Advertisement

Applying the Widget Paradigm to Learning Design: Towards a New Level of User Adoption

  • Bernd Simon
  • Michael Aram
  • Frans Van Assche
  • Luis Anido Rifon
  • David Griffiths
  • Manuel Caeiro Rodríguez
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8095)

Abstract

Researching the sharing of learning designs is a well-established domain within the technology-enhanced learning research community. However, until now tools supporting educational modelling languages such as IMS Learning Design have reached a wide adoption in today’s school practice. Following a design science research methodology we report on the design, implementation, and evaluation of a novel tool referred to as "Composer". The Composer supports the design of learning activities and has been developed according to design principles such as (a) interoperability between design-time and run-time systems based on the W3C Widget Standard, (b) inclusion of artefact types beyond content such as tools, people and events, (c) a user-friendly authoring environment. A first evaluation of the proof-of-concept implementation suggests that the tool is easy-to-use and provides added value for teachers when it comes to reflecting about the design of learning activities.

Keywords

Learning Design Educational Modelling W3C Widgets Mashups Wookie Design Science 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Koper, R., Bennett, S.: Learning Design: Concepts. In: Adelsberger, P.D.H.H., Kinshuk, P., Pawlowski, P.D.J.M., Sampson, P.D.G. (eds.) Handbook on Information Technologies for Education and Training, pp. 135–154. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Derntl, M., Neumann, S., Griffiths, D., Oberhuemer, P.: The Conceptual Structure of IMS Learning Design Does Not Impede Its Use for Authoring. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies 5(1), 74–86 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Neumann, S., Oberhuemer, P.: User Evaluation of a Graphical Modeling Tool for IMS Learning Design. In: Spaniol, M., Li, Q., Klamma, R., Lau, R.W.H. (eds.) ICWL 2009. LNCS, vol. 5686, pp. 287–296. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Durand, G., Belliveau, L., Craig, B.: Simple Learning Design 2.0. In: IEEE 10th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT) 2010, pp. 549–551 (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Durand, G., Downes, S.: Toward Simple Learning Design 2.0. In: 4th International Conference on Computer Science & Education, ICCSE 2009, pp. 894–897 (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Core ICT Indicators 2010. International Telecommunication Union (ITU)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Technology, Broadband and Education Advancing the Education for All Agenda - A Report by the Broadband Commission Working Group on Education. International Telecommunication Union (ITU)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    PISA, Results: Students On Line Digital Technologies and Performance. OECD (2009), http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/pisa2009/48270093.pdf
  9. 9.
    Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M.A., Chatterjee, S.: A Design Science Research Methodology for Information Systems Research. Journal of Management Information Systems 24, 45–77 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hevner, A., Chatterjee, S.: Design Research in Information Systems: Theory and Practice. Springer (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    March, S.T., Smith, G.F.: Design and Natural Science Research on In-formation Technology. Decision Support Systems 15(4), 251–266 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hevner, A.R.: A Three Cycle View of Design Science Research. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 19(2), 87 (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vaishnavi, V.K., Kuechler, W.: Design Science Research Methods and Patterns: Innovating Information and Communication Technology, 1st edn. Auerbach Publications (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Takeda, H., Veerkamp, P., Tomiyama, T., Yoshikawa, H.: Modeling Design Processes. AI Mag. 11(4), 37–48 (1990)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sampson, D.G., Zervas, P., Sotiriou, S.: From Learning Objects Repositories to Learning Design Repositories: The COSMOS Learning Design Repository. In: 2011 11th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), pp. 285–289 (2011)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    IEEE Standard Computer Dictionary. A Compilation of IEEE Standard Computer Glossaries (1991)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    van Assche, F., Duval, E., Massart, D., Olmedilla, D., Simon, B., Sobernig, S., Ternier, S., Wild, F.: Spinning Interoperable Applications for Teaching & Learning using the Simple Query Interface. Journal of Educational Technology & Society 9(2), 51–67 (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Packaged Web Apps (Widgets) - Packaging and XML Configuration (Second Edition). W3C Recommendation (2012), http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/
  19. 19.
    Griffiths, D., Johnson, M., Popat, K., Sharples, P., Wilson, S.: The educational affordances of widgets and application stores. Journal of Universal Computer Science 18(16), 2252–2273 (2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Soylu, A., Mödritscher, F., Wild, F., De Causmaecker, P., Desmet, P.: Ma-shups by Orchestration and Widget-based Personal Environments: Key Challenges, Solution Strategies, and an Application. Program: Electronic Library and Information Systems 46(4), 383–428 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Berners-Lee, T., Mendelsohn, N.: The Rule of Least Power. W3C (2006)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zuzak, I., Ivankovic, M., Budiselic, I.: Cross-context Web Browser Communication with Unified Communication Models and Context Types. In: MIPRO, 2011 Proceedings of the 34th International Convention, pp. 690–695 (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bernd Simon
    • 1
  • Michael Aram
    • 1
  • Frans Van Assche
    • 2
  • Luis Anido Rifon
    • 3
  • David Griffiths
    • 4
  • Manuel Caeiro Rodríguez
    • 3
  1. 1.Knowledge Markets ConsultingWienAustria
  2. 2.Computer Science DepartmentUniversity of LeuvenBelgium
  3. 3.Universidad de VigoVigoSpain
  4. 4.University of BoltonBoltonUnited Kingdom

Personalised recommendations