Dashboard > Technical Roadmap Working Group > TRWG > Framework Document Project
  Technical Roadmap Working Group Log In | Sign Up   View a printable version of the current page.  
  Framework Document Project
 Browse Space
Added by Tyde Richards, last edited by Tyde Richards on Jan 22, 2008  (view change)
Labels: 
(None)

Scope & Purpose

This project will develop a framework document that can be used notate the capabilities recorded included in Core SCORM as it evolves as well as capabilities not in Core SCORM but of interest to the broader SCORM community, such as those supported by particular communities of practice. When instantiated with specific capabilities it will provide the LETSI Technical Roadmap at a particular point in time. Externally it will enable technical coordination with relevant organizations, such as ISO/IEC JC1 SC36 or consortia representing communities of practice. Within LETSI it will support collaboration between the Technical Roadmap, Teaching & Learning Strategies, and Business Requirements WGs to ensure that technical capabilities endorsed by LETSI have been appropriately vetted.

Calendar 

March 1, 2008 - draft document for comment and submission through ADL to SC36 Study Group on Core SCORM 

Participants 

Jill Abbott

Clark Christensen 

Frank Polster 

Tyde Richards

Schawn Thropp 

Ginny Travers 

Requirements for Framework Document 

Please note any particular concerns ... 

Framework Document Outline

TBD 

Candidate Properties for each Capability

An initial set provided below for discussion purposes ...

Number

Just the number of the capability (1,2,3) 

Name

It's name. 

Type

One thought was a procedural/declarative distinction or the difference in current SCORM between the content aggregation model and runtime behavior. 

SCORM version

The version(s) of SCORM in which it occurs, starting with SCORM 2004 

Specification

The specification or de jure standard supporting the capability 

Option 

An indication of the option number cases where there are more than one option to support a capability  

Technical

Sign-off from the Technical Roadmap WG that a viable technical means exists to support the capability 

Learning

Sign-off from the Teaching & Learning Requirements WG that the capability addresses a learning capability (Note: for some basic "infrastructure" technical capabilities this will not apply) 

Business

Sign-off from the Business Requirements WG that there is a business rationale for implementing the capability 

Comments 

Candidate Capabilities 

An initial set provided below for discussion purposes... 

Activity/Resource Aggregation

Multiple technical solutions. MPEG 21.2 under investigation. 

Metadata

Currently uses IEEE LOM but Dublin Core and SC36 MLR may also be relevant 

Sequencing

Runtime Communication - ECMAScript API

IEEE Standard 

CMI Runtime Data Model - ECMAScript Binding

IEEE standard 

Runtime Communication - Service-based

From AICC Content Services Architecture WG?

CMI Runtime Data Model - XML Binding

Based on the IEEE standard?

Competency Definitions

Based on the IEEE standard for reusable competency definitions? 

Quality

Based on the quality standard(s) from SC36?

Accessibility

Based on the accessibility standard(s) from SC36?

Collaboration

Based on the collaborative workplace standards from SC36? 

Structured Content 

This is where DITA and probably S1000D go as well as approaches that may be specific to a community of practice (SIFA?). 

Simulation & Game Integration 

The SCORM Web Services interface described here allows any application to act as an SCO, removing the restriction that SCOs be displayed by a Web client.

The following information was also posted on the adl community web pages for comment in June, 2007. See http://adlcommunity.net/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=116

We are soliciting your comments on a proposed expanded SCORM RTE and architecture to accommodate immersive learning simulation (aka games).

There are several key goals for this architecture including:

  • providing training that is targeted to the trainees' requirements
  • support for "immersive experiential training" using PC-based simulations
  • support for both individual and team training
  • providing training that can be customized at the local level
  • support for training that is accessible anywhere, anytime, on a global scale, both in the school house and in the field

This paper proposes methods to expand the current SCORM RTE to accommodate immersive learning simulations aka games.

The use case example in the paper is the following -

Through interactions with the SCORM RTE, and traditional SCOs, the trainee is presented with appropriate training material on the doctrine and procedures related to "scanning and sectors of fire"

  • Upon the trainee's completion of appropriate SCOs, including perhaps SCOs that test the trainee's knowledge of the training material, the SCORM sequencer encounters a Lightweight Scenario Format (LSF). The LSF includes the information necessary to select appropriate experiential, simulation-based training for the trainee. In this case, the LSF would include the trainee's training requirement (or objective), that is "scanning and sectors of fire"
  • The SCORM RTE contacts the Distributed Training Event Coordination Service (DTECS), providing the LSF, as well as additional information about this trainee's expertise and experience gathered from the Global Learner Profile Service.
  • The SCORM RTE obtains an authentication token from the DTECS that it will later pass to the user's browser. This authentication token supports "single user login" by enabling the trainee to use both the SCORM RTE and the DTECS with one login.
  • The DTECS compares the trainee's objective in the Lightweight Scenario Format to the training objectives provided by local training systems. The Local Training Package repository at each DTECS includes information about the training objectives that can be met by each local training system configuration. By comparing the objective in the Lightweight Scenario Format with the objectives in the Local Training Packages, the DTECS selects an appropriate configuration of a training system and creates a training event based on that.
  • One component of the DTECS is a web server that provides access to training selection, scheduling, and a Lobby for trainees and instructors. In particular, the web server provides a Lobby web page that includes controls that allow the user to indicate when he is ready to start training and to actually start the training system. The DTECS sends a reference to the Lobby web page to the SCORM RTE.
  • The SCORM RTE delivers the reference for the Lobby to the user's web browser. From the user's point of view, the Lobby web page is displayed as if it was another SCO; the hand-off to the DTECS is completely invisible.
  • Using the Lobby web page controls (e.g. hitting a "Start" button), the trainee starts the training system. In response to this single user input, the DTECS remotely starts the training system on the user's machine. Furthermore, the configuration of the training system for teaching "scanning and sectors of fire" has been determined from the information in the Local Training Package. The user does not need to work through multiple menus or selection of scenario files in order to receive the appropriate training.
  • When the training system is launched, the DTECS provides it with a reference to its web-services based interface. The trainee interacts with the simulation-based training system, for example, simulating riding in a convoy through an urban area while scanning for snipers. The training system reports the trainee's performance in meeting the objective to the DTECS. The DTECS communicates this information to the SCORM RTE and may store it in a local repository of training records. The SCORM Sequencer uses this information to select the next SCO for the trainee, and if appropriate, stores the results in its Global Learner/ Shared State Persistence repository.

