Multimedia Tools and Applications

, Volume 47, Issue 2, pp 257–278 | Cite as

Focusing on content reusability and interoperability in a personalized hypermedia assessment tool

  • Fotis LazarinisEmail author
  • Steve Green
  • Elaine Pearson


This paper presents the development of a modularized hypermedia testing tool, called iAdaptTest, based entirely on e-learning specifications and discusses how this architecture improves the reusability and the interoperability of the learning data. All the categories of data,—that is—topics, user profiles, testing data, adaptive rules, and testing results are coded in XML format complying with Topic Maps, IMS LIP and IMS QTI. The data are stored in distinct files and can be independently shared across different educational applications. The paper concludes with an evaluation study concerning the creation of formative and summative assessments for adult seminars. Through focused interviews, the participants of the study identified the ability to share information and the multi-criteria adaptation options as the most important features of the system. Further, in the second phase of the evaluation the files produced were shared with other educational applications and thus it was verified that the learning data could be imported and rendered correctly.


Adaptive hypermedia Interoperability Reusability Assessment Educational technology Personalisation Multimedia applications XML 


  1. 1.
    Arapi P, Moumoutzis N, Mylonakis M, Theodorakis G, Christodoulakis S (2008) A Pedagogy-driven Personalization Framework to Support Automatic Construction of Adaptive Learning Experiences. In: H. Leung et al. (Eds.) Proccedings of ICWL 2007, LNCS 4823, pp. 55–65Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bacon RA (2003) Assessing the use of a new QTI assessment tool within Physics, Proceedings of the 7th CAA Conference, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK. Available at:
  3. 3.
    Boticario J, Santos O (2007) An open IMS-based user modelling approach for developing adaptive learning management systems, Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2,
  4. 4.
    Chang W-C, Hsu H-H, Smith TK, Wang C-C (2004) Enhancing SCORM metadata for assessment authoring in e-Learning. J Comput Assist Learn 20(4):305–316. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2004.00091.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Conlan, O., Dagger, D., & Wade, V. (2002). Towards a Standards-based Approach to e-Learning Personalization using Reusable Learning Objects. In Proceedings of E-Learn 2002, October 15 - 19, 2002, Montreal, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Conole G, Warburton B (2005) A review of computer-assisted assessment. ALT J Res Learn Technol 13(1):17–31Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    De Bra P, Aroyo L, Cristea A (2004) Adaptive Web-Based Educational Hypermedia, in Levene and M. Poulovassilis A. (Eds.). Web Dynamics, Adaptive to Change in Content, Size, Topology and Use. Springer, pp 387–410Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dichev C, Dicheva D, Aroyo L (2004) Using Topic Maps for Web-based Education. Interntl J Adv Technol Learn 1(1):1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dolog P, Gavriloaie R, Nejdl W, Brase J (2003) Integrating adaptive hypermedia techniques and open rdf-based environments. Proceedings of 12th International World Wide Web Conference. Budapest, HungaryGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dolog, P., Henze, N., Nejdl, W., Sintek, M. (2004) The Personal Reader: Personalizing and Enriching Learning Resources using Semantic Web Technologies, Adaptive Hypermedia and Adaptive Web-Based Systems Conference, LNCS 3137, pp. 85–94Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dublin Core (2008) Dublin Core Metadata Initiative
  12. 12.
    Duitama F, Defude B, Bouzeghoub A, Lecocq C (2005) A Framework for the Generation of Adaptive Courses Based on Semantic Metadata. Multimedia Tools and Applications 25(3):377–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ghali F, Cristea A (2008) Interoperability between MOT and Learning Management Systems: Converting CAF to IMS QTI and IMS CP, Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Adaptive Hypermedia and Adaptive Web-Based Systems. LNCS 5149:296–299Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Giacomini Pacurar E, Trigang P, Alupoaie S (2005) A QTI editor integrated into the netUniversité web portal using IMS LD. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, Vol. 9. Available at:
  15. 15.
    Harlen W, James M (1997) Assessment and Learning: differences and relationships between formative and summative assessment. Assess Educ Princ Policy Pract 4(3):365–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    IEEE LOM (2002) IEEE Standard for Learning Object Metadata
  17. 17.
    IEEE PAPI (2002) Public and Private Information, Scholar
  18. 18.
    IMS LD (2003) IMS Learning Design,
  19. 19.
    IMS SS (2003) IMS Simple Sequencing,
  20. 20.
    IMS LIP (2005) Learner Information Package,
