Comments on: Don’t Bloggerize eLearning http://www.tenreasonswhy.com/weblog/2003/04/dont-bloggerize-elearning/ Unclarifying the issues since 2000 Sun, 10 Jul 2011 04:49:46 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: elearnspace http://www.tenreasonswhy.com/weblog/2003/04/dont-bloggerize-elearning/comment-page-1/#comment-27 elearnspace Sun, 03 Oct 2004 17:33:00 +0000 http://www.tenreasonswhy.com/weblog/?p=394#comment-27 <strong>"Bloggerizing elearning"</strong> Two things: Greg Ritter is blogging again! I used to follow his previous blog...but he "dropped out" one day with a cryptic message along the lines of: "I'm done blogging, might be back"...so it's good to see him back! Second:... “Bloggerizing elearning”

Two things: Greg Ritter is blogging again! I used to follow his previous blog…but he “dropped out” one day with a cryptic message along the lines of: “I’m done blogging, might be back”…so it’s good to see him back! Second:…

]]> By: whois http://www.tenreasonswhy.com/weblog/2003/04/dont-bloggerize-elearning/comment-page-1/#comment-26 whois Sat, 23 Aug 2003 04:42:57 +0000 http://www.tenreasonswhy.com/weblog/?p=394#comment-26 So quiet lately. Any more comment please. So quiet lately. Any more comment please.

]]> By: postal code http://www.tenreasonswhy.com/weblog/2003/04/dont-bloggerize-elearning/comment-page-1/#comment-25 postal code Thu, 24 Jul 2003 16:19:15 +0000 http://www.tenreasonswhy.com/weblog/?p=394#comment-25 Your are not the only one. Your are not the only one.

]]> By: Stephen Lahanas http://www.tenreasonswhy.com/weblog/2003/04/dont-bloggerize-elearning/comment-page-1/#comment-24 Stephen Lahanas Wed, 30 Apr 2003 21:23:19 +0000 http://www.tenreasonswhy.com/weblog/?p=394#comment-24 Hello both of you, Have to disagree, the standards are the problem. In some cases they are too complex, in most cases they are simply inappropriate to the problem space. Don't expect all of the tools to solve bad design - not all standards are good or deserve to be adopted. They get adopted by being pragramatic (and not to any one set of toolmakers but to the global market, this is an important distinction). Case in point, SCORM - has violated a basic design tenat by including application logic within the data or content layer. Huge mistake, I've been complaining about it for 2 years, it's taking way too long for folks to find out the hard way that it won't work well, especially in distributed environments. In the meantime, the standard has more or less held the industry hostage and nearly killed it off. And yes, the user / developer communities have been cut off from this very un-democratic approach towards standards definition. IMS and the new LOM standard are in the same boat for different reasons. All of these will fail in favor of a more flexible approach (not simpler, more flexible). I've been writing about standards issues since I was at Cisco in '99 and we have made almost zero industry progress since then. Hello both of you,
Have to disagree, the standards are the problem. In some cases they are too complex, in most cases they are simply inappropriate to the problem space.
Don’t expect all of the tools to solve bad design – not all standards are good or deserve to be adopted. They get adopted by being pragramatic (and not to any one set of toolmakers but to the global market, this is an important distinction).
Case in point, SCORM – has violated a basic design tenat by including application logic within the data or content layer. Huge mistake, I’ve been complaining about it for 2 years, it’s taking way too long for folks to find out the hard way that it won’t work well, especially in distributed environments. In the meantime, the standard has more or less held the industry hostage and nearly killed it off.
And yes, the user / developer communities have been cut off from this very un-democratic approach towards standards definition. IMS and the new LOM standard are in the same boat for different reasons. All of these will fail in favor of a more flexible approach (not simpler, more flexible).
I’ve been writing about standards issues since I was at Cisco in ‘99 and we have made almost zero industry progress since then.

]]> By: George Siemens http://www.tenreasonswhy.com/weblog/2003/04/dont-bloggerize-elearning/comment-page-1/#comment-23 George Siemens Tue, 15 Apr 2003 13:58:50 +0000 http://www.tenreasonswhy.com/weblog/?p=394#comment-23 Hi Greg! Nice to see you blogging again! I've replied to your post here: <a href="http://www.elearnspace.org/cgi-bin/elearnspaceblog/archives/000909.html#000909" rel="nofollow">Bloggerize elearning"</a> I agree with what you write: the complexity of a standard/protocol isn't the issue...it's the tools that must be simple...so I think we agree there. The other area: user involvement in standards creation. In my opinion, standards are being built ahead of use (by use, I'm referring to the user-level instructor)...robbing the process of the feedback that should shape standards development...quick releases, quick feedback (the open source model). Thoughts? George Hi Greg!
Nice to see you blogging again!
I’ve replied to your post here: Bloggerize elearning”
I agree with what you write: the complexity of a standard/protocol isn’t the issue…it’s the tools that must be simple…so I think we agree there. The other area: user involvement in standards creation. In my opinion, standards are being built ahead of use (by use, I’m referring to the user-level instructor)…robbing the process of the feedback that should shape standards development…quick releases, quick feedback (the open source model). Thoughts?
George

]]>