« My toolkitCourses and Content »

7 comments

Comment from: chris bradley [Visitor]  
chris bradley

A very well argued case, the UK Education system is rapidly adopting a wide range of different VLEs. They are lured into a false sense of security by VLE sales personell who make SCORM seem like the answer to the the Balkanisation of resources. There is less to SCORM than meets the eye. It allows for ‘plug-in’ tutorials or demonstrations where a skill or piece of knowledge is described followed by a quiz or test to check retention, but the more demanding requirments for students to discuss and submit material is a quality of the LMS. An ideal package may consist of a packaged website, supporting files, templates, layout docs and a course structure document that specifies how to use the material in most LMS. Sample installations of all the main LMS would be very useful - any ideas?

11/08/08 @ 07:35
Comment from: berthelemy [Member]  
Mark

Thanks Chris,

A more useful standard would perhaps be to use Moodle’s XML backup as a means of transferring information about the whole range of learning activities between VLE systems. But it would take quite a lot of political will to make that happen. Perhaps that’s a role for Becta??

11/08/08 @ 15:14
Comment from: chris bradley [Visitor]
chris bradley

That would be the BECTA that Specifically excluded Moodle from the recommended list of VLEs for schools :(
After supplying the VLEs the suppliers need a continuing revenue stream and spurious ‘hosting’ and SCORM compatible content is to supply it.

13/08/08 @ 16:37
Comment from: berthelemy [Member]  
Mark

I wouldn’t say Becta excluded Moodle - since the Becta approved list isn’t a list of VLE’s, it’s a list of suppliers that have passed the European procurement regulations. It doesn’t stop any school or LEA from using Moodle or any other VLE, or from asking the approved suppliers to use Moodle. It just means that, for large contracts, these pre-approved suppliers don’t need to go through the pre-qualification phase of the procurement.

And I don’t think you can argue that SCORM content is providing the revenue stream. Most VLE suppliers I know get their revenue stream from ongoing training, support, hosting and consultancy. Content may be a factor for a few, but not all.

13/08/08 @ 20:30
Comment from: Mook [Visitor]  
Mook

“Often a potential client will specify that they want their elearning to be “SCORM compliant". When asked why they want this, and to what level of compliance, they often find it difficult to answer.”

Oh yeah, I know that feeling!

Loved the article, very eloquently put.

29/03/10 @ 03:45
Comment from: Ray O'Connor [Visitor]  
Ray O'Connor

Articulate & Moodle

Have you experienced any problems with loading Articulate elearning modules into Moodle? There seem to be some compatability issues betwwen the two, which I’ve been reading about on many of the Moodle forums. Whilst Moodle’s ease of use is a beneficial factor, it also illustrates that a SCORM compliant tool doesn’t necessarily mean the two will work with each other.

01/04/10 @ 19:39
Comment from: berthelemy [Member]  
Mark

Hi Ray,

I agree totally that SCORM compliant means very little in practice. However, I’ve not had any problems loading Articulate stuff into Moodle. We use the two together a lot, with SCORM packaging and without.

What problems are you having?

01/04/10 @ 20:13
Contact. ©2014 by Mark Berthelemy. free blog software / hosts UK.
Design & icons by N.Design Studio. Skin by Tender Feelings / Skin Faktory.