Object Objections

Three Objections to Learning Objects
Norm Friesen ([email protected])
Athabasca University
April 13, 2003

Norm Friesen has three philosophical problems with learning objects but offers no solutions. The term learning object is meaningless and a learning standard can be either neutral or relevant but not both. These are academic arguments. His third objection is that the bull leading the charge into object standards is the U.S. military, and they’re the wrong people to do the job. This is a real problem, but if not they, who? I’d hate to the team behind “No Child Left Behind” work on standards.

The game as Friesen sees it:

    Strike One: Bad name. Learning Object, the combination of learning, a concept so vague that people can read almost anything into it, and object, a technical term so precise that it’s hard to describe without technobabble - principles such as abstraction, concurrency, encapsulation, hierarchy, persistence, polymorphism, and typing.

      In order for the positive potential of learning objects to be realized, they need to be labelled, described, investigated and understood in ways that make the simplicity, compatibility and advantages claimed for them readily apparent to teachers, trainers and other practitioners.

    Strike Two: Flawed concept. SCORM purports to be pedagogically neutral. But there are many pedagogies — tailored to specific situations. SCORM favors the single, self-directed, self-paced learner; that’s not neutrality. Neutral or relevant: take one, not both.

    Strike Three: Do you really want educational systems defined by the Department of Defense? Not all education is mil-spec, nor all learners soldiers, nor should they be.

Thanks to Stephen Downes for the pointer to the original item.


Posted by Jay Cross at April 14, 2003 09:20 PM | TrackBack
Comments

In January 2002, the Spencer Foundation published a very thorough "Survey of International Investment in Educational Technology Research and Investment" (fas.org/learn/intl_rev/intlsurvey.pdf) which identifies agencies that invest into EdTech R&D. In 2000, the US Dep't of Education budgeted $20 million. The Dep't of Defense budgeted $165 million.

Federal budgets for 2000 were set before the current military frenzy and "No Child Left Behind". The Dep't of Defense's budget this year for EdTech R&D is probably significantly higher, and the Dep't of Education's budget lower than in 2000.

There is no other corporate or government entity which rivals the military's commitment to elearning. There probably won't be for years. The European Commission has some interesting programs, but in aggregate they invested only $65 million (US) into EdTech R&D in 2000.

What other agency is there that might rival the military's leading role in setting learning standards? ASTD?

Given these realities, and others that dampen R&D expenditures in the enterprise elearning sector, I think questions about the legitimacy of the military driving learning object standards are mute.

Posted by: Alex Gault at April 15, 2003 10:15 AM

Moot, it's moot

sorry, pet peeve.

See the adj. definition here:
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=moot

That aside, the various branches aren't the only institutions involved in setting learning standards. I'm encouraged by European involvement because of the different perspective it offers.

David

Posted by: David Carter-Tod at April 15, 2003 01:32 PM

Alex, I realize that the military has its nearest rival in education R&D spending outgunned (couldn't resist) by 8:1, but I don't think it's something for us to forget about or willingly accept.

The post before this one, on John Taylor Gatto, links to the tale of the creation of America's dysfunctional school system (borrowed from the Prussians to serve the industrialists) that the citizenry bent over for.

I don't trust Donald Rumsfeld and the Pentagon to draw up the blueprints for the future of education. God I love the smell of napalm in the morning.

Posted by: Jay Cross at April 15, 2003 09:31 PM

Here's a thoughtful rebuttal to the original article. Military? SCORM's so limited, we need not worry; it's not going anywhere.

Posted by: Jay Cross at April 17, 2003 11:16 PM

30 Poppy Lane
Berkeley, California 94708

1.510.528.3105 (office & cell)



Subscribe to this Blog

Enter your email address to subscribe. We vow never to share your information with anyone. No Spam.

Subscribe Unsubscribe

Reference Pages

Articles
Blogs
Building Community
CSS, Semantic Mark-Up, and codes
Design
First Principles
Glossary
How People Learn
Knowledge Management
Learning Links
Learning Standards
Making It Work (Implementing)
Metrics & ROI
Presentations
Psychology
Social Software
String theory
The eLearning Museum
Time
Visual Learning


Search


Our Infrequent Newsletter
Sign up for our sporadic newsletter.
Email:


Entries by category...

Blogging
Books
Collaboration
Customer care
Design
Emergent Learning
handbook
Jokes
Just Jay
Learning
Meta
Networking
Outbound
Recycled from Blogger
Ref
store
The Industry
Time
Visual
Workflow-based eLearning


Blogroll


Internet Time Group



© 2004 Internet Time Group



Click for Berkeley, California Forecast
Berkeley, California


Recent entries

New Blog
Blogger Experience, Housekeeping, Something New
Loosely Coupled
Above all
Demographics is destiny
Are you setting the bar high enough?
Virtual Apps
Aerobic Learning
Work as Video Game
Oracle and Macromedia, Sitting in a Tree
The Blogosphere
ASTD Silicon Valley
Performance Support
Kingsbridge Conference Center
First Post by Email
Transition
Inactive Blog
RSS Feed for New Site
Comment Spam
Testing ... testing ... 1...2..3
IT Doesn't Matter - Learning Does.
All blogging is political
Mutlimedia Learning
Damn, damn, double damn
Nonverbal impact?
The New Religion
Shhhhh.....
Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf!
Business Process Management (2)
Really Big
Business Process Management Conference
WorkFLOW
Don't Lose a Common Sense: LISTEN
It's only natural
Gmail!
Go with the flow
Time Out for the Fair
Informal get-together in SF this Wednesday
Repetition, reverb, and echoes
Who Knows?
Ur-blogging
Cognitive Mapping
Push vs pull
The Big Picture on ROI
Art Break
TDF Finale
New Community of Practice Forming
Dropouts
More TDF04
Training Directors Forum 2004
A Rare One-Liner
PlaNetwork LIVE 2
PlaNetwork LIVE
ASTD 2004 Leftovers
Googlism
Worker Effectiveness Improvement, not KM
Upcoming Events
eLearning Effectiveness?
Jay's Talk at ASTD
Mintzberg & Cooperider
Lest ye forget
ASTD International Conference & Exposition 2004
Knowledge Tips
What is Workflow Learning?
ASTD msg 1 of n
Look out, it's Outlook
Collaboration at ASTD Next Week
Tell me a story
User indifference
Interdependence
The shortest presentation on metrics you will ever hear
Back to Blogger
Windows fixes
The Alchemy of Growth
Grab bag
Very loosely coupled
E-Learning from Practice to Profit
Robin Good kicks off Competitive Edge
China Bloggers
Sonoma Dreaming
Upcoming Events
Emergent Learning Forum: Simulations
'Lanta
The Best Things in Life Are Free
Metrics and Web Services
OpEd: ROI vs. Metrics
e-Merging e-Learning
Loosely Coupled
Search me
Exercise?