  21. 21.
    IMS QTI (2006) Question and Test Interoperability,
  22. 22.
    Johnson K, Hall T, O’Keeffe D (2005) Generation of Quiz Objects (QO) with a Quiz Engine Developer (QED), Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education WMTE’05. University of Tokushima, Japan, pp 120–122Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kay J (1990) UM: a user modelling toolkit. 2nd Intl User Modelling Workshop (Hawaii), 11Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kazi SA (2004) A conceptual framework for Web-based intelligent learning environments using SCORM-2004, Proceedings of the 4 th IEEE Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), pp 12–15Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Koper R (2003) Combining reusable learning resources and services to pedagogical purposeful units of learning. In: Littlejohn A (ed) Reusing Online Resources: A Sustainable Approach to eLearning. Kogan Page, London, UK, pp 46–59Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lazarinis F (2006) A hypermedia environment for managing online courseware based on adaptable templates, International Conference on Virtual Learning, 239–246Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lazarinis F, Green S, Pearson E (2009) Measuring the conformance of hypermedia assessment tools to QTI. Int J innov Learn 6(2):127–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lesage M, Riopel M, Raiche G, Sodoke K (2008) IMS-QTI sub-standards in computerised adaptive testing and interfacing. Interntl J Adv Media Commun 2(2):115–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Martínez-Ortiz I, Moreno-Ger P, Sierra JL, Fernández-Manjón B (2006) <e-QTI>: a Reusable Assessment Engine, 5th International Conference on Web-based Learning, Penang, Malaysia. LNCS 4181:134–145Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mills C, Potenza M, Fremer J, Ward C (eds) (2002) Computer-based testing building the foundation for future assessment. New York, Lawrence Erlbaum AssociatesGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Morimoto Y, Ueno M, Yokoyama S, Miyadera Y (2007) A SCORM-compliant Learning Management System that Enhances Learning By Managing the Learning Itself, Proceedings of the 7th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT) pp 122-126Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Musa DL, Oliveira, JPM (2004) Sharing Learner Information through a Web Services based Learning Architecture, In: WISM-CAISE 2004, Riga, 2004Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Paramythis A, Loidl-Reisinger S (2004) Adaptive Learning Environments and e-Learning Standards. Electronic Journal of eLearning, 2 (1),
  34. 34.
    Parmar K, Anane R, Hendley R (2007) Architecture of a SCORM-Compliant Assessment Authoring Tool, 5 th International Conference on Computational Science and Applications, pp 111–117Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rey-López M, Díaz-Redondo R, Fernández-Vilas A, Pazos-Arias J, López-Nores M, García-Duque J, Gil-Solla A, Ramos-Cabrer M (2008) T-MAESTRO and its authoring tool: using adaptation to integrate entertainment into personalized t-learning. Multimedia Tools and Applications 40(3):409–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sadler DR (1989) Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. J Instr Sci 18(2):119–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    SCORM (2004) Sharable Content Object Reference Model,
  38. 38.
    Topic Maps (2000) Topic Maps,
  39. 39.
    Topic Maps (2002) ISO/IEC 13250 Topic Maps 2n ed.,
  40. 40.
    Torres da Silva V, Pereira de Lucena C, Fuks H (2001) ContentNet: a framework for the interoperability of educational content using standard IMS. Comput Educ 37(3–4):273–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Towle B, Halm M (2005) Designing Adaptive Learning Environments with Learning Design. In: Koper R, Tattersall C (eds) Learning Design—A Handbook on Modelling and Delivering Networked Education and Training. Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg, pp 215–226Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    van der Linden WJ, Glas CAW (eds) (2000) Computerized adaptive testing: Theory and practice. Kluwer, Boston, MAGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Van Rosmalen P, Vogten H, Van Es R, Passier H, Poelmans P, Koper R (2006) Authoring a full life cycle model in standards-based, adaptive e-learning. Educ Technol Soc 9(1):72–83Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Wainer H, Mislevy RJ (2000) Item response theory, calibration, and estimation. In: Wainer H (ed) Computerized adaptive testing: a primer. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Zualkernan IA, Ghanam YA, Shoshaa MF, Kalbasi AS (2007) An Architecture for Dynamic Generation of QTI 2.1 Assessments for Mobile Devices Using Flash Lite, Proceedings of the 7 th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), pp 194–195Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of ComputingUniversity of TeessideTees ValleyUK

Personalised recommendations