17 Responses to Xpert vs Jorum?

  1. Pat says:

    Explain this to me?

  2. Pat says:

    The LOM bit that sounds like you giving me work 😦

  3. Pat says:

    In the OAI I have – I see no sign of zips to download?

  4. Pat says:

    Is this the helpdesk?

  5. Nick says:

    Just checked and <package:packageDownloadLocator> is just returned by SRU, not OAI so not sure how you could harvest…SRU query below returns 8 numeracy resources:

    http://repository-intralibrary.leedsmet.ac.uk/IntraLibrary-SRU?recordSchema=lom&operation=searchRetrieve&version=1.1&maximumRecords=10&startRecord=1&query=numeracy&x-info-2-auth1.0-authenticationToken=oer

    • Nick says:

      Forgot to add that I can apparently force the packageDownloadLocator to come out via OAI_PMH by using a macro in the metadata template in intraLibrary.

  6. Pingback: Using Jorum (and/or Xpert?) for ACErep « ALPS CETL Repository Project

  7. Hi Nick,

    I tried to post a question on this list a couple of weeks ago, but nothing seems to have appeared – so I’ll have another try.

    I am interested in the interface between what you are doing and SCORM packages. Through SALTIS (www.saltis.org), I have been working on a content packaging project and we hope to be creating packaging-related metadata profiles in the near future.

    1. You refer to a search “returning 4 component parts of a SCORM package”. I agree with the implication here, that packaging should be regarded as ephemeral – and so you may wish to reference (and discover) individual learning objects within a package. But in the schools sector and in the wider SCORM community, we have found issues about disaggregation which is technically reliable and ensures proper control to the original content owner. How do you distinguish the component parts of the package – do you take these to be the nodes for example?

    2. SCORM packages use LOM metadata and OAI-PMH uses Dublin Core as its primary format. Do you have a standard cross-walk between the two?

    3. I do not understand the problem you refer to about “the large number of JavaScript variables exceeds what is possible under version 1.2”. I am not aware of any limit to the number of JavaScript variables imposed by SCORM 1.2. Maybe it is an LMS-specific or JavaScript-version-specific problem?

    4. You want to fetch a link to the SCORM package, from which the package can be imported into your VLE. Better (particularly from the point of view of non-technical teachers/instructors/lecturers) would be an automatic import in which the VLE talks directly to repository. Do you see any scope for this type of direct link between VLE and repository?

    5. I am also confused by the reference to the example quiz not returning any final statistics “as none of the modules store any of the result scores as global variables”. Surely any SCO should return scores using the CMI data field cmi.score.raw (or cmi.core.score.raw in SCORM 1.2)? If the module does not support that basic functionality, I would not call it a SCORM package in any meaningful sense. I do not understand the role of global variables in this.

    Thanks for your thoughts and clarifications.

    Best wishes,
    Crispin Weston

    • Nick says:

      Hi Crispin

      Thanks for your interest – however, I’m not certain how much help I can be as I am still very much learning about SCORM and in the earliest stages of integrating our repository with our VLE.

      The package was only split into 4 due to the technical problems experienced by my colleague (no idea of the nature of the Java issue) and I was simply experimenting with them.

      Our repository software intraLibrary is indeed based on LOM – download crosswalk doc from here

      Our Application Profile is very lightweight in any case so no major issues for OAI-PMH harvest though we would need to apply a macro to our metadata template if we wanted to add the package download locator to the OAI metadata for example.

      An automatic import in which the VLE talks directly to repository sounds like a great idea – no idea how to achieve it though!

      • Crispin Weston says:

        Thanks Nick,

        I might get back to you when we come to do metadata profiling within our content packaging project.

        Best, Crispin.

  8. Reinhold says:

    Hi Crispin,

    I have used CourseLab to create the SCORM objects which Nick refers to, and I hope to provide some answers to your questions.

    Re. your question 3: This limit which Nick mentions here may be a limitation of the SCORM editing tool “CourseLab”. It turns out that when in stand-alone mode, without being integrated into the LMS (Blackboard Vista / X-Stream) the LO runs fine and does not need to be split up. However, after being integrated into the LMS the LO stops working after “slide 6”. I identified that this has nothing to do with the content itself – replacing slide, changing the order etc. did not make any difference. What appeared to be the problem was that just after several slides “something” gets full; my quess is that this is the array which holds variables; I also read somewhere (forgot where) that in SCORM 1.2 there is a limit of internal variables of 100 – so I guessed that this is the reason. After splitting up the LO from originally 20 slides into 4 smaller LOs with each 5 slides (that is what now can be downloaded), the error did not occur anymore.

    Your question 5:
    When the LO was as one module with 20 slides, internally I was able to track several marking objects which carried marking for individual criteria. After breaking this up into 4 parts, these criteria were no longer overall available. The goal would here to have them as external global variables, where scores can be accumulated as the student complete the questions and solves the problems. Again, I read somewhere (forgot where) that SCORM 1.2 does not support “global” variables, whereas SCORM 2004 does, and I infered from this that I would not be able to have those global criteria across all 4 parts of the LO.

    My apologies if this reply does not completely answer your questions. I must admit I have no deep knowledge of SCORM – I just use that tool CourseLab which takes care of creating – hopefully properly – the SCORM-compliant LO. I am using this now in my teaching with good success. Unfortunately only our old X-Stream/Vista 8 is set up properly for SCORM, and then only for SCORM 1.2; The new Blackboard Vista 9 (to which we will switch next academic year) is supposed to support SCORM 2004 as well, but I was not able to use it in our pilot test, with neither SCORM version – there seems still to be a setup problem.

    Many regards,
    Reinhold Behringer

  9. Pingback: Repository reports and more on SEO « Repository News

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: