Skip to main content

: an integrated modeling approach for developing educational modules

Abstract

Educational modules—concise units of study, composed of theoretical and practical content, which can be delivered to learners by using technological and computational resources—are relevant mechanisms to improve the learning processes. Similar to software products, educational modules require the establishment and integration of innovative methods, tools and procedures into well-defined processes aiming at producing flexible, adaptable and high-quality products. In this sense, content modeling activity plays a fundamental role in the development of educational modules, providing a way to structure the relevant parts of the learning content. Motivated by this scenario, we propose —an approach for modeling learning content, capable of addressing conceptual, instructional and didactic issues altogether, in an integrated way. By means of a set of models, helps the author in determining the relevant parts of the learning content, providing a systematic way to structure the concepts and related information. also explores the idea of open specifications, providing support for the definition of dynamic contexts of learning. Besides that, the translation of models into machine-readable specifications, automatically or by hand, makes possible interoperability and promotes reusability. has been applied in the development of educational modules for different domains. The resulting modules have been evaluated in terms of the authors’ and learners’ perspectives. The results obtained provide preliminary evidence of the learning effectiveness, quality and flexibility achieved by the educational modules produced.

References

  1. 1.

    Advanced Distributed Learning Initiative (ADL): Sharable Content Object Reference Model (SCORM) specifications (2006). Retrieved April 10, 2011, from http://www.adlnet.org/

  2. 2.

    Ausubel DP, Novak JD, Hanesian H (1978) Educational psychology: a cognitive view, 2nd edn. Hold, Rinehart & Winston, New York

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Barbosa EF (2004) Uma contribuição ao processo de desenvolvimento e modelagem de módulos educacionais. Ph.D. thesis, ICMC-USP, São Carlos, SP. In Portuguese

  4. 4.

    Barbosa EF, Maldonado JC (2006) An integrated content modeling approach for educational modules. In: IFIP 19th world computer congress—international conference on education for the 21st century, Santiago, Chile, pp 17–26

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Barbosa EF, Maldonado JC (2011) Collaborative development of educational modules: a need for lifelong learning. In: Magoulas GD (ed) E-infrastructures and technologies for lifelong learning: next generation environments, pp 175–211. IGI Global, Birkbeck College, University of London, UK

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Barbosa EF, Souza SRS, Maldonado JC (2008) An experience on applying learning mechanisms for teaching inspection and software testing. In: 21st conference on software engineering education and training (CSEET 2008), Charleston, SC, pp 189–196

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Basili V, Selby RW (1987) Comparing the effectiveness of software testing strategies. IEEE Trans Softw Eng SE-13(12):1278–1296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Blackboard I (2002) Blackboard learning system (release 6): Product overview. White paper (http://www.blackboard.com)

  9. 9.

    Borges VA, Maldonado JC, Barbosa EF (2011) Towards the establishment of supporting mechanisms for modeling and generating educational content. In: 26th symposium on applied computing (ACM SAC 2011)—track intelligent/innovative learning environments, TaiChung, Taiwan, pp 1–6

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Brachman RJ, Levesque HJ (eds) (1985) Readings in knowledge representation. Kaufmann, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Brotherton JA, Abowd GD (2004) Lessons learned from eClass: Assessing automated capture and access in the classroom. ACM Trans Comput-Hum Interact 11(2):121–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Caeiro-Rodríguez M (2007) Learning objects and instructional design: From contents to activities. In: Koohang A, Harman K (eds) Learning objects and instructional design, pp 219–251. Informing Science Press, Santa Rosa

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    (DCMI) (2005) D.C.M.I.: DCMI metadata terms. Retrieved 10 April, 2011, from http://dublincore.org/documents/2005/06/13/dcmi-terms/

  14. 14.

    Delamaro ME, Maldonado JC, Mathur AP (2001) Interface mutation: an approach for integration testing. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 27(3):228–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    DeMillo RA, Lipton RJ, Sayward FG (1978) Hints on test data selection: Help for the practicing programmer. IEEE Comput 11(4):34–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Dewald NH (1999) Web-based library instruction: what is good pedagogy? Inf Technol Libr 18(1):26–31

    Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Dick W, Carey L, Carey JO (2001) The systematic design of instruction, 5th edn. Addison-Wesley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Dieberger A, Guzdial M (2003) CoWeb—experiences with collaborative web spaces. In: Lueg C, Fisher D (eds) From usenet to coWebs: interacting with social information spaces, 1st edn. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    DotLRN (2009) DotLRN: open source learning management system. (http://dotlrn.org/)

  20. 20.

