HomeAboutContact

Author's note: this article was originally written as an internal document for an employer to inform and educate senior management on SCORM compliance in distributed learning. It relies heavily on information quoted from the Web sites mentioned in the article.

Ridin' the SCORM out

The Evolution of Computer-Based Instruction

By Bob Schmitt
February, 2005

In November of 1997, the United States Department of Defense (DoD) and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) launched the Advanced Distributed Learning initiative (ADL — http://www.adlnet.org/ ) whose mission is to identify and assemble a set of standards to define advanced distributed learning technologies and practices, for a variety of purposes which include: enhancing training effectiveness, influence commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) product development, and to lower development costs of Computer-Based Instruction.

The ADL started by identifying a set of high-level requirements for learning content. These include:

Durability — content does not require redesign, reconfiguration or recoding despite changes in technology such as system software.

Interoperability — content created in one environment (hardware, operating system, display mechanism such as a browser) with one set of tools is usable in all other environments with all other tools (or at the least a "wide variety" of environments and tools).

Accessibility — content is located and accessed as needed and delivered from any remote location to all ("many") other locations.

Reusability — content can be incorporated into multiple special uses regardless of context.

To achieve these goals and requirements, the ADL has created the SCORM concept as a "first step toward liberating learning content objects from local implementations." The intent of SCORM, which stands for Shareable Content Object Reference Model, is to describe the technical means by which content can be segmented into "objects", or self-contained pieces, and aggregated by a Learning Management System (LMS).

A Historical Perspective

Before delving into SCORM and LMS, a brief look back at the events that lead up to the inception of the ADL will help to make clear where the DoD's perceived need for standardization came from and the resulting technical requirements that arose from that need.

The following is my summary of the history of CBI (Computer-Based Instruction) according to the ADL.

Back in the early days of computers, technologists split into two camps, engineers who "followed the evolutionary chain of computer development and exploited its advancements" for commercial use/gain and "advanced researchers" who worked in the theoretical to develop prototypical Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS) which will be discussed later. Suffice it to say, the engineers advanced CBI methodology by using available technology. As technology advanced, costs associated with development of CBI content reduced, training effectiveness increased, and an industry of commercial products was established. As complex creation tools matured and rich media and advanced feature sets were incorporated, the tools naturally played a significant role in defining instructional constructs. However these systems were described as "predominantly client-based" producing "monolithic and fairly rigid instructional content that was captive to the authoring tool environment. Instructional content and logic were tightly bound together."

Meanwhile the "advanced researchers" sought to develop an "instructional experience" which is custom-fit to the needs of each individual learner. The ADL observes: "Such approaches tended to separate control logic from instructional content. The concept of dynamically assembling learning objects to meet specific learning objectives took root."

Though as an outcome of each camp these distinctions may have been by-and-large true, it seems to me that it is the fault of the CBI developers, and not the technology that fails in this view. However, our story continues....

As the Internet came into the public consciousness, both camps began to recognize the value of a distributed environment. The first generation of Web-based training content were often derivatives of existing CBI products which served to replace one distribution method with another, but content was still "held captive to the development environment" in that it required "proprietary browser plug-ins to process private formats."

Second generation Web-based training implementations began the process of separating content from control and the two camps found common ground on which to reset the development agenda.

The result of all this was the identification of a new set of technical requirements and the beginning of the standardization process.

So, what is this "Intelligent Tutoring Systems" you speak of?

First of all, remember that we are still dealing with the theoretical, so given that caveat here are the functionalities of an Intelligent Tutoring System. First the ITS must "generate instruction in real time and on demand as required by individual learners." As a concept, I think any one of us could imagine how that could be realized, but wait there's more: The ITS must also, "support mixed initiative dialogue, allowing free form discussion between the technology and the student or user." Now we begin to see why these things don't exist (unless you consider Microsoft's "Clippy" an ITS, and I think we all know how useful he was...). The ADL describes a number of requirements for an ITS "borrowed" from the ITS community, they include: learning that is presented in real-time and on demand; the learning content's sequence, pace, difficulty level, abstraction level (is it high-level or low-level or in between?), and style are tailored to the needs, background, ability, interests, and cognitive style of the student (the concept being to take advantage of a student's strengths and reinforce areas where help is needed); and that either the technology or the student can ask a question or answer a question in plain language (mixed initiative dialogue) at any time.

ADL puts the "Advanced" in Distributed Learning

Alright, one last bit of info before we get to SCORM. The difference between "distance learning" and "distributed learning" is an important concept to understand.

Distance learning relies on synchronous learning technologies to provide distance education and training. This means, the students and the instructor are separate from one another, but the act of educating takes place at a specific time (and in many cases a specific place). Examples of this are video teleconferencing and Placeware/Symposium-style environments.

Distributed learning on the other hand is asynchronous, meaning that learning can take place anytime, anywhere (and, if preferred, in your underwear). Examples of this include: Computer-Based Instruction, Interactive Multimedia Instruction, Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Network Tutorial Simulation, and Web-Based Training.

The ADL has co-opted the term "Advanced" and stuck it on the front of distributed learning to describe "traditional computer-based instruction and interactive multimedia technologies with new Web-enabled intelligent tutoring and simulation capabilities" (Not to mention distribution capabilities, which they didn't mention, thank you very much.)

So finally, let's move on to SCORM.

