dcannell has posted some thoughts on learning object repositories and metadata from a user’s perspective. I’m hearing from yet another source that “expensive” standardized metadata strategies won’t fly with the users.
I disagree with dcannell’s “thing of the past” verdict, in that I strongly think that learning object repositories are valuable (I’ve built a couple, and am working on something new), but that their role must change drastically if their value is to be realized.
I’m seeing something that is a cross between Pachyderm, Breeze, Contribute, Keynote, iPhoto, Flickr, and some other pieces. Something that focuses on users (who they are, what they do, how they do it), rather than on the infrastructure. To compare, CAREO (and all other learning object repositories of its generation) is pretty solidly based on exposing infrastructure. That’s just plain wrong, moving forward…
PS. dcannell – I don’t know your full name, because you don’t have it anywhere on your weblog… And with comments and trackbacks disabled, there was no way for me to comment on your post directly…
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
I have a question regarding the learning object repositories. How will their role be changed? Should they focus on users? And how?
I knew when I wrote my entry about repositories being a thing of the past, that those people who had spent a better part of a decade making repositories would be upset. I still stand by my comment: The internet by itself is one big repository; we do not need to horde stuff into a tighter site to make it useful. Tagging, better search engines and free use for everyone would allow these to happen. The greatest thing about that making that comment is I have no answer to the tagging problems or the other problems that arises from following my idea. But if we continue to make repositories (I have made a few in my time) we will never find a solution. Some of the bigger repositories like Merlot have gotten so big they mirror the internet problems, cannot find what I need, better structure needed, and better tagging system etc. So, if Merlot finds a good solution could we not be just as effective by applying the strategy to the whole internet, no duplication necessary.
Darren, I’m not upset by your comment. I actually agree with you. “Repositories” as currently implemented don’t work. That much is obvious. However, new tools like Flickr and del.icio.us show that repositories can work, be successful, and be actively used. The problem with current repositories is that they try to be The One True Repository. That’s flawed on so many levels. The stuff we’re working on is attempting to push repositories into a more distributed pattern, with smaller “departmental repositories” hosting smaller collections of learning objects. These smaller repositories are able to search each other, acting as a cohesive system as desired. There are also very good opportunities to tie into desktop applications as well, further blurring the line between hosted and desktop repositories.
The real value of Merlot isn’t the assets/learning objects in it, it is the community of practicioners that has evolved around (despite) it. If a rich, vibrant community can evolve around a somewhat limited/flawed design, I think we (meaning everyone in The Field) can do much better.
Treating the internet as One Big Repository is one option, as well, but won’t be ready for prime time until the semantic web stuff goes live. Google is full of way too much irrelevant and unvetted stuff to be a practical as a teaching/learning tool (without a lot of extra work being done).
Hi Darren,
what is Your new project about? Some hints?