    Dougiamas M (2009) Moodle—a free, open source course management system for online learning. (http://moodle.org/)

  21. 21.

    EML: Educational modeling language (2000). Retrieved March 15, 2011, from http://hdl.handle.net/1820/81

  22. 22.

    Farrell K, Carr AE (2007) A blended model of instructional design for learning objects. In: Koohang A, Harman K (eds) Learning objects and instructional design, pp 359–405. Informing Science Press, Santa Rosa

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Gagné RM, Briggs L, Wager W (1992) Principles of instructional design, 4th edn. HBJ College Publishers, Fort Worth

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Gibbons AS, Bunderson CV, Olsen JB, Rogers J (1995) Work models: still beyond instructional objectives. Mach-Mediat Learn 5(3–4):221–236

    Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Goldberg MW, Salari S, Swoboda P (1996) World wide web—course tool: an environment for building WWW-based courses. Comput Netw ISDN Syst 28(7–11):1219–1231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Harel D (1987) Statecharts: a visual formalism for complex systems. Sci Comput Program 8:231–274

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Horn RE (1989) Mapping hypertext. Lexington Institute, Lexington

    Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    IEEE Learning Technology Standards Committee (LTSC) (2002) Learning Object Metadata (LOM)

  29. 29.

    IMS Global Learning Consortium Inc (2003) IMS learning design information model, final specification. Retrieved March 15, 2011, from http://www.imsglobal.org/learningdesign

  30. 30.

    IMS Global Learning Consortium Inc (2004) IMS content packaging, final specification. Retrieved March 15, 2011, from http://www.imsglobal.org/packaging

  31. 31.

    International organization for standardization (2004) Information technology—software life cycle processes. Standard. ISO/IEC 12207:1995/Amd 2:2004, ISO/IEC

  32. 32.

    Jonassen D (1999) Designing constructivist learning environments. In: Reigeluth CM (ed) Instructional theories and models, Mahwah, NJ, pp 215–239. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

    Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Kawasaki EI, Fernandes CT (1996) Modelo para projeto de cursos hipermídia. In: VII Simpósio Brasileiro de informática na educação, pp 227–240. Belo Horizonte, MG

    Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Leinonen T, Purma J, Poldoja H, Toikkanen T (2010) Information architecture and design solutions scaffolding authoring of open educational resources. IEEE Trans Learning Technol 3(2):116–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Leinonen T, Toikkanen T, Silfvast K (2008) Software as hypothesis: research-based design technology. In: 10th participatory design conference (PDC 2008), Bloomington, IN

    Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Maidantchik CLL, Rocha AR (2002) Managing a worldwide software process. In: Workshop on global software development—international conference on software engineering (ICSE 2002), Orlando, FL

    Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Maldonado JC (1991) Critérios potenciais usos: Uma contribuição ao teste estrutural de software. Ph.D. thesis, DCA/FEEC/UNICAMP, Campinas, SP

  38. 38.

    Maldonado JC, Fabbri SCPF, Mendonça M, Dória E, Martimiano LAF, Carver J (2006) Comparing code reading and testing criteria. In: ISESE 2006—international symposium on empirical software engineering, Rio de Janeiro, pp 42–44

    Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Mayorga JI, Verdejo MF, Rodríguez-Artacho M, Calero MY (1999) Domain modelling to support educational web-based authoring. In: TET 99 congress, Norway

    Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    McConnell S (1999) Open-source methodology: ready for prime time? IEEE Softw 16(4):6–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    McGreal R (2010) Approaches to oer development. In: 7th open education conference. Retrieved April 10, 2011, from http://hdl.handle.net/10609/5083

    Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    McManus TF (1996) Delivering instruction on the world wide web. Online document. Retrieved March 15, 2011, from http://www.svsu.edu/mcmanus/papers/wbi.html

  43. 43.

    Memmel M, Ras E, Jantke K, Yacci M (2007) Approaches to learning object oriented instructional design. In: Koohang A, Harman K (eds) Learning objects: theory, praxis, issues, and trends, pp 281–325. Informing Science Press, Santa Rosa

    Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Merrill MD (1983) Component display theory. In: Instructional design theories and models: an overview of their current states. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale

    Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Merriënboer JV (1997) Training complex cognitive skills: a four-component instructional design model for technical training. Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  46. 46.

    Michener ER (1978) Understanding understanding mathematics. Cognitive Science 2(4)

  47. 47.

    Myers GJ, Sandler C, Badgett T, Thomas TM (2004) The art of software testing, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  48. 48.

