Since 1997, organisations like the IMS Global Learning Consortium1 have been hard at work, formulating specifications needed to address the different activities related to learning objects. In July 2002, a standardised scheme for labelling learning objects, commonly referred to as the Learning Object Metadata (LOM), has been accepted as an approved international standard, opening up new opportunities for learning systems that adhere to this standardised labelling scheme. These standards-based systems will be able to search, retrieve and exchange learning objects. Emerging specifications that address packaging, sequencing and distributed repositories are also being formulated.

The term ‘learning object’ was first coined by the Learning Technology Standards Committee (LTSC) of the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers2 (IEEE). The definition of a learning object as spelled out by the LTSC, however, has been found to be too broad, encompassing “any entity, digital or non-digital, that may be used for learning, education or training”3. There is a practical need to be able to distinguish between any digital raw media assets and learning objects. The former are any digital media comprising of text, images and sound; however unlike learning objects, they may not be independent, defined pieces of instruction. Therefore, the learning object is typically a collection of digital media that is put together with specific instructional or learning objectives in mind. At the same time, in order to facilitate re-usability, it must be designed as the smallest logical unit of instruction. There are various learning object frameworks that have been proposed by content developers. One such framework, that CIT has adopted, is an adaptation of the CISCO Systems4 re-usable learning object framework.

By focusing on a single core concept, each learning object is conceived in the following manner:

1. Overview

• State learning objectives
• State prerequisite knowledge

2. Content Presentation

• Provide multimedia materials and active engagement of the learner

3. Practice/Assessment

• Enable students to verify for themselves their progress

4. Summary

• Reinforce learning objectives

This framework shares similarities to the nine events of instruction proposed by Gagne5:

• Gain attention
• Describe goal
• Recall prior knowledge
• Present lesson content
• Provide lesson guidance
• Elicit performance
• Provide feedback (reinforcement) to learner about performance
• Assess performance
• Enhance retention and transfer

Apart from creating contents with the proposed learning object framework, other types of instructional materials also encapsulate specific instructional objectives that may serve as useful references in learning. For example, web-cast lectures can serve as an invaluable instructional reference for students, and may therefore form a different category of learning objects.

As learning objects are delivered through the Web, they can be created with existing web-content creation tools that are readily available and vary in sophistication and complexity. For instance, common HTML editors like Microsoft FrontPage can be used to create a learning object. So too can other commercial software like Macromedia Director, Flash and Authorware that provide richer environments for developing engaging instructional web-delivered multimedia content.

Lecturers have traditionally built courseware websites (i.e. customised websites that are specific to a particular module and not designed for re-use). Such module websites are typically expensive, time-consuming, one-off efforts to create online instructional materials. However if these instructional materials could be re-used, aggregated, disaggregated or re-sequenced when needed, it would allow for greater choice and efficiency. More importantly, it would also reduce the need for lecturers to create all the instructional materials they need from scratch, thereby reducing the need to ‘re-invent the wheel’ for every new course offered.

In order for learning objects to be discovered and deployed by different users, they have to be registered with a learning object repository. The Integrated Virtual Learning Environment (IVLE) content management tool is one such repository. To register a learning object with a repository, one fills up a web form to describe the learning object, much like creating a label to describe the contents within a can of food. Based on the LOM standard, the set of fields, which ‘labels’ the learning object, ensures that the registration of a learning object need only be done once in its ‘lifetime’.

Figure 2: Registering a learning object with the IVLE Content Management Tool

If required, the learning object with its registration information can be imported into or exported out of the IVLE content management tool. In addition, learning objects can be aggregated or disaggregated from the IVLE Lesson Plan; or they can be packaged and sequenced together into a content package, which can then be referenced from the Lesson Plan tool.The various pieces of technology and instructional theories related to learning objects are just beginning to fall into place. Standards bodies have started to address the issues of managing and sequencing learning objects. There is still pedagogical research, standardisation and technological refinement needed before a complete strategy for learning objects becomes clear.

Figure 3: Learning Objects can be packaged and sequenced

However, just like the use of the Internet in education, packaging contents in a learning object framework provides another instructional option for lecturers. Technologies that support the registration and delivery of learning objects are not perfect; but like the rest of the Web, they are functional. The fundamental mechanisms for the exchange and re-use of learning objects are already in place. Lecturers can already register the learning objects they create, aggregate learning objects in different sequence and re-use them in multiple modules through the IVLE platform today.

1. IMS originally stood for the Instructional Management Systems (IMS) project that existed as a project within the National Learning Infrastructure Initiative of Educause. Since then, the acronym stuck on, even though the organisation has expanded beyond its original project scope to include standards for learning servers, learning content and the enterprise integration of these capabilities.

2. The IEEE is a non-profit, technical professional association of more than 377,000 individual members in 150 countries. Through its members, the IEEE is a leading authority in technical areas ranging from computer engineering, biomedical technology and telecommunications, to electric power, aerospace and consumer electronics, among others.

3. Learning Technology Standards Committee, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (15 July 2002). Draft Standard for Learning Object Metadata, p. 6. http://ltsc.ieee.org/doc/wg12/LOM_1484_12_1_v1_Final_Draft.pdf. (Last Accessed: 21 January 2003).

4. Cisco Systems, Inc. is a worldwide leader in networking for the Internet. The Cisco Internet Learning Solutions Group (ILSG) proposed and adopted the reusable learning object strategy, as it recognises a need to move from creating and delivering large inflexible training courses, to database driven objects that can be searched and modified.

5. Gagne, R. (1985). The Conditions of Learning (4th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.