We want LORS to recognize the learning units (IMS LD) and
call the appropiate parser (we where thinking about doing it
in the evaluation/gradebook package) and fill out the
evaluation tables with the learning activities.
Unfortunately, IMS LD is not quite simple as other IMS specs -where you can take the XML in the manifest and the content and run with it.
Although you would be able to parse IMS LD and identify activities, you could potentially find it difficult to map the activities to .LRN modules or LAMS activities, or Reload Player for that matter.
IMS LD interoperability is still a pending issue for the spec. There are numerous people currently working on ways to do this. For instance, if I understand it properly the Alfanet fellows (http://www.ii.uam.es/~rcarro/AHCW04/Santos.pdf) have created templates that would accommodate for activities that you can run on .LRN. LAMS has a new Tools Contract and Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) fellows (http://ulises.tel.uva.es/uploaded_files/wbe2005-Davinia_HdezLeo.pdf) are proposing extensions to IMS LD to accommodate for some of these limitations.
In the Alt-I-LAB IMS Conference (http://www.imsglobal.org/altilab) in Sheffield this month, there's going to be a Learning Design workshop so hopefully some of these issues are going to be put forward and (again, hopefully) addressed.
.LRN has a good start, as we have done a mapping of weird Blackboard and WebCT course packages into .LRN... so I imagine similar mappings would have to take place to truly make IMS LD interoperable. And by interoperability I mean, a learning design (or unit of learning, or learning sequence -yes, we have ambiguity on terms too 😉 created in elive LD suite can play in Alfanet/.LRN implementation or LAMS... that'll be really cool.
However, maybe it wouldn't be quite the same as the tools in each system might be slightly different and some pedagogical aspects of using one tool from a particular implementation, might not be able to map to a tool of another implementation... defeating the purpose of interoperability.
So, yes, Learning Design is rather complex, but I guess it's its own nature as we are not only dealing with content but with activities, groups, roles and people... so quite a few other things that are brought to the equation.
Ernie
