Abstract
| Language | English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Unknown Host Publication |
| Place of Publication | Adelaide, Australia |
| Pages | 679-683 |
| Number of pages | 6 |
| Publication status | Published - Dec 2003 |
| Event | 20th Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education - Adelaide, Australia Duration: 1 Dec 2003 → … |
Conference
| Conference | 20th Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education |
|---|---|
| Period | 1/12/03 → … |
Fingerprint
Cite this
}
Reuse in Practice: Learning Objects and Software Development. / Paris, M.
Unknown Host Publication. Adelaide, Australia, 2003. p. 679-683.Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Conference contribution
TY - GEN
T1 - Reuse in Practice: Learning Objects and Software Development
AU - Paris, M
PY - 2003/12
Y1 - 2003/12
N2 - Learning objects (LOs) may be considered from two perspectives: the learning perspective, with a focus on learning objectives, content, and assessment in order to derive small instructional components from existing resources; and the object perspective, stemming from the object-oriented paradigm in computer science, with a focus on the development of small, reusable components, which are characterized in terms of accessibility, reusability, and interoperability. This dual perspective reflects the interests of the protagonists in the LO movement: the education community and the learning technology community. While the technologists are concerned with the development of technical systems designed to meet educational needs, these systems must also conform to pedagogical theories and concepts of instructional design, which are the domain of the education community. Many commentators disassociate learning objects from the object-oriented paradigm; at the same time, the LO community is preoccupied with the issue of reuse, which is a fundamental of this paradigm. This review draws parallels between both communities, as the same concerns are mirrored; the fundamentals of object technology should be applied to the entire learning object development process if higher levels of reuse are to be achieved.
AB - Learning objects (LOs) may be considered from two perspectives: the learning perspective, with a focus on learning objectives, content, and assessment in order to derive small instructional components from existing resources; and the object perspective, stemming from the object-oriented paradigm in computer science, with a focus on the development of small, reusable components, which are characterized in terms of accessibility, reusability, and interoperability. This dual perspective reflects the interests of the protagonists in the LO movement: the education community and the learning technology community. While the technologists are concerned with the development of technical systems designed to meet educational needs, these systems must also conform to pedagogical theories and concepts of instructional design, which are the domain of the education community. Many commentators disassociate learning objects from the object-oriented paradigm; at the same time, the LO community is preoccupied with the issue of reuse, which is a fundamental of this paradigm. This review draws parallels between both communities, as the same concerns are mirrored; the fundamentals of object technology should be applied to the entire learning object development process if higher levels of reuse are to be achieved.
UR - http://www.adelaide.edu.au/ascilite2003/program/conf_prog_index.htm
UR - http://www.adelaide.edu.au/ascilite2003/program/conf_prog_index.htm
M3 - Conference contribution
SN - 0-9751702-1-X
SN - 0-9751702-2-8
SP - 679
EP - 683
BT - Unknown Host Publication
CY - Adelaide, Australia
ER -