Paper written by Ron Oliver and mark McMahon for The Australian Flexible Learning Framework (2006).
The main findings (based on series 7) from my POV are:
- The use of stable and powewrful CMS provides strong support for designing online learning units [wonder if this is a reflection of Tassies experience with Learning Edge-maybe skewed the outcomes?]
- Many LOs hold strong contextual connections with their original use which can limit their re-use [central to a LO appraoch has to be developing them independant of context]
- The use of LOs appears to ahve a strong fit with teachres design and development strategies [not sure what this means]
- The use of LOs can discourage the use of task oriented designs [again this is more a reflection of poor learning design approach]
- The majoity of LOs are tutorial in design. There appear to be far fewer content and information objects from which teachers can choose [does this imply teachers want content objects? I would have thought tutorial objects wouldembarce the notion of ‘information objects’/these are possibly teacher classifications and not learningdesign descriptions]
- Teachers would be advantaged by better descriptions of Los to aid their discovery and selection. [maybe a reflection of poor repository/CMS organisation-]
and most significantly I think: Teachers do not appear to be inclined to seek to customise LOs.
If this last point is generalisable, then we should question the extent to which we keep dissagregating resources, perhaps teachers only want to use complete modules/courses off the shelf. Not all teachers want to repurpose material.