A Process Using Ontology to Automate the Operationalization of Pattern-Based Learning Scenarios

  • Zeyneb TadjineEmail author
  • Lahcen Oubahssi
  • Claudine Piau-Toffolon
  • Sébastien Iksal
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 583)


For most teachers-designers, operationalizing learning scenarios based on patterns just replicates traditional ways by adding course content and multimedia elements on learning management systems (LMS). We aim to go beyond this method by trying to engage the teachers-designers to design deployable learning scenarios. Using patterns for their design is proven to be an adequate solution to seek balance between the need of expressive instructional scenarios, and the technical constraints that occur while deploying these scenarios on learning management systems. Pattern’s formal description is needed in order to translate the concepts of a pedagogical scenario, according to those embedded in the LMS. In this paper, we propose a process to structure, index, formalize, and finally adapt and operationalize the pattern-based learning scenarios. The presented process shows how the use of an ontology modeling learning scenario’s concepts helps the automation of deploying the learning scenarios on an LMS. For that, this ontology has been extended with one representing a learning platform paradigm.


Operationalization Patterns Ontologies Instructional design LMS Teaching situation 


  1. 1.
    Mor, Y., Craft, B., Hernandez-Leo, D.: The art and science of learning design: editoral. Res. Learn. Technol. 21, 1–8 (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Agostinho, S., Bennett, S., Lockyer, L., Harper, B.: The future of learning design. Learn. Media Technol. 36(2), 97–99 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rice, W.: Moodle 2.0 E-Learning Course Development. Packt Publishing Ltd., Birmingham (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
    Mawas, N.E., Oubahssi, L., Laforcade, P.: A meta-model based approach for identifying and formalizing LMS instructional design languages. In: Collaboration Technologies and Systems (CTS), pp. 159–166 (2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chimalakonda, S., Nori, K.V.: A patterns-based approach for modeling instructional design and TEL systems. In: 14th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, pp. 54–56 (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Villasclaras-Fernández, E., Hernández-Leo, D., Asensio-Pérez, J.I., Dimitriadis, Y.: Web collage: an implementation of support for assessment design in CSCLmacro-scripts. Comput. Educ. 67, 79–97 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Koper, R.: Modelling Units of Study from a Pedagogical Perspective: the Pedagogical Metamodel Behind EML. Technical Report OUNL (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Martel, C., Vignollet, L., Ferraris, C., David, J.P., Lejeune, A.: Modeling collaborative learning activities on e-learning platforms, pp. 707–709 (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    IMS-LD. IMS Learning Design.
  11. 11.
    Katsamani, M., Retalis, S., Boloudakis, M.: Designing a Moodle course with the CADMOS learning design tool. Educ. Media Int. 49(4), 317–331 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Clayer, J.P., Piau-Toffolon, C., Choquet, C.: Assistance for learning design community-a context-awareness and pattern-based approach. In: CSEDU, pp. 293–300 (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Buendía-García, F., Benlloch-Dualde, J.V.: Using patterns to design technology-enhanced learning scenarios. eLearning Papers 27, pp. 1–12 (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Anderson, L.W., Krathwohl, D.R.: A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and Assessing: a Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Complete Edition. Longman, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Prieto, L.P., Asensio-Pérez, J.I., Dimitriadis, Y., Gómez-Sánchez, E., Muñoz-Cristóbal, J.A.: GLUE!-PS: a multi-language architecture and data model to deploy tel designs to multiple learning environments. In: Kloos, C.D., Gillet, D., Crespo García, R.M., Wild, F., Wolpers, M. (eds.) EC-TEL 2011. LNCS, vol. 6964, pp. 285–298. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., Silverstein, M.: A Pattern Language, Town, Buildings, Constructions. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1977)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Abedmouleh, A., Oubahssi, L., Laforcade, P., Choquet, C.: An analysis process for identifying and formalizing LMS instructional language. In: ICSOFT, pp. 218–223 (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Paquette, G.: A competency-based ontology for learning design repositories. Int. J. Adv. Comput. Sci. Appl. 5(1), 55–62 (2014)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wang, F., Hannafin, M.J.: Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning. ETR&D 53(4), 5–23 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Montenegro, C., Cueva-Lovelle, J.-M., Sanjuán-Martínez, O., Gaona-Garcia, P.-A.: Modeling and comparison study of modules in open source LMS platforms with Cmapstool. Int. J. Interact. multimedia Artif Intell. 1–3 (2010)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    LOM Specification, Learning Object Metadata.
  22. 22.
    Weibel, S.: Dublin core metadata for resource discovery. Internet Engineering Task Force RFC 2413.222 (1998)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pernin, J.P., Lejeune, A.: Dispositifs d’apprentissage instrumentés par les technologies: vers une ingénierie centrée sur les scénarios. Technologies de l’Information et de la Connaissance dans l’Enseignement Supérieur et de l’Industrie. Université de Technologie de Compiègne, pp. 407–414 (2004)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Goodyear, P., Yang, D.: Patterns and pattern languages in educational design. In: Handbook of Research on Learning Design and Learning Objects: Issues, Applications and Technologies, pp. 167–187 (2008)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gui, J., Fredj, M., Conte, A., Hassine, I., Giraudin, J.-P.: A tool and a formalism to design and apply patterns. In: Bellahsène, Z., Patel, D., Rolland, C. (eds.) OOIS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2425, pp. 135–146. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Churchill, D.: Towards a useful classification of learning objects. Educ. Tech. Res. Dev. 55(5), 479–497 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Andrews, D.H., Goodson, L.A.: A comparative analysis of models of instructional design. J. Instr. Dev. 3(4), 2–16 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zeyneb Tadjine
    • 1
    Email author
  • Lahcen Oubahssi
    • 1
  • Claudine Piau-Toffolon
    • 1
  • Sébastien Iksal
    • 1
  1. 1.LUNAM University, University of MaineLe MansFrance

Personalised recommendations