SCORM Runtime Environment (RTE)

WSDL: http://darworld.bbn.com:8080/adl/services/SCORM?wsdl

Distributed Training Event Coordination Service (DTECS) interface for Selecting Training

WSDL: http://darworld.bbn.com/services/dtecs?wsdl

Distributed Training Event Coordination Service (DTECS) for interfacing to Training Systems, AARs, and Assessment Engines

WSDL: http://darworld.bbn.com/services/darWorld?wsdl

For comments, questions, or additional information, please contact the BBN project manager, Virginia Travers, at travers@bbn.com.

The complete document has been added as an attachmernt

Comments  (Hide)

Tyde, This comment is in the "for what it's worth" category on the purpose and scope. I think the frame work documents capabilities are technical statements that enable future functionality some of which are beyond the current scope of SCORM. Some of these requirements of future functionality are not related to courseware but related to learning e.g collaboration, communities of practices, electronic performance support systems, games, etc. To that point I think we will require an architectural framework which in fact may describe a set of common/standard set of services (Web Services) in an environment of multiple standards (SCORM, HLA, etc).

I think we ought to be explicit in the scope and purpose on the future functionality and the need for an a architectural framework.

Posted by Frank Polster at Jan 14, 2008 09:33

The challenge is to look at what has always been "core" to SCORM - content packaging, communication and bindings, and a runtime model - and identify and prioritize the business requirements that will drive the extension of SCORM, whether an extension of the "core" or a set of "add-ons" for want of a better term.  I think it is important to keep in mind that real people have to implement this in products and employ it in training development and delivery.

For example, currently, content packaging is a better description than content aggregation.  It currently is a problem to acquire, organize (sequence), deliver and track content from diverse sources (as opposed to bundling up my files and/or metadata in a manifest/ZIP file).  So it would seem that an extension of the core might address the issues of locating repositories, authenticating to them, securely aquiring and registering content objects in the LMS, sequencing the content with other content objects, and rolling up and tracking use and performance.  For me that alone represents a very complex set of problems that could occupy a lot of time and work to resolve, without even considering the challenge of resolving a LETSI approach to this with the multiple efforts out there that are attacking these problems from a variety of directions with a variety of goals and agendas (while we were meeting this morning I received email from IMS announcing their "Common Cartridge Alliance").  

My opinion is that data bindings, including XML, that serve the needs of diverse communities of practice and their legacy content, a web services based model for content acquistion and delivery that addresses secruity and IP issues, an expanded content aggregation model, and a sequencing engine that expands the ability to combine content sources and and track and remediate based on learning objectives and performance would make up a core that would address some current business needs and expand functionality.

That said, I am not opposed in any way to looking at other technologies.  Simulation, for example, is huge for us in aviation and Ginny and others have laid down some great work already realtive to web services and SCORM.  I would just offer that we separate "core" work from very valuable extensions.  The challenge is to find the volunteer resources to effectively tackle the most we can handle and produce in a reasonable (credible) amount of time. 

Posted by Neil Cramer at Jan 22, 2008 10:24

Out of our last meeting I took the task to provide information on Dan Rehak's ADl work on the D3UI and JADL.The JADL is an Integrated Prototype Architecture (IPA) provides an architectural framework to describe how to combinea collection of systems, components and services in support of a life-cycle training process in an ADL environment.
Here's the link for a public posting. http://groups.google.com/group/lsal-ef/files?hl=en
 

Posted by Frank Polster at Jan 23, 2008 16:02

Please pardon my cross-posting.

I have added an attachment on SCORM issues.The underlying theme is the alignment of our different pieces of the specification. I am a proponent of a generative speicifcation, namely new things can be created one never thought of. From past exerience (with some 8 standards groups) the better integrated the core specifications the easiere it is to create new things. We need to take care that our initial requirements include issues of internal alignment. A pieces and parts approach can miss that opportunity.

Posted by Tom Wason at Feb 05, 2008 10:33
Site running on a free Atlassian Confluence Community License granted to MedBiquitous Consortium. Evaluate Confluence today.
Powered by Atlassian Confluence, the Enterprise Wiki. (Version: 2.6.0 Build:#913 Sep 27, 2007) - Bug/feature request - Contact Administrators
Atlassian Confluence