The TAO of Learning Objects: Part One - Nature
Susan Hesemeier,
CanCore,
Nov 28, 2002
Engaging discussion cenetered around an effort to capture the essence (or nature) of learning objects. Broad catch-all definitions (such as found in Wiley) are rejected because they do not convey the object's educational objective. In addition, an extended discussion of the object oriented approach to definition is also rejected as "marginal, at best, and absolutely counterproductive at worst" because while it captures the need for reusability, that's all it captures. Instead, they focus on the beginnings of a definition that relies more heavily on the purpose of a learning object rather than a description of its design (let's call this the 'deontological definition' as opposed to Wiley's (and IEEE's) 'digital definition' and my own 'functional definition' (which nobody ever refers to, but I've learned to live with that)).
Today: 0 Total: 17 [Direct link] [Share]