What is SCORM?

The ADL describes it this way, "SCORM defines a Web-based learning Content Aggregation Model and Run-time Environment for learning objects and references interrelated technical specifications to bring together diverse and disparate learning content and products to ensure reusability, accessibility, durability and interoperability in Web-based learning." To which you are probably saying, "Huh? Is there anyway to say that in plain English?"

The SCORM 1.2. Overview describes it a little clearer: "The Sharable Content Object Reference Model (SCORM™) defines a Web-based learning 'Content Aggregation Model' and 'Run-time Environment' for learning objects. At its simplest, it is a model that references a set of interrelated technical specifications and guidelines designed to meet DoD's high-level requirements for Web-based learning content."

What this means is that SCORM is a conglomeration of technical guidelines and specifications created by many different groups and covering different aspects of Web-based training falling into 2 main topic categories: "Content Aggregation Model" and "Run-time Environment". It is SCORM's intent to coordinate and "connect" all these disparate groups and interests into one cohesive standard for emerging technologies and commercial/public implementations.

SCORM is described as a library containing 3 "books". The first book is the SCORM Overview, authored by the ADL and containing high-level descriptions of the ADL, SCORM, the evolution of learning technologies, and how SCORM fits into that evolution (in a far more redundant manner than I am attempting here). Books 2 and 3 contain a variety of standards created by recognized standards bodies that describe the technical details of the 2 topic categories noted earlier. These various standards are as follows:

Book 2: Content Aggregation Model

The SCORM Content Aggregation Model attempts to standardize the composition of learning content, defines how content is to be identified, described, indexed and aggregated into a course, and subsequently moved between Learning Management Systems (LMS).

Book 3: The Run-Time Environment

The SCORM Run-Time Environment describes the interoperability of content objects and Learning Management Systems. Book 3 attempts to standardize the way content starts (and ends), the way content communicates with an LMS, and defines "data elements that are exchanged between an LMS and content during its execution."

Other books and standards may be added to future versions of SCORM.

Standards organizations

The ADL is not a standards organization (although they have been mistakenly called one by some sources), they are part of the DoD. The ADL states: "We are defining the needs [emphasis is mine] for standards [but not the standards themselves]. Our strategy is to let industry set the standards wherever possible. Standards are the basis for wider use of commercial learning products and tools. The standards will evolve over time." SCORM is not a recognized standard per se, but a "blanket concept" for a group of disparate standards being created by a number of recognized standards organizations. These are the major standards bodies involved:

The Learning Management System

The second part of SCORM-compliant training (content objects being the first) is the Learning Management System (LMS). The SCORM defined LMS resides in a server-based environment and contains the intelligence for distributing content as needed, tracking and reporting on each student's progress and interactions through a course, assessing a student's mastery of the subject matter, and determining what the student should experience next. The LMS has a suite of functionalities among which are: back-end connections to other information systems, "complex" tracking and reporting, centralized registration, gathering and processing student profile information, online collaboration, and adaptive content delivery.

The LMS must also have the intelligence to combine "relatively small, reusable learning resources" (i.e. content objects) and give them a specific context. The SCORM Overview describes it this way: "By themselves, learning resources have no specific context. When combined with other learning resources, the aggregation provides the context and allows an LMS to manage the learning experience. [Learning] resources can thus be reused in multiple contexts."

Obviously the point of this is that the content objects contain no logic or information about other content objects (they are "liberated" from the constraints of context), but instead logical things like sequencing and navigation are defined by rules (imported into the LMS with a content package) for an aggregation (e.g. a course, a unit of instruction, a lesson... whatever) interpreted and acted upon by the LMS.

"The most obvious benefits of sharability and reuse are the possibility of large content repositories and the development of a new 'content economy' where Sharable Content Objects are traded widely." — SCORM Overview

What Does SCORM-Compliant Learning Look Like?

The ADL tests and evaluates projects to determine if they meet the requirements for durability, interoperability, accessibility, and reusability as defined earlier. Projects that qualify are those that:

SCORM-related/compliant Products

These are a few products that I have run across that claim some level, or commitment to, SCORM compliance.

Microsoft Blackboard 5.5 — targeted to colleges and universities (not business). Claims that "Both Microsoft and Blackboard support standards efforts such as the Instructional Management System (IMS) and SCORM." How much support of the standards remains to be evaluated. It probably will be difficult to ever find a Microsoft app with 100% SCORM compliance.

Macromedia Exchange for Dreamweaver — offers SCORM RTI Minimal Code Extension which "inserts JavaScript and HTML attributes for minimal compliance with ADL SCORM specifications for learning content." Discussion group feedback seems to indicate that the version level and type and amount of SCORM compliance is suspect.

Macromedia Flash FS SCORM Extension — "This publishing template allows developers to call ADL SCORM 'LMS' functions by using fscommands within Flash movies. LMS functions allow developers of learning content to communicate with a student tracking database using a standard API." Unfortunately from what I understand from the SCORM docs, proprietary plug-in technologies are a no-no for building content objects. Maybe Flash can get around this because it is an open format, but I do not know.

Pathlore Learning Management System (LMS) — SCORM compliant, uses IIS, SQL 7 (or Oracle). Again, the level of compliance needs to be assessed.

Copyright © 2012 Robert Schmitt. All rights reserved.