    Novak JD (1990) Concept mapping: a useful tool for science education. J Res Sci Teach 27:937–949

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. 49.

    Pansanato LTE, Nunes MGV (1999) Autoria de aplicações hipermídia para ensino. Revista Brasileira de informática na educação pp. 103–124

  50. 50.

    Paquette G, Teja I, Léonard M, Lundgren-Cayrol K, Marino O (2005) An instructional engineering method and tool for the design of units of learning. In: Koper R, Tattersall C (eds) Learning design: A Handbook on modeling and delivering networked education and training. Springer, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  51. 51.

    Pimentel MG (1997) MAPHE: Metodologia de apoio a projetos de hipertextos educacionais. In: VIII simpósio Brasileiro de informática na educação (SBIE 97), São José dos Campos, SP, pp 351–368

    Google Scholar 

  52. 52.

    Pimentel MG, Ishiguro Y, Kerimbaev B, Abowd GD, Guzdial M (2001) Supporting long-term educational activities through dynamic web interfaces. J Interact Comput 13(3):353–374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. 53.

    Reigeluth CM (1999) The elaboration theory: audience for scope and sequence decisions. In: Reigeluth CM (ed) Instructional design theories and models: a new paradigm of instruction theory. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale

    Google Scholar 

  54. 54.

    Richards G, Marshall S (2010) Open educational resources for development of university courses. In: 7th open education conference. Retrieved April 10, 2011, from http://hdl.handle.net/10609/4846

    Google Scholar 

  55. 55.

    Rodríguez-Artacho M (2002) PALO language overview. Tech rep, UNED University, Madrid, Spain. STEED project

  56. 56.

    Rodríguez-Artacho M, Maíllo MFV (2004) Modeling educational content: the cognitive approach of the PALO language. Educat Technol Soc 7(3):124–137

    Google Scholar 

  57. 57.

    Rumbaugh J, Blaha M, Premerlani W, Eddy F, Lorensen W (1991) Object-oriented modeling and design. Prentice Hall International, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  58. 58.

    Russell SJ, Norvig P (2003) Artificial intelligence: a modern approach, 2nd edn. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  59. 59.

    Sakai Project (2009) Collaboration and learning environment for education. http://sakaiproject.org/

  60. 60.

    Shepard T, Lamb M, Kelly D (2001) More testing should be taught. Commun ACM 44(6):103–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. 61.

    Silva MAG, Barbosa EF, Maldonado JC (2011) Model-driven development of learning objects. In: 41st Frontiers in education conference (FIE 2011). Rapid City, SD. 6p, Accept for publication

  62. 62.

    Support centre for open resources in education (SCORE) (2011) SCORE project. Retrieved April 10, 2011, from http://www8.open.ac.uk/score/

  63. 63.

    Turine MAS, Oliveira MCF, Masiero PC (1997) Designing structured hypertext with HMBS. In: VIII International ACM hypertext conference (Hypertext 97), Southampton, UK, pp 241–256

    Google Scholar 

  64. 64.

    UNESCO international institute for educational planning (IIEP) (2011) UNESCO OER Community. Retrieved April 10, 2011, from http://oerwiki.iiep.unesco.org/index.php/Main_Page

  65. 65.

    Uschold M, Grüninger M (1996) Ontologies: principles, methods and applications. Knowledge Engineering Review 11:93–136. doi:10.1017/S0269888900007797

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. 66.

    Villani SA (2007) Learning objects and instructional design: theories, methods and tools useful in creating effective e-learning environments. In: Koohang A, Harman K (eds) Learning objects: theory, praxis, issues, and trends, pp 371–416. Informing Science Press, Santa Rosa

    Google Scholar 

  67. 67.

    Vincenzi AMR, Wong WE, Delamaro ME, Maldonado JC (2003) JaBUTi: a coverage analysis tool for java programs. In: XVII Simpósio brasileiro de engenharia de software (SBES 2003), Manaus, AM

    Google Scholar 

  68. 68.

    Wiley DA (2001) The instructional use of learning objects. Agency for instructional technology and association for educational communications and technology, Bloomington, IN. Retrieved March 20, 2011, from http://reusability.org/read/chapters/wiley.doc

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ellen Francine Barbosa.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Barbosa, E.F., Maldonado, J.C. : an integrated modeling approach for developing educational modules. J Braz Comput Soc 17, 207–239 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13173-011-0043-5

Download citation

Keywords

  • Educational modules
  • Content modeling
  • Instructional design