Forum .LRN Q&A: Re: Can we compare .LRN with WebCT

Collapse
4: Re: Can we compare .LRN with WebCT (response to 1)
Posted by Peter Alberer on 09/13/03 06:02 PM
Hi Carl,

for the Vienna University of Business Administration we have developed a Self-assessment tool, (several types of exercises, can be integrated into exams) which is - after a lot of development - quite sophisticated (different assessment schemes, different grading schemes, everything is xml im- and exportable). All of the exercises are "learning objects" that can be semantically connected via a categorization system.

If you are interested, i can send you additional information.

Collapse
7: Re: Can we compare .LRN with WebCT (response to 4)
Posted by Carl Robert Blesius on 09/15/03 11:20 AM
Peter,

it would be great if you could share more information on your additions.

Malte just posted an assessment rfc
https://openacs.org/projects/openacs/packages/assessment/rfc/

Your feedback on that would be great.

We are gearing up to get started and it would be ideal if we could use the work and generalize it for the greater toolkit (if needed).

Is the self-assessment tool based on parts of existing packages (e.g. survey) or is it built from scratch?

Are you using XML defined by IMS for import and export?

Categorization system? Is that the same one that was recently contributed (and hopefully works in 5.0)?

More information please.

Collapse
8: Re: Can we compare .LRN with WebCT (response to 7)
Posted by Peter Alberer on 09/16/03 10:47 AM
i will have a look at the rfc and give feedback later this week when i come back from a trip to Dresden (Wirtschaftsinformatik 2003)
Collapse
9: Re: Can we compare .LRN with WebCT (response to 7)
Posted by Peter Alberer on 09/22/03 12:08 PM

Hello, and sorry for the late reply.

Is the self-assessment tool based on parts of existing packages (e.g. survey) or is it built from scratch?

We have not used existing packages. The requirements we defined for the whole system and for the assessment system lead to the development of our learning-object-system that did not "fit" with the survey package. The assessment system is geared towards automatic grading and self-assessment only. The whole definition of a certain exercises is saved as one xml document. There is no "datamodel" for the definition of an exercise, just for the metadata. These are some of the points why we did not use the survey package.

Are you using XML defined by IMS for import and export?

No, we have defined our own xml-schemata.

Categorization system? Is that the same one that was recently contributed (and hopefully works in 5.0)?

No, there was no such system when we started development. Therefore we developed our own system. We have a paper describing our system, where you can find additional information.