Bridging the Gap Between E-Learning Modeling and Delivery Through the Transformation of Learnflows into Workflows

  • Olga Mariño
  • Rubby Casallas
  • Jorge Villalobos
  • Dario Correal
  • Julien Contamines

Abstract

E-learning pedagogical models are described in terms of educational modeling languages (EMLs). IMS-LD is accepted as the standard EML. It allows for the description of multiactor adaptable learning processes. Although some IMS-LD-compatible editing tools are being developed, no delivery platfonn is yet available. This chapter proposes to bridge this gap by looking at business process modeling languages and execution engines, in particular the Workflow Management Coalition Standard, XPDL. The first two sections of the chapter give the introduction and the context of the work. Section 3 describes IMS-LD as well as existing editing and delivery tools. Section 4 describes XPDL and some editing tools and execution engines. Section 5 proposes a transformation from IMS-LD to XPDL, and Section 6 describes the application developed to implement this transfonnation. The chapter ends with some conclusions on the work done and on the possibilities it opens to further research and applications.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Andrews, T., Curbera, F., Dholakia, H., et al. (2003) Business process execution language for Web services version 1.1. Technical report. ftp://www6.software.ibm.com/ software/developer/library/ws-bpel.pdfGoogle Scholar
  2. 6.
    Eder, J., Gruber, W. (2002) A metamodel for structured workflows supporting workflow transformation. In: Lecture Notes on Computer Science, 2435.Google Scholar
  3. 11.
    Hollingsworth, P. (1995) The workflow reference model. Technical Report TC00-1003, Workflow Management Coalition (WfMC).Google Scholar
  4. 12.
    IEEE. (2002) Draft standard for learning object metadata 1484.12.1.Google Scholar
  5. 13.
    IMS Global Learning Consortium. (2002) IMS Reusable Definition of Competency or Educational Objective Information Model. Version 1 Final Specification.Google Scholar
  6. 14.
    IMS Global Learning Consortium. (2003) IMS Learning Design Best Practice and Implementation Guide. Version 1. Final Specification.Google Scholar
  7. 15.
    IMS Global Learning Consortium. (2003) IMS Learning Design Information Model. Version 1 Final Specification.Google Scholar
  8. 16.
    IMS Global Learning Consortium. (2004) IMS ePortfolio Information Model. Version 1.0 Public Draft.Google Scholar
  9. 17.
    IMS Global Learning Consortium. (2005) IMS Learner Information Package— Information Model Specification. Version 1.0.1 Final Specification.Google Scholar
  10. 18.
    JBoss Inc.(2005) JbossEnterprise Middleware System, http://www.jboss.org/products/ index.Google Scholar
  11. 20.
    Kluijfhout, E. (2002) Stimulating the widespread use of EML. OTEC2002/22, http://hdl.handle.net/1820/200.Google Scholar
  12. 21.
    Koper R. (2001) Modeling units of study from a pedagogical perspective, the pedagogical meta-model behind EML. Technical report first draft, version 2. Educational Technology Expertise Center—Open University of Netherlands, Heerlen, Netherlands.Google Scholar
  13. 23.
    Lei, K., Singh, M. (1997) A Comparison of Workflow Metamodels, Proceedings of the ER-97 Workshop on Bahavioral Modeling and Design Transformations: Issues and Opportunities in Conceptual Modeling, Los Angeles, November 1997.Google Scholar
  14. 27.
    Marino, O., Contamines, J. (2004) La modélisation de Scénarios Collaboratifs d’apprentissage: possibilités et limites du standard IMS-LD. Communication au Colloque CIRTA, Congres ACFAS.Google Scholar
  15. 28.
    Sun Microsystems. Java 2 Platform Enterprise Edition (J2EE). http://java.sun.com/j2ee.Google Scholar
  16. 29.
    Sun Microsystems. Java API Specification. http://java.sun.com/reference/api.Google Scholar
  17. 30.
    Sun Microsystems. Java Management Extensions (JMX). http://java.sun.com/products/ JavaManagement.Google Scholar
  18. 31.
    OASIS. Web Services Business Process Execution Language (WSBPEL). http://www.oasis-open.org/committees.Google Scholar
  19. 32.
    Open University of the Netherlands (OUNL). CopperCore. http://www.coppercore.org.Google Scholar
  20. 33.
    OMG. CORBA. http://www.corba.org.Google Scholar
  21. 34.
    OMG. (2000) Workflow Management Facility Specification Version 1.2. Needham, MA: Document number bom/00-05-02.Google Scholar
  22. 36.
    Paquette, G. (2002) La Modélisation des Connaissances et des Compétences, pour Concevoir et apprendre. Presses de l’Université du Québec, 2002, 352 pages.Google Scholar
  23. 37.
    Paquette, G. (2003) Using learning object repositories: the eduSource suite of tools, edu-Source Industrial Forum communications. http://www.edusource.ca/english/resources/ eduSource-Moncton-AN.ppt.Google Scholar
  24. 38.
    Paquette G., Marino, O., de la Teja, I., Léonard, M., Lundgren-Cayrol, K. (2005) Delivery of learning design: The explor@ system case. In: Koper, R., Tattersall, C. (eds.). Learning Design: A Handbook on Modelling and Delivering Networked Education and Training. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  25. 39.
    SCORM. Sharable Content Object Reference Model (SCORM). http://www.adlnet.org/scorm/index.cfm.Google Scholar
  26. 42.
    Van der Aalst, W. (2003) Patterns and XPDL: A Critical Evaluation of the XML Process Definition Language. QUT Technical report, FIT-TR-2003-06, http://www. citi.qut.edu.au/pubs/ce-xpdl.pdf, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, 2003.Google Scholar
  27. 43.
    Vantroys, T., Peter, Y. (2002) Un système de workflows flexible pour la formation ouverte et à distance. In: Frasson, C., Pecuchet, J.-P. (Dir.), Technologies de l’Information et de la Communication dans les Enseignements d ingenieurs et dans 1 industrie. Villeurbanne, France: Institut National des Sciences Appliquees de Lyon.Google Scholar
  28. 44.
    Vantroys, T., Peter, Y. (2004) Cow, a flexible platform for the enactment of learning scenarios. International Workshop on Groupware CRIWG 2003, Lecture Notes on Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  29. 45.
    Vogten, H. (2005) Designing a learning design engine as a collection of finite state machines. International Journal on E-Learning. http://hdl.handle.net/1820/303.Google Scholar
  30. 46.
    Workflow Management Coalition (WfMC). (2002) Workflow Process Definition Interface—XML Process Definition Language. Version 1. Final Draft WFMC-TC-1025.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Olga Mariño
    • 1
  • Rubby Casallas
    • 1
  • Jorge Villalobos
    • 2
  • Dario Correal
    • 1
  • Julien Contamines
    • 2
  1. 1.Software Construction GroupUniversity of Los AndesBogotáColombia
  2. 2.Laboratory on Cognitive Informatics and Learning EnvironmentsLICEF Telé-university of Quebec, TELUQMontrealQuebecCanada

Personalised recommendations