Pithamber R. Polsani
Assistant Professor
University of Arizona , Tucson
AZ 85721
USA
polsani@email.arizona.edu

The current definitions of learning objects fall into a very wide spectrum ranging from anything and everything to those that are used in specific instructional context. Rory McGreal (2004) groups existing definitions of learning objects into five areas:

1. Anything and everything (Downes, 2003, Friesen, 2001, Mortimer, 2002) ;
2. Anything digital, whether it has an educational purpose or not (Wiley, 1999) ;
3. Anything that has an educational purpose (Doorten, Giesbers, Janssen et al , 2004; Quinn and Hobbs, 2000) ;
4. Only digital objects that have a formal educational purpose (Dunning, 2002; Koper, 2003; Sosteric and Hesemeier, 2004; and Polsani, 2004); and
5. Only digital objects that are marked for specific educational purposes (Alberta Learning, 2002, Cisco Systems, 2001, R Koper, 2001, D Rehak and Mason, 2003, Wieseler, 1999 , Koper and vanEs, 2004, and Sloep, 2004).

As is evident from these definitions, the learning object landscape has many vistas. These multiple description could be confusing to anyone interested in venturing into the area of learning objects. Therefore, the presentation in the content area of learning objects panel will provide a comprehensive and a critical evolution of existing definitions.

Metadata

In order to achieve the efficiency promised by Learning Objects it is critical that they be discoverable, accessible and manageable. Metadata, the information attached to a learning object, facilitates finding and using of learning objects. Several organizations and consortia world-wide—IEE LTSC LOM, ADL, ARIADNE, IMS, Dublin Core, CanCore, SingCore—are actively involved in developing standardized metadata schemas. While the metadata proponents agree on the merits of learning object metadata there are several strong disagreements on which schema would more efficient and practical for finding and using learning objects. The presentation in the panel about metadata will offer an explanation of different standards and the relative merits of each one, thus offering an informed view of metadata to the attendees.

Instructional Design

The effective use of learning objects for learning depends on well thought-out instructional design targeted for specific contexts of instructions. Existing instructional design theories were developed for classroom instruction with print based materials in view. Once learning objects are accepted as the basic building blocks of online instruction, then we need to urgently think about the validity and currency of these theories for virtual classes. The section devoted to instructional design in the panel will address the principles of instructional design using learning objects, the effectiveness of existing design theories and the new forms of designing instruction with learning objects.

Technologies

As with the area of content and metadata, the landscape of learning object technologies is equally jagged. This is understandable given the fact that the technology vendors are trying to create systems and software that would serve multiple user with different views of learning objects. However, it is crucial for practitioners of learning objects to use technologies that would not only enable them to easily create learning objects, add metadata to the objects, but also facilitate interoperability. The presentation in this area of the panel will provide a comprehensive view of existing technologies and technological standards. Additionally, the presentation would demonstrate some features of these technologies with a critical view as to their merit and usefulness for learning objects.

Why Learning Objects?

Pithamber R. Polsani

Learning Objects and Standards: Pedagogical Neutrality and Engagement

Norm Friesen

The Evolution of Educational Metadata: From Standards to Application Profiles

Demetrios Sampson