2 edition of E-Learning Standards found in the catalog.
|LC Classifications||November 25, 2002|
|The Physical Object|
|Pagination||xvi, 140 p. :|
|Number of Pages||64|
nodata File Size: 2MB.
Conference on grass weeds in cereals in the United Kingdom, 6-7 January 1981, University of Reading, Berkshire, England
SCORM is a model for defining, packaging, and managing. WBT developers know that if they create content formatted to the HTML 4 standard, for example, that any browser that supports HTML 4 will E-Learning Standards display that course content. XML, itself a specification of the W3C, is the lingua franca of all IMS specifications. Furthermore, SCORM does not currently address instructional design issues, nor does it prescribe specific functionality for LMSs.
There are, of course, other E-Learning Standards around the globe that are discussing the issues and establishing specifications. World travelers know how to deal with the absence of uniform electrical standards.
E-learning standards promise —and deliver—interoperability as well as reusability, durability, and accessibility. That implies a level of built-in interoperability and durability. The result is the SCORM. Before the meta-data tagging scheme and these formal specifications, consumers of learning content had a difficult time determining what was out there to reuse.
The aviation industry was one of the first to formulate standards. This standard followed an earlier and more extensive standard in the form of a recommendation, the W3C Web Accessibility Initiative WAI Web Content Accessibility Guidelines WCAG.
By adhering to standards, courseware builders can construct components completely independent of the management systems under which they are intended to run—that's interoperability. WBTIC Overview of Standards Overview E-Learning Standards E-Learning Standards Standards bring order to the world and e-learning standards are bringing great new benefits to this domain.
Though not widely adopted outside government and commercial aviation circles, the pioneering work of this committee set the stage for standards to follow. The latter standard provides three levels of conformance: Priority One, which is relatively E-Learning Standards to achieve and is mandatory; Priority Two, recommended but somewhat more difficult to achieve; and Priority Three, desirable but difficult to achieve without a shift from common and wide-spread coding practice.
While all the standards mentioned should be considered for their benefits today, and durability is certainly of major concern, one should expect that they will be refined and in some cases modified in only a few years—that is the nature of technological innovation in Internet time. The life expectancy of a courseware component is greatly increased when we know that we can upgrade a management system and it still works, or when we reuse that component in a totally new course.
The W3C is the international body that defined the specifications that ultimately set the standards. These online learning standards are a solid foundation for refinements and additions to come in future years.
is a relatively new standard for improving accessibility to Web content and applications, including WBT, for persons with physical and cognitive disabilities.
However, the IMS specifications go much further.
The latter standard provides three levels of conformance: Priority One, which is relatively easy to achieve and is mandatory; Priority Two, recommended but somewhat more difficult to achieve; and Priority Three, desirable but difficult to achieve without a shift from common and wide-spread coding practice.