... refining definitions

154. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 154 Learning Objects, What Are They? [2/5] Related definitions, courtesy Claude Ostyn, Asymetrix Learning Systems: Learning Asset (LA) –Reusable learning resource (e.g. course, course module, test item, document, tool, etc.) Learning Object Metadata (LOM) –Data that describes a Learning Asset –Is the metadata component of a Learning Object Learning Object (LO) –Conceptual, not a concrete object –What you get when LOM is associated with LA –Not an object as defined in Object Oriented Programming –May be represented by an OOP object in an implementation

155. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 155 Learning Objects, What Are They? [3/5] A Learning Asset encapsulates data or behaviors. –May be portable (e.g. HTML) –May be implementation or system dependent (e.g. a Windows ToolBook module, a Quicktime file) –Different LOMs may reference the same learning Asset –Different LOMs may use the same learning Asset in different ways –May be very small or very large –A learning Asset may be off-line (person, physical book)

156. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 156 Learning Objects, What Are They? [4/5] Other “Learning Object” definitions, courtesy Frank Farance, Edutool.Com: Definition #1: [reusability] –“Learning Object” means “focus on reuse” –Designing for use in multiple contexts –Common launch/parameterization Definition #2: [containerization] –“Learning Object” means “focus on containerization, separation” –Copy/transmit an object — black box –Labeling, metadata, attributes –Electronic commerces

157. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 157 Learning Objects, What Are They? [5/5] Definition #3: [goals] –“Learning Object” means “focus on instructional objective” –Describing objectives, goals, knowledge, achievements, accomplishments Definition #4: –“Learning Object” means “things that learn” –Not in common use Definition #5: [separation] –“Learning Object” means “media-only, not course structure” –Connecting/associating/embedding structure and content –Other associated attributes (metadata)

158. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 158 Learning Objects Metadata  Learning Content Cataloging Information learning content: information that is intended to be rendered as a multimedia in a learning experience learning content cataloging information: information associated with learning content learning object metadata: see “learning content cataloging information” [Definitions courtesy F. Farance.]

159. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 159 Learning Content (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t IEEE 1484.12: Learning Objects Metadata (LOM) WG Primary design issues: query, catalog info (metadata), locator index (e.g., URLs) Secondary design issues: coach, learning resources, learning content, delivery Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) MultimediaBehavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

160. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 160 Metadata, Where Is It? Metadata may be embedded Metadata may be attached Metadata may have storage Metadata may be generated on demand Metadata may be static Metadata may be dynamic Implementation features, not functional features

161. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 161 IEEE 1484.12: Metadata Embedded/Attached Information technology issues: –How is metadata embedded in content? –How is metadata attached to content? –How is a locator peeled from metadata (catalog info)? Learning content issues: –How is the metadata specification applied to learning content? –How does metadata support pedagogy alternatives? –Intellectual property rights management (IPRM)? Learning Resources Content Embedded Metadata Attached Metadata Content Locator is “peeled” from Catalog Info (metadata) Learning Content Query L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator

162. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 162 IEEE 1484.12: Locator Index, Resource (e.g., URL) Related issues: –What is the locator index syntax? Only URLs/URIs? –How are locators extended for navigation? Example: lessons 1-3 and 5 –How is content invoked/launch? What are the semantics of “invoke/launch”? –What is the “information category”? Examples: help message, presentation, simulation, practice environment, coaching –What is the “type” of the Learning Content? Examples: applet, HTML, XML, executable, tutor, script Delivery To User Locator is used to launch/identify content L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Locator Learning Content

163. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 163 IEEE 1484.12: Learning Object Metadata Mapping of Dublin Core Elements [1/2] DC.Identifier  1.1 General.Identifier DC.Title  1.2 General.Title DC.Language  1.4 General.Language DC.Description  1.5 General.Description DC.Subject  1.6 General.Keywords and 9.1 Classification.Purpose DC.Coverage  1.7 General.Coverage DC.Type  5.2 Educational. LearningResourceType

164. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 164 IEEE 1484.12: Learning Object Metadata Mapping of Dublin Core Elements [2/2] DC.Date  2.3.3 LifeCycle.Contribute.Date DC.Creator  2.3.2 LifeCycle.Contribute.Entity DC.OtherCreator  2.3.2 LifeCycle.Contribute.Entity DC.Publisher  2.3.2 LifeCycle.Contribute.Entity DC.Format  4.1 Technical.Format DC.Rights  6 Rights DC.Relation  7 Relation DC.Source  7 Relation.Resource

165. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 165 IEEE 1484.12: Learning Object Metadata “General” Elements General –Identifier –Title –Catalog Entry Catalogue Entry –Language –Description –Keywords –Coverage –Structure –AggregationLevel

166. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 166 IEEE 1484.12: Learning Object Metadata “Life Cycle” Elements Version Status Create –Contribute Role Entity Date

167. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 167 IEEE 1484.12: Learning Object Metadata “Meta-Metadata” Elements Identifier CatalogEntry –Catalogue –Entry Contribute –Role –Entity –Date MetadataScheme Language

168. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 168 IEEE 1484.12: Learning Object Metadata “Technical” Elements Format Size Location Requirements –Type –Name –MinimumVersion –MaximumVersion InstallationRemarks OtherPlatformRequirements Duration

169. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 169 IEEE 1484.12: Learning Object Metadata “Educational” Elements InteractivityType LearningResourceType InteractivityLevel SemanticDensity IntendedEndUserRole Context TypicalAgeRange Difficulty TypicalLearningTime Description Language

170. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 170 IEEE 1484.12: Learning Object Metadata “Rights Management” Elements Cost CopyrightAndOtherRestrictions Description

171. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 171 IEEE 1484.12: Learning Object Metadata “Relation” Elements Kind Resource –Identifier –Description

172. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 172 IEEE 1484.12: Learning Object Metadata “Annotation” Elements Person Date Description

173. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 173 IEEE 1484.12: Learning Object Metadata “Classification” Elements Purpose TaxonPath –Source –Taxon Identifier Entry Description Keywords

174. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 174 IEEE 1484.9: Localization SG Chair: Erik Duval, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven Technical Editor: To Be Assigned URL: http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg9 http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg9 Documents: –None –Status: Not yet formed, PAR not yet approved

175. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 175 IEEE 1484.9: Problem Statement Areas of internationalization (I18N) –Metadata –Vocabularies –Taxonomies –Performance information Example: internationalize for use in languages other than US English (or US culture/institution dependencies)

176. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 176 Learning Content (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t IEEE 1484.9: Localization WG Primary design issues: query, catalog info (metadata), locator index (e.g., URLs) Secondary design issues: coach, learning resources, learning content, delivery Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) MultimediaBehavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

177. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 177 IEEE 1484.14: Semantics And Exchange Bindings (SXB) WG Chair: Tyde Richards, Macromedia Technical Editor: Not yet assigned URL: http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg14 http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg14 Documents: –Various presentations –Status: expect submissions by 1999-12 –Summary: APIs and XML bindings of data

178. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 178 IEEE 1484.14: Problem Statement Define common APIs and codings for use across LTSC working groups Provide XML bindings with concentrated XML expertise in Working Group

179. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 179 Learning Content Multimedia (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t IEEE 1484.14: Semantics and Exchange Bindings (SXB) WG Primary design issues: performance info, assessment info, catalog info, query Secondary design issues: evaluation, learner records, coach, learning resources Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) Behavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

180. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 180 IEEE 1484.14: APIs and XML Bindings IEEE LTSC working groups that collaborate with IEEE 1484.14 on API and XML work: –IEEE 1484.2 Portable student records (PAPI) –IEEE 1484.4 Task Model –IEEE 1484.6 Course Sequencing –IEEE 1484.7 Tool/Agent Communication –IEEE 1484.8 Enterprise Systems –IEEE 1484.10 CBT Data Interchange –IEEE 1484.11 Computer Managed Instruction (CMI) –IEEE 1484.12 Learning Objects Metadata (LOM) –IEEE 1484.17 Content Packaging

181. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 181 1484.X Methodology: Work Flow And Progressive Deliverables Requirements Functionality Conceptual Model Semantics Bindings: APIs Bindings: Codings Bindings: Protocols Encodings: Data Formats Encodings: Calling Conventions Encodings: Various Communication Layers

182. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 182 1484.X Requirements: Needs and Desirables Of Users, Institutions, Developers, etc. Informative, not part of standard => only conform to interoperability Examples: –Search digital libraries –Learning content access to student info –Validate student enrollment –Search for employee qualifications Requirements Functionality Conceptual Model Semantics Bindings: APIs Bindings: Codings Bindings: Protocols Encodings: Data Formats Encodings: Calling Conventions Encodings: Various Communication Layers

183. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 183 1484.X Requirements: Sources and Influences Requirements Functionality Conceptual Model Semantics Bindings: APIs Bindings: Codings Bindings: Protocols Encodings: Data Formats Encodings: Calling Conventions Encodings: Various Communication Layers Requirements Functionality Related IndustriesEdu-RelatedOther Sources

184. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 184 1484.X Functionality: What It Does Partition into functional areas Examples: –Partition into personal, preference, performance, portfolio info –Session definition for intellectual property usage –Get/put values/records –Describe learning content –Partition into sender- receiver, client-server, publisher-subscriber Requirements Functionality Conceptual Model Semantics Bindings: APIs Bindings: Codings Bindings: Protocols Encodings: Data Formats Encodings: Calling Conventions Encodings: Various Communication Layers

185. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 185 1484.X Functionality: Sources and Influences Requirements Functionality Conceptual Model Semantics Bindings: APIs Bindings: Codings Bindings: Protocols Encodings: Data Formats Encodings: Calling Conventions Encodings: Various Communication Layers Functionality Conceptual Model Requirements Related IndustriesEdu-RelatedOther Sources

186. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 186 1484.X Conceptual Model: How A Virtual Implementation Works “Theory of Operation” Examples: –Application opens repository –Authentication –Scan/search for data –Read/write data –Perform database and E-commerce transactions –Multiple open sessions –Close sessions Requirements Functionality Conceptual Model Semantics Bindings: APIs Bindings: Codings Bindings: Protocols Encodings: Data Formats Encodings: Calling Conventions Encodings: Various Communication Layers

187. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 187 1484.X Conceptual Model: Sources and Influences Requirements Functionality Conceptual Model Semantics Bindings: APIs Bindings: Codings Bindings: Protocols Encodings: Data Formats Encodings: Calling Conventions Encodings: Various Communication Layers Conceptual Model Semantics Functionality Data InterchangeRelated SpecsRelated Stds

188. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 188 1484.X Semantics: Detailed Meaning Of Operations/Transactions Assertions: sentences using shall, should, or may Inquiries: range of values Negotiations: heuristics Examples: –Data model element X uses closed vocabulary Y –PutValue: replaces old object, in place –Search: scans all records and returns those matching regular expressions Requirements Functionality Conceptual Model Semantics Bindings: APIs Bindings: Codings Bindings: Protocols Encodings: Data Formats Encodings: Calling Conventions Encodings: Various Communication Layers

189. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 189 1484.X Semantics: Sources and Influences Requirements Functionality Conceptual Model Semantics Bindings: APIs Bindings: Codings Bindings: Protocols Encodings: Data Formats Encodings: Calling Conventions Encodings: Various Communication Layers Semantics Bindings: APIs Conceptual Model Bindings: Codings Bindings: Protocols Language-RelatedProtocolsRelated Stds

190. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 190 APIs, Codings, Protocols — All Three Are Required [1/6] Semantics are “bound” to APIs, codings, and protocols Designing for all three produces more coherent, harmonized design Different stakeholders have different foci: –some want only APIs –some want only codings –some want only protocols –some want a combination APIs, codings, and protocols can “re-use”, “re-target”, or “re-apply” existing standards

191. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 191 APIs, Codings, Protocols — All Three Are Required [2/6] Motivation for not standardizing APIs: –Only interested in system-to-system interoperability, i.e., focus is on codings or protocols What happens if APIs are not standardized? –Each application develops its own “libraries” –Code and application reusability is greatly decreased because no common API or API framework –Much effort is spent “reinventing the wheel” by building low-level subsystems that provide services normally supplied by APIs

192. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 192 APIs, Codings, Protocols — All Three Are Required [3/6] Motivation for not standardizing codings: –Programmers only use (standard) APIs –Codings are not necessary because databases are proprietary –Too hard: vendor, user, institutional variants/extensions What happens if codings are not standardized? –Each application develops its own data model and representation –Exchanging data among systems becomes impractical because of data model incompatibilities –Data representation incompatibilities  much data “mediation” and conversion

193. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 193 APIs, Codings, Protocols — All Three Are Required [4/6] Motivation for not standardizing protocols: –Only (standard) APIs are necessary, protocols are vendors’ “value-added” feature, thus proprietary –Only (standard) codings are necessary... “just point me to the data”, protocols are lower implementation details What happens if protocols are not standardized? –Each (proprietary) implementation develops its own protocols to communicate across wide area networks –Proprietary solutions produce “islands” of interoperability –Wide area, multi-vendor solutions become impossible

194. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 194 APIs, Codings, Protocols — All Three Are Required [5/6] Requirements Functionality Conceptual Model Semantics Bindings: APIs Bindings: Codings Bindings: Protocols Encodings: Data Formats Encodings: Calling Conventions Encodings: Various Communication Layers Semantics Bindings: APIs Bindings: Codings Bindings: Protocols - Std APIs may be implemented via std or proprietary Protocols - Std Protocols may be accessed by std or proprietary APIs - Both std APIs/Protocols improve wide area interoperability - Std APIs may use std or proprietary Codings - Std Codings may be used by std or proprietary APIs - Both std APIs/Codings improve portable apps/data - Std Protocols may use std or proprietary Codings - Std Codings may be exchanged via std or proprietary Protocols - Both std Protocols/Codings improve system interoperability Harmonized standard APIs, Codings, and Protocols promote: - Application portability - Data portability - Multi-vendor, “open” solutions - Wide area, end-to-end interoperability

195. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 195 APIs, Codings, Protocols — All Three Are Required [6/6] Common APIs: –Application portability –Separation of application and low-level implementation Common codings: –Representation of information –File/exchange formats, portable data Common protocols: –Necessary for multi-vendor and wide area networking –Internet relies on common protocols, not common APIs Common APIs, codings, protocols: –All are necessary

196. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 196 1484.X: Codings vs. Encodings Codings: the structure and representation of information –Examples: XML, Tcl, tabbed, object-oriented, Java binding Encodings: the bit/byte representation and format –Examples: ASCII, ISO 10646, IEEE floating point, UNIX x86 calling conventions Both coding and encoding example: –“The name shall be coded in XML as … … and encoded in ASCII.”

197. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 197 1484.X Bindings: Mappings To Other Standards Frameworks Bindings to APIs Bindings to codings (information organization) Bindings to protocols Examples: –APIs: C/C++, Java, Perl –Codings: XML, TCL –Protocols: HTTP, DCTP Requirements Functionality Conceptual Model Semantics Bindings: APIs Bindings: Codings Bindings: Protocols Encodings: Data Formats Encodings: Calling Conventions Encodings: Various Communication Layers

198. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 198 1484.X Encodings: Bit/Octet Data Representation and Format Not to be confused with “codings” Examples: –POSIX/Win32 subroutine linkage –UTF8 –IETF text format Requirements Functionality Conceptual Model Semantics Bindings: APIs Bindings: Codings Bindings: Protocols Encodings: Data Formats Encodings: Calling Conventions Encodings: Various Communication Layers

199. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 199 1484.X: Bindings -> Encodings APIs -> Calling Conventions Requirements Functionality Conceptual Model Semantics Bindings: APIs Bindings: Codings Bindings: Protocols Encodings: Data Formats Encodings: Calling Conventions Encodings: Various Communication Layers Bindings: APIs Encodings: Calling Conventions Semantics Language-RelatedOtherRelated Stds Language/Protocol Related OS-Related

200. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 200 1484.X: Bindings -> Encodings Codings -> Data Formats Requirements Functionality Conceptual Model Semantics Bindings: APIs Bindings: Codings Bindings: Protocols Encodings: Data Formats Encodings: Calling Conventions Encodings: Various Communication Layers Bindings: Codings Encodings: Data Formats Semantics Related SpecsRelated StdsStds Activity Related StdsStds Activity

201. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 201 1484.X: Bindings -> Encodings Protocols -> Communication Layers Requirements Functionality Conceptual Model Semantics Bindings: APIs Bindings: Codings Bindings: Protocols Encodings: Data Formats Encodings: Calling Conventions Encodings: Various Communication Layers Bindings: Protocols Encodings: Various Communication Layers Semantics Related Stds/SpecsStds/SpecsStds Activity Presentation FeaturesOctet Encodings

202. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 202 IEEE 1484.14: API and XML Bindings IEEE 1484.X is:.2,.4,.6,.7,.8,.10., 11., 12.,.17 Functionality Conceptual Model Semantics Bindings: APIsBindings: CodingsBindings: Protocols Encodings: Data Formats Encodings: Calling Conventions Encodings: Various Communication Layers IEEE 1484.X Informative Wording IEEE 1484.X Normative Wording IEEE 1484.X, IEEE 1484.14 XML IEEE 1484.14 SDA Informative Wording IEEE 1484.X, IEEE 1484.14 SDA Normative Wording IEEE 1484.X, 1484.14, And Other Standards IEEE 1484.15 DCTP, IEEE 1484.16 HTTP Various Standards Requirements

203. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 203 IEEE 1484.14: APIs and XML Bindings Define APIs: C, C++, Java, JavaScript, Visual Basic, Perl, Tcl Contributions from several organization Collaboration with many standards organizations Related protocol work: –IEEE 1484.15 DCTP (data/control transfer protocol) –IEEE 1484.16 HTTP bindings

204. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 204 IEEE 1484.14: Session Services, API Examples NewSession() : Opens a new session to repository DestroySession() : Closes repository OpenView() : Starts data access to a portion of the repository CloseView() : Ends data access SetParam(), QueryParam() : Changes or retrieves session parameters

205. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 205 IEEE 1484.14: Handler Services, API Examples SetHandler(), QueryHandler() : Set up and inquire about event handlers RequestSecurity(), RespondSecurity() : Allow “server-side” authentication requests RequestNomad(), RespondNomad() : Can setup nomadic (reconnectable) connections RequestEvent(), RespondEvent() : Used for handling most exceptions and errors

206. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 206 IEEE 1484.14: Data Perspective Services, API Examples SetNaming(), QueryNaming() : Set or inquire naming convention SetCoding(), QueryCoding() : Sets data coding, i.e., organization of information SetView(), QueryView() : Set or inquire view

207. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 207 IEEE 1484.14: Data Transfer/Walk Services, API Examples GetValue(), PutValue() GetDeepValue(), PutDeepValue() Copy(), DeepCopy() Move(), DeepMove() NewObject(), DeleteObject() WalkGetObject(), WalkPutObject() List(), DeepList()

208. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 208 IEEE 1484.15: Data Interchange Protocols WG Chair: Paul Siegel, Edutool.Com Technical Editor: Frank Farance, Edutool.Com URL: http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg15 http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg15 Documents: –“Data and Control Transfer Protocol” http://edutool.com/dctp http://edutool.com/dctp –Status: expect submissions by 1999-12 –Summary: Protocols for high-volume, small-sized transactions

209. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 209 IEEE 1484.15: Scope This standard will provide a common lightweight protocol for exchanging data among clients, servers, and peers. The standard addresses data exchange at a finer granularity than HTTP and is intended to perform better in a wide range of network infrastructures, qualities of service, distributed systems, nomadic systems, and security systems. The standard will define a protocol and semantics that can easily be implemented in networking applications and can easily be bound to APIs.

210. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 210 Learning Content Multimedia (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t IEEE 1484.15: Data Interchange Protocols WG Primary design issues: performance info, assessment info, catalog info, query Secondary design issues: evaluation, learner records, coach, learning resources Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) Behavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

211. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 211 IEEE 1484.15: Purpose A good number of protocols exist for exchanging data, such as FTP, HTTP, CORBA. However, these protocols don't perform well (e.g., HTTP is not good for fine grain data), they don't have enough semantics (e.g., FTP cannot get/put attributes, properties, or metadata), or they are difficult to interface to (e.g., CORBA cannot be conveniently accessed in Perl or Tcl). A lightweight protocol that was easily implementable and addressed the needs of learning technology would have wide acceptance and integration within many applications because protocols are one of the key elements to portable, interoperable distributed (distance) learning systems.

212. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 212 IEEE 1484.15: DCTP Example Messages RESOLVE : connect to repository OPEN : begin access to repository GIVEAUTH, NEEDAUTH : authentication NOMAD : nomadic (disconnected) access CV : change view (directory) GETVAL : get info from repository PUTVAL : put info to repository LIST : retrieve names in repository CLOSE : end access to repository UNRESOLVE : disconnect from repository

213. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 213 IEEE 1484.15: Sample DCTP Transactions Attach to user “Côté”:  RESOLVE /home/C%e2t%dc  RESULT 1  OPEN 1 read-write  NEEDAUTH password  GIVEAUTH password hashed “asbkjed”  SET CODING XML Get personal info:  GETVAL name  RESULT Côté Joseph

214. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 214 IEEE 1484.15: Sample DCTP Transactions Read performance info for “session-01”:  LIST performance  math-02  physics-11  CV math-02  LIST  session-01  session-02  GETVAL session-01  RESULT 19990102030405 89 numeric

215. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 215 IEEE 1484.15: Sample DCTP Transactions Write performance info for new “session-03”:  LIST  session-01  session-02  NEW list session-03  PUTVAL session-03 19990809101112 A+ letter

216. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 216 IEEE 1484.16: HTTP Bindings WG Chair: Steve Griffin, IMS Project Technical Editor: Not yet assigned URL: http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg16 http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg16 Documents: –Various presentations, IMS work –Status: expect submissions by 2000-03 –Summary: HTTP-tunneled interface for data interchange

217. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 217 IEEE 1484.16: Scope This standard will provide common bindings to HTTP for learning technology services. The standard will specify common URL suffixes (e.g., “ cgi-bin ” paths), HTTP commands, and/or HTTP POST body contents that will correspond to common learning technology services available through web servers. The standard will include the semantic description, syntax and encodings (in the case of post body contents), and interface definition to these services, and extension mechanisms to support future growth.

218. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 218 Learning Content Multimedia (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t IEEE 1484.16: HTTP Bindings WG Primary design issues: performance info, assessment info, catalog info, query Secondary design issues: evaluation, learner records, coach Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) Behavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

219. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 219 IEEE 1484.16: Purpose Web browsers and servers are commonly available, thus, the desire the leverage existing infrastructure. A common standard would allow the developers of learning content, management systems, learner profile systems, metadata systems, and supporting services to access services via a common web- based interface.

220. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 220 IEEE 1484.16: Why HTTP? Platform independent Programming model independent Works with firewalls and common firewall configurations

221. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 221 IEEE 1484.16: Service Example Service Binding Examples –RMI –DCOM –CORBA –FTP –HTTP Student Profile Service Content What is the student’s name? Steve You didn’t ask the question in a way that I understood? For some reason, I can’t answer your question.

222. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 222 IEEE 1484.16: Related Activities Standards and specification development organizations: –IEEE 1484.15 Data Interchange Protocol –IMS API HTTP binding –AICC HTTP Protocol Other similar efforts: –As an ORB transport WIDL (Java to HTTP binding) DCOM HTTP tunneling Other tunneling protocols CORBA? –Extension to HTTP WebDAV (from W3C)

223. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 223 IEEE LTSC (P1484) Mgmt. Systems and Applications Activities IEEE 1484.11 Computer Managed Instruction ** IEEE 1484.18 Platform and Media Profiles IEEE 1484.7 Tool/Agent Communication IEEE 1484.8 Enterprise Interfaces ** Extended slide presentation for this WG

224. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 224 IEEE 1484.11: Computer Managed Instruction (CMI) WG Chair: Jack Hyde, FlightSafetyBoeing Technical Editor: Kris Sundaram URL: http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg11 http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg11 Documents: –AICC contributed AGR006 as base document –Expect AICC to contribute AGR009 –“CMI Draft 1.8” Status: Working Draft, 1998-09 –Summary: Learning management system interface

225. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 225 IEEE 1484.11: Document Development Original contribution from AICC Improve technical areas: –Multi-platform –Longer technical horizon (>5 years) –Better definition of “assertions” ==> better conformance testing Improve process: –Accredited standards process to formalize specification –IEEE LTSC will do maintenance/interpretation phase

226. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 226 Learning Content Multimedia (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t IEEE 1484.11: Computer Managed Instruction (CMI) WG Primary design issues: performance info, assessment info, query, catalog info (metadata), locator index (e.g., URLs), invocation of learning content Secondary design issues: behavior, learner records, coach, learning resources, learning content, delivery Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) Behavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

227. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 227 IEEE 1484.11: CMI Separates Content From Management Systems Sets lesson parameters Launches lessons Records lessons’ results Framework for organizing content (assignable units) LAN and web-based systems Collaboration with: IEEE 1484.6 Course Sequencing IEEE 1484.10 CBT Data Interchange IEEE 1484.12 Learning Objects Metadata IEEE 1484.14 APIs and XML IEEE 1484.16 HTTP Bindings

228. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 228 IEEE 1484.18: Platform Profiles and Media WG Chair: Frank Farance, Edutool.Com Technical Editor: Not yet assigned URL: http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg18 http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg18 Documents: –Working group just formed –Status: expect submissions by 2000-03 –Summary: Functional specification of browsers, media, etc., via standards profiles

229. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 229 IEEE 1484.18: Scope This standard profile will identify existing standards and specifications of learning technology platforms and their content. Several standards profiles will be developed for several operating scenarios, such as "browser platform", "workstation platform", "web media types". The standard profile will not specify the technical details, but limitations and enhancements to these standards and specifications. It is expected that these profiles will be updated and amended often enough to track current technology.

230. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 230 Learning Content Multimedia (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t IEEE 1484.18: Platform Profiles WG Primary design issues: delivery, learning content, locator index (e.g., URLs), multimedia, learner entity, behavior, learner entity Secondary design issues: learning preferences, evaluation, coach, query, catalog info (metadata), learning resources Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) Behavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

231. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 231 IEEE 1484.18 Purpose Many systems require compatibility for common suite of features such as browsers, operating systems, and content. A standard profile would specify functionality (e.g., Java 1.1, JPEF, GIF-89, C95,...) rather than implementations (e.g., Netscape 4.0, Windows 95, Adobe PDF plug-in). A specification based on functionality allows consumers and vendors a wider range of implementations that are conforming. Since many standards and specifications may be implied by compatibility, a standard profile would allow consumers and vendors to point to a single document that references the collection of features.

232. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 232 IEEE 1484.7: Tool/Agent Communication WG Chair: Randy Saunders, Raytheon Learning Institute Technical Editor: To be assigned URL: http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg7 http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg7 Documents: –Tool/Agent Communication, 1997-10-16 http://ltsc.ieee.org/ltscdocs/wg7/tooltutorspec.html http://ltsc.ieee.org/ltscdocs/wg7/tooltutorspec.html –Status: Base Document, 1997-09 –Summary: Common interactions among tools, agents, and portable interfaces –Target: Not yet planned

233. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 233 IEEE 1484.7: Problem Statement How can tools communicate in a vendor-independent way? How can applications (agents) access tool so custom software can be integrated with COTS (commercial off-the-shelf) tools? Component integration is key: significantly lowers development cost for learning content, tools, and systems

234. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 234 Learning Content Multimedia (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t IEEE 1484.7: Tool/Agent Communication WG Primary design issues: coach, behavior, evaluation, assessment info, performance info, learner records, query, catalog info (metadata), locator index (e.g., URLs) Secondary design issues: query, catalog info (metadata), learning resources, delivery Delivery Evaluation Coach Learning Resources Query (new) Behavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

235. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 235 IEEE 1484.7: Configuration Example Example: CMU Equation Solving Tutor (EST) must communicate with other tools, e.g., spreadsheets Technical requirements: communication among tools and their agents; vendor independence Techniques: scripting languages, simulation protocols (e.g., DoD DMSO HLA) Agent 1 Agent 2Tool Tool/Agent Messages

236. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 236 IEEE 1484.8: Enterprise Interfaces WG Chair: Thor Anderson, IMS Project Technical Editor: To Be Assigned URL: http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg8 http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg8 Documents: –None –Status: Forming, PAR not yet approved –Summary: Interfaces for back office systems

237. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 237 Learning Content (history) A s s e s s m e n t A s s e s s m e n t IEEE 1484.8: Enterprise Interfaces WG Primary design issues: learning preferences, performance info, learner records Secondary design issues: learner entity, coach Delivery Evaluation Learning Resources Query (new) MultimediaBehavior Learner Records Performance (current) Learner Entity Coach Performance/ Preferences Learning Preferences L o c a t o rL o c a t o r Catalog Info Locator Interaction Context

238. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 238 IEEE 1484.8: Information Sources/Relations Information about people and organizations: –Personal demographic/address data –Personal security/email directory data –Groups –Organization demographic and address data –Education/training registration –Degrees, certificates, competencies

239. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 239 IEEE 1484.8: Information Source/Relations Information about classes (or learning unit): –Class and component descriptions; other information –Class scheduling –Linking teachers to classes Relationship between learners and classes: –Class enrollment –Attendance tracking –Completion/results of course components –Class completion/grading –Class work groups

240. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 240 IEEE 1484.8: Sample Applications Human resource systems: tracks skills and competencies and define eligibility for training programs Student administration systems: supports course catalog management, class scheduling, academic program registration, class enrollment, attendance tracking, grade book, grading, etc. E-mail, security, directory services: tracks IDs, passwords, E-mail addresses, and other learner information across an entire organization

241. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 241 For Further Information IEEE LTSC (P1484) web site: http://ltsc.ieee.org Check web site for papers, meetings, minutes, etc. http://ltsc.ieee.org Chair: Jim Schoening, US Army (CECOM) +1 732 532 0118, Schoenin@mail1.monmouth.army.mil Schoenin@mail1.monmouth.army.mil Vice Chair: Frank Farance, Edutool.Com +1 212 486 4700, frank@farance.com frank@farance.com Secretary: Debbie Brown, Mississippi State University +1 601 325 9397, debbie@erc.msstate.edu debbie@erc.msstate.edu Administrator: Kris Sundaram, sundram@hotmail.com sundram@hotmail.com

242. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 242 For Further Information LTSC General Mailing List –Send one line to “ listserv@listserv.readadp.com ”: subscribe P1484 FirstName LastName –E-Mail Reflector: p1484@listserv.readadp.com 1484.1, Architecture and Reference Model –Mike Collett, Education Online mike@collett.demon.co.uk mike@collett.demon.co.uk –Send one line to “ listserv@listserv.readadp.com ”: subscribe ARCH-RM FirstName LastName –E-Mail Reflector: arch-rm@listserv.readadp.com

243. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 243 For Further Information 1484.2, Learner Model –John Tyler, MITRE Corp. jtyler@mitre.org jtyler@mitre.org –Send one line to “ listserv@listserv.readadp.com ”: subscribe LEARNER-MODEL FirstName LastName –E-Mail Reflector: learner-model@listserv.readadp.com 1484.3, Glossary –Katherine Sinitsa, IRTC ITS UNESCO/IIP kath@umod.kiev.ua kath@umod.kiev.ua –Send one line to “ listserv@listserv.readadp.com ”: subscribe GLOSSARY FirstName LastName –E-Mail Reflector: glossary@listserv.readadp.com

244. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 244 For Further Information 1484.4, Task Model –Tom Probert, US Dept. of Labor probert@ecii.org probert@ecii.org –Send one line to “ listserv@listserv.readadp.com ”: subscribe TASK-MODEL FirstName LastName –E-Mail Reflector: task-model@listserv.readadp.com 1484.5, User Interfaces –Ian Wright, Vega UK ian.wright@ibm.net ian.wright@ibm.net –Send one line to “ listserv@listserv.readadp.com ”: subscribe USER-INTERFACES FirstName LastName –E-Mail Reflector: user-interfaces@listserv.readadp.com

245. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 245 For Further Information 1484.6, Course Sequencing –Jim Schoening, US Army (CECOM) Schoenin@mail1.monmouth.army.mil Schoenin@mail1.monmouth.army.mil –Send one line to “ listserv@listserv.readadp.com ”: subscribe COURSE-SEQUENCING FirstName LastName –E-Mail Reflector: course-sequencing@listserv.readadp.com 1484.7, Tool/Agent Communication –Randy Saunders, Raytheon Learning Institute RSaunders@HTI.com RSaunders@HTI.com –Send one line to “ listserv@listserv.readadp.com ”: subscribe TOOL-AGENT FirstName LastName –E-Mail Reflector: tool-agent@listserv.readadp.com

246. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 246 For Further Information 1484.8, Enterprise Interfaces –Thor Anderson, IMS Project tanderson@imsproject.org tanderson@imsproject.org –Send one line to “ listserv@listserv.readadp.com ”: subscribe ENTERPRISE FirstName LastName –E-Mail Reflector: enterprise@listserv.readadp.com 1484.9, Localization –Erik Duval, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven erik.duval@cs.kuleuven.ac.be erik.duval@cs.kuleuven.ac.be –Send one line to “ listserv@listserv.readadp.com ”: subscribe LOCALIZATION FirstName LastName –E-Mail Reflector: localization@listserv.readadp.com

247. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 247 For Further Information 1484.10, CBT Data Interchange –Bill McDonald, FlightSafetyBoeing william.a.mcdonald@boeing.com william.a.mcdonald@boeing.com –Send one line to “ listserv@listserv.readadp.com ”: subscribe CBTINTER FirstName LastName –E-Mail Reflector: cbtinter@listserv.readadp.com 1484.11, Computer Managed Instruction –Jack Hyde, FlightSafetyBoeing jackie.q.hyde@boeing.com jackie.q.hyde@boeing.com –Send one line to “ listserv@listserv.readadp.com ”: subscribe CMI FirstName LastName –E-Mail Reflector: cmi@listserv.readadp.com

248. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 248 For Further Information 1484.12, Learning Objects Metadata –Wayne Hodgins, Autodesk Inc. wayne.hodgins@autodesk.com wayne.hodgins@autodesk.com –Send one line to “ listserv@listserv.readadp.com ”: subscribe LEARNING-OBJECTS FirstName LastName –E-Mail Reflector: learning-objects@listserv.readadp.com 1484.13, Student Identifiers –Mike Collett, Education Online mike@collett.demon.co.uk mike@collett.demon.co.uk –Send one line to “ listserv@listserv.readadp.com ”: subscribe STUDENT-IDENTIFIER FirstName LastName –E-Mail Reflector: student-identifier@listserv.readadp.com

249. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 249 For Further Information 1484.14, Semantics and Exchanges Bindings –Tyde Richards, Macromedia trichards@macromedia.com trichards@macromedia.com –Send one line to “ listserv@listserv.readadp.com ”: subscribe SXB FirstName LastName –E-Mail Reflector: sxb@listserv.readadp.com 1484.15, Data Interchange Protocols –Paul Siegel, Edutool.Com siegel@farance.com siegel@farance.com –Send one line to “ listserv@listserv.readadp.com ”: subscribe PROTOCOLS FirstName LastName –E-Mail Reflector: protocols@listserv.readadp.com

250. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 250 For Further Information 1484.16, HTTP Bindings –Steve Griffin, IMS Project sgriffin@collegis.com sgriffin@collegis.com –Send one line to “ listserv@listserv.readadp.com ”: subscribe HTTP-BINDINGS FirstName LastName –E-Mail Reflector: http-bindings@listserv.readadp.com 1484.17, Content Packaging –Mike Fore, US Army (ATSC) forem@atsc.army.mil forem@atsc.army.mil –Send one line to “ listserv@listserv.readadp.com ”: subscribe CONTENT-PACKAGING FirstName LastName –E-Mail Reflector: content-packaging@listserv.readadp.com

251. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 251 For Further Information 1484.18, Platform and Media Profiles –Frank Farance, Edutool.Com frank@farance.com frank@farance.com –Send one line to “ listserv@listserv.readadp.com ”: subscribe PROFILES FirstName LastName –E-Mail Reflector: profiles@listserv.readadp.com 1484.19, Quality Systems for Life-Long Learning –Jim Schoening, US Army (CECOM) Schoenin@mail1.monmouth.army.mil Schoenin@mail1.monmouth.army.mil –Send one line to “ listserv@listserv.readadp.com ”: subscribe QUALITY-LLL FirstName LastName –E-Mail Reflector: quality-lll@listserv.readadp.com

252. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 252 For Further Information 1484.20, Competency Definitions –Claude Ostyn, Click2Learn.com claude.ostyn@click2learn.com claude.ostyn@click2learn.com –Send one line to “ listserv@listserv.readadp.com ”: subscribe COMPETENCY-DEFINITIONS FirstName LastName –E-Mail Reflector: competency-definitions@listserv.readadp.com

253. 1999-12-08IEEE LTSC Work Program/Process, F. Farance ©1999 Edutool.Com 253 Future LTSC (Quarterly) Meeting Schedule 1999-12-06 / 1999-12-10, Washington, DC, USA 2000-03-13 / 2000-03-17, London, UK Co-Located with JTC1/SC36 2000-06-21 / 2000-06-26 (ex. Sunday), Montreal, QC, Canada Overlap with/adjacent to Ed-Media and ITS conferences Plenary on Monday — Workshop with Ed-Media 2000-09-20 / 2000-09-25 (ex. Sunday), Albuquerque, NM, USA Co-Located with JTC1/SC36 AICC meets in same location during following week overlap on Monday (1484.6, 1484.7, 1484.10, 1484.11) 2000-12-04 / 2000-12-08, Southern Europe (Italy or Greece) 2001-03-19 / 2001-03-23, West Coast, US 2001-09, Europe (Greece or Italy — opposite of 2000-12 mtg)