The week's pick
Reseach Article
Advantages of using Web Services as Learning Objects
| Design and Evaluation of Digital Content for Education |
| Foundation of Computer Science USA |
| DEDCE - Number 1 |
| None 2011 |
| Authors: Cristina Gonzalez, Regina Motz |
| c1ee9ee1-0af4-43c0-ab1d-c5d408981101 |
Cristina Gonzalez, Regina Motz . Advantages of using Web Services as Learning Objects. Design and Evaluation of Digital Content for Education. DEDCE, 1 (None 2011), 31-36.
Abstract
The creation of educational content for use in e-learning, requires compliance with certain characteristics of the technology while allowing the adaptability of the material to different student profiles. Meeting these requirements makes the task of creating and designing the e-course content (theoretical material, examples, exercises, etc.) expensive. Learning Management Systems (LMS) have provided an environment for creating courses but the instructional materials and activities available to teachers (interested in achieving certain learning goals) have been limited. Thinking about Web Services as Learning Objects offers new possibilities. This helps achieving a learning experience in line with the expectations of new generations of students.
References
- IEEE - Learning Technology Standards Committee 2002. Draft standard for learning object metadata.
- Wiley, D. 2002. Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory: a definition, a metaphor, and a taxonomy, pages 3-23. The Agency for Instructional Technology, Bloomington, IN.
- Dietze, S., Gugliotta, A., and Domingue, J. 2007. Context-adaptive learning designs by using semantic web services. Journal of Interactive Media in Education. Adaptation and IMS Learning Design. Special Issue, ed. Daniel Burgos, 2007/03. ISSN: 1365-893X, 2007.
- Taraghi, B., Ebner, M., and Schaffert, S. 2009. Personal learning environments for higher education: A mashup based widget concept. In Fridolin Wild, Marco Kalz, Matthias Palmér, and Daniel Müller, editors, 2nd International Workshop on Mashup Personal Learning Environments (MUPPLE) - EC-TEL09.
- Dolog, P., Henze, N., Nejdl, W., and Sintek, M. 2004. Personalization in distributed e-learning environments.
- Dolog, P., and Nejdl, W. 2003. Challenges and benefits of the semantic web for user modelling.
- DAML-S: Semantic Markup for Web Services. Technical Report, http://www.daml.org/services/daml-s/0.9/daml-s.pdf. 2003. W3C. Owl web ontology language semantics and abstract syntax, http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/. 2003.
- Koper, R. 2004. Use of the Semantic Web to Solve Some Basic Problems in Education: Increase Flexible, Distributed Lifelong Learning, Decrease Teacher's Workload. Journal of Interactive Media in Education. Special Issue on the Educational Semantic Web. ISSN: 1365-893X.
- Ullrich, C. 2005. The learning-resource-type is dead, long live the learning-resource-type! Learning Objects and Learning Designs, 1(1):7-15.
- OâReilly, T., and Battelle, J. 2009. Web Squared: Web 2.0 Five Years On. Web 2.0 Summit (Web 2.0 Conference).
- Drachsler, H., Pecceu, D., Arts, T., Hutten, E., Rutledge, L., Van Rosmalen, P., Hummel, H., and Koper, R. 2009. ReMashed - Recommendation Approaches for Mash-Up Personal Learning Environments in Formal and Informal Learning Settings.
- Sicilia, M. A., and Lytras, M. D. 2005. Scenario-oriented reusable learning object characterizations. International Journal of Knowledge and Learning, 1:332-341.
- Sicilia, M. A., GarcÃa, E., Pagés, C., Sánchez-alonso, S., Rius, A., and Tibidabo, A. 2004. Specifying semantic conformance profiles in reusable learning object metadata. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training. Estambul, TurquÃa.
- Chatti, M. A., Jarke, M., Wang, Z., and Specht, M. 2009. SMashup Personal Learning Environments.
- Palmer, M., Sire, S., Bogdanov, E., Gillet, D., and Wild, F. 2009. Mapping Web Personal Learning Environments. In 4th European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning (EC-TEL) - Workshop on Mash-Up Personal Learning Environments (MUPPLE09).
- Severance, C., Hardin, J., and Whyte, A. 2008. The coming functionality mash-up in personal learning environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 16(1):47-62.
- Dorn, C., Schall, D., and Dustdar, S. 2009. Context-aware adaptive service mashups. In IEEE Asia-Pacific Services Computing Conference (APSCC).
- Chatti, M. A., Jarke, M., Wang, Z., and Specht, M. 2009. SMashup Personal Learning Environments.
- Anderson, L., and Krathwohl, D. A. 2001. A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Longman.
- IMS Learning Tools Interoperability Project Group. 2006. IMS Tools Interoperability Guidelines Version 1.0.
- GT9/SC36 AENOR. Peril de Aplicación LOM -ES V 1.0. 2008.
- ProgrammableWeb, http:/www.programmableweb.com/, accessed on 2011.
- Alier, M., Piguillem, J., and Casany, M. J. 2011. GESSI research group, and Universidad Politécnica de Cataluña. Basiclti4moodle. http://code.google.com/p/basiclti4moodle/, accessed on 2011.
- The Open University, http://openlearn.open.ac.uk/, accessed on 2011.
- Simon, B., Massart, D., Assche, F., Ternier, S., Duval, E., Brantner, S., Olmedilla, D., and Miklós, Z. 2005. A simple query interface for interoperable learning repositories. In proceedings - The 1st workshop on interoperability of web-based educational systems, pages 11-18.
Index Terms
Keywords