Scorm 2.01 experiment on oer

Scorm 2.0: proposed solution

SCORM will never solve all the problems associated with learning, education or training. As the acronym clearly states, it is primarily about the sharing of contentobjects [in training and education – implied]. It has been argued in this paper that theprevious focus of SCORM, while appropriate for the time at which it was conceived, is now too narrow and has suffered from some problems that cannot be resolved without anapproach that includes a structured content model together with flexible levels of aggregation. (It should be noted that IMS Global has also moved to an approach thatenables levels of aggregation in the Content Packaging v1.2 specification.) Irrespective of the structure and composition of the next generation of SCORM, there will continue tobe a requirement to allow flexibility in the implementation. That will always mean that implementation choices will affect the levels of interoperability, reuse, adaptabilityetc, however, hopefully less so in a new model than in the past.

The requirements and solutions proposed in this paper are not intended to be comprehensive. This paper will not propose solutions to all of the issues raised withinthe scoping section. More specifically, the scope of the proposal may be tabulated as follows.

The core of this proposal is to adopt an existing structured content model as part of SCORM. This paper is neutral to the reasons for LETSI seeking to implement a new contentaggregation model for SCORM 2.0, rather it takes the approach that if this is necessary, then replacing the aggregation model alone does not provide sufficient value to warrantthe effort or resulting impact across the LET communities, including vendors. LETSI’s approach to gathering requirements tends to support this notion.

Given SCORM 2.0 deadlines published on the LETSI site, it is not feasible to develop a new structured content and aggregation model for SCORM. This is also outside of thestated scope of work of LETSI. On that basis, an existing structured content and aggregation model needs to be selected for adoption. While several such standards exist, they are mostly quite narrow and industry specific in their focus and do not provideeasy pathways for adoption into learning communities.