I fogot to run this when it first came out last week - good thing I check my notes. The author looks at my argument in Design, Standards and Reusability to the effect that learning design and reusability are incompatible. His response (and this summarizes the views of many) is that "I think our enthusiasm for the concept of 'reuse' in the learning object paradigm must be tempered with a more realistic appraisal of the environment in which we are currently operating." In essence, he writes, "My issue with the concept of reusability in learning objects is that it runs counter to instructional design best practices. I agree with Shaw (2002) who stated that in developing learning resources, one should begin with a genuine instructional problem and should strive to achieve outcomes which are not otherwise possible." As for the "common element" reusability, well, "Asking an instructional designer to create an LO based on the "common element" is like asking a local politician to develop municipal legislation with a provincial (state) and national level audience in mind." Well, maybe. But instead of thinking about legislation, think about bricks and trucks. Doesn't matter where they were designed, trucks can be used anywhere. And a truck is pretty complex. What makes reusability work is not the type of object, but rather, how you use it. And learning design is not how you use learning objects.
Today: 0 Total: 1381 [Direct link] [Share]
