Forum .LRN Q&A: LAMS Integration with .LRN ready for testing!

Please put the code not in contrib, but release it in packages in the 5.2 tree (we are nearing the .LRN 2.2 release, so this would be excellent). We will set the maturity level accordingly.

Now, as for the plans for an integration, I was wondering if we could use .LRN Forums and Assessments in addition / as an alternative to existing LAMS functionality. So the LAMS player would allow you e.g. to specify the URL of the assessment and direct you there and set the return_url correctly so you go back into LAMS once you are done. Same with forums et al.

Which reminds me that we should think about enabling return_urls for all these packages :).

What is sad though is that LAMS and .LRN overlap quiet a lot. Both have many things in common:

- forums
- sequencing (lors, lams)
- tests (assessment, q&a)
- annotations (comments, notes)
- voting
- shared resources

Do you see any chance to migrate or merge these features or is this just another good example that reuse is not possible? Of course I know that beeing LMS independant increases the chances of being used in combination with moodle, sakai, .lrn and several other platforms. On the other hand it is a reason for confusion since you have notes but in two systems, you have forum posts but in two systems...which reduces the benefits of a portal. Where can I find information on the architecture of lams (webserver,database,language...).

One little thing on
http://lamsfoundation.org/integration/dotlrn/animations/Adding_a_new_sequence.htm
you talk there about a moodle class but use a dotlrn class :)

A more general problem is how we use names in .LRN. Most of them are misleading or saying nothing at all for students and professors: lors, lorsm, lams, assessment (which is evaluation), evaluation (which is gradebook), ... I know that from the community perspective it is nice to say that we have support for lams but from the users perspective maybe we must call it support for learning activities?

Greetings,
Nima

Great to see news from the middle east.

About a month or so ago, James ran a LAMS presentation in Jordan for the Intaj fellows. Also last month at the e-Merging e-Learning Conference in the UAE, LAMS was also introduced. I'll get you the presentations as soon as I get a hold of them, if you think they might be handy for you.

Regarding the integration, what we have done now is basically a first attempt. However, I would like to take this to a much deeper level where we can create LAMS sequences using the .LRN tools directly (that means, been able to see the .LRN tools as the drag and drop tools you see in LAMS Authoring). That will be really nice.

For LAMS 1.1, the next version, we have abstracted the way that LAMS activities talk to the LAMS progress engine, defining a new tools API/Contract. Therefore, any tool written in any language -following that API- can be integrated seamlesly into LAMS Authoring. That will be really nice.

Ernie

how do you figure out the state?

What I meant to mean with state is basically how the tool behaves given a certain situation. So for instance, take .LRN Survey. Once a student has attempted Survey, you might not want to give the option for the same student to retake it (survey is now finished/completed). So if the student reattemp it again, survey will behave differently.

So forum, photo-album, faq and LORS might not necessarily need (in some cases) to be aware of state. Therefore you can still use them, being aware of the limitation.

Ernie

The LAMS survey activity is meant to collect students responses for analisys and all, but it won't stop students for continue since there's no right and/or wrong answers.

However you can use the Multiple Choice activity which it does allow you to specify wrong and right answers as well as a passing mark. So if a student doesn't get to the passing mark, it won't be able to continue to the following activity in the sequence.

Have a look at the teacher's guide for specifics in each activity tool.

And can we remodel this behaviour with existing .LRN
survey / assessment?

Not with our current code base (LAMS v1.0.x). But as I mentioned before, LAMS 1.1 does have an API that will allow it to add external tools easier. There will be a few changes to the .LRN tools, but I don't think they will be significant.

LAMS 1.1 beta is expected to be released in the firt quarter of 2006.

Ernie

Usually is way less than 24 hrs. But since we are in the other end of the world, when you guys have sign up we are usually a sleep, so it takes us at least a few hours.

Ernie

there's no need to wait for approval. Should we?

There are mainly two reasons for the manual account creation:

1. LAMS is all about collaborating learning. Therefore in order to better appreciate this, it's always easier to have each user with its own account so they can participate in each other's sequences, create their own, monitor the progress of other people, etc. One account for all, as your demo server, won't do for it.

2. Although we can get people to sign up automatically, in order to really assess and have a fair play go at integration they will have to be professors/teacher assitance in a course so they can take advantage of the author and monitor interfaces (as a .LRN student for a course, you'll only get the Learner's interface). Therefore even if we get them to sign in automatically, we will have to set them up in a .LRN as professors.

True, it requires a bit more management in our side, as we need to create manual accounts and all (and of course takes a bit longer than automatic account creation), but given the differences in the experiences, I think a few hours wait makes quite a difference. Nevertheless, we're releasing the LAMS .LRN packages on Friday, if you want to add them to the .LRN demo site, please let me know as we can set up a LAMS server in Europe so it works faster from where you guys are.

Thanks,

Ernie

Thanks,

Ernie