SCORM Talk vs. SCORM Walk
Categories: e-Learning Atlas, Ideas and Thoughts, SCORM 2004, SCORM 2004, SCORM Cloud, SCORM Cloud
13 Dec 2011
When looking through the eLearning Atlas, I wondered if the versions of SCORM that companies claim to support are closely matched to what we see being used in reality, via SCORM Cloud. Let’s check it out:
Versions of Claimed SCORM Support in the eLearning Atlas vs. Use in SCORM Cloud:
1 Comment | Post a comment »
I answer a lot of SCORM questions ranging from the basic to the extravagant, and I actually like it. A huge part of what I do is teaching about SCORM.
Sometimes, though, I get questions that make me laugh. Today, I feel like I need to share this one because it isn’t the first time I’ve gotten a question like this one.
What is Scorm Compliance?
OK, good question. I get this one a lot, so I have a sense of where it’s headed. My answer:
Is this what you’re looking for? The distinction between compliance and conformance? Or something more like this, a basic description of SCORM?
The response (slightly rephrased):
Yes both are good. There is a training specialist job interview question? ”Which of the following best describes your experience with Scorm Compliance?” (Then # years and months choice) So what does experience with Scorm Compliance mean in this context?
Let’s cut to the chase. The answer is none. You have no experience if you don’t know what it is.
Funny, yes. Uncommon? Not entirely. People think, or more accurately hope, that their products are SCORM conformant. Let me put it simply… if you haven’t tried, or worked at it, your product simply is not SCORM conformant, or IMS BLTI compliant, or AICC conformant. These things take effort. And so does acquiring SCORM experience as an individual.
No Comments | Post a comment »
eLearning Atlas: Research Worth Sharing
Categories: AICC, e-Learning Atlas, SCORM, SCORM 2004, SCORM 2004
5 Dec 2011
We created the eLearning Atlas to be an ideal tool to easily find the proper solutions. Jena and I have tried to speak to every company in the Atlas, and we continue to seek those that we’ve missed. This process provides a valuable pool of data. Rather than hoard this information, I thought it would be nice to share.
Let’s take a graphical look at some of the interesting conclusions I’ve drawn. The following graphs only include traditional products that can implement standards (Authoring Tools, LMSs, LCMSs and Content Libraries). Here we can see the haves and the have-nots:
eLearning Atlas Products That Support At Least One Standard:
A look at the Haves:
So, what does this all mean? For the majority of the industry, SCORM works, but there are lots of eLearning products out there that don’t play nicely with one another. The creation and delivery of content is a hard problem to solve, without a common standard or model… it’s really hard to solve.
When developers try to fit a unique course into a unique learning system… things get complicated. When eLearning gets complicated, things get expensive.
The eLearning Atlas proves that there are thousands of possible companies who can create, manage and deliver eLearning, some doing it without any claimed support for standardization. For some companies, the expense of stepping outside their branded box of solutions, locks a customer in for life. We think SCORM frees people to choose the best fit. The eLearning Atlas can help users easily filter out the noise of companies who are not interested in playing nicely with one another, and make connections with products that want to work together.
To look at it another way, we’ve currently found 219 Authoring Tools, some being used by 360 Custom Content Creators to make training that will be delivered using 655 LMS/LCMSs… that’s 51,640,200 possible combinations. Trying to fit all those pieces together, each time, is a daunting task and the exact pain ADL created SCORM to solve. SCORM (and other standards) help eLearning providers play nicely with one another; the eLearning Atlas can help users find the products and services that will play nicely with the systems they already use.
No Comments | Post a comment »
A car salesman’s credibility is quickly lost when he guesses what size engine is under the hood or what the gas mileage could be. Claiming a car has “good” gas mileage is not the same thing as knowing it’s 40 mpg. A 6-cylinder engine can come in a variety of flavors… in-line or V, turbocharged or naturally-aspirated, these details create some machines that are much faster than others. With cars, more is not always better, sweating the details creates vehicles that keep “car guys” debating for hours. People who care nothing for cars will make generalizations that make me cringe, but nobody wants a guessing salesman to help choose the perfect vehicle.
3 Comments | Post a comment »
Project Update: Tin Can is ready
Categories: Ideas and Thoughts, Project Tin Can, SCORM, Standards Evolution
14 Sep 2011
SCORM is over 10 years old. A while ago, ADL (the keepers of SCORM) asked us to research what the next-generation e-learning specification could/should look like.
We’ve been gathering information from the entire e-learning community about what you’d like to see in the next specification. Many of you already know about this, and many of you have participated.
We have our solution — it’s the Tin Can API.
The Tin Can API solves a lot of problems that older specifications suffered from, but it also adds new capabilities, new business cases, and new ways of handling content. The Tin Can API fuses a decade of collective e-learning experiences with a decade of technological advances.
We’ve created a place for you to go and tell us what we got right and what we missed. Click on the video below to learn more about the Tin Can API.
4 Comments | Post a comment »
Older Posts »
