EAG+Comments

=This page contains comments from the Victorian e-learning Advisory Group on Future Toolboxes.=


 * 1) It is important to speed up time to market with the Toolboxes, producing 5 - 6 Toolboxes per year is not satisfying demand.
 * 2) If a standardised back-end is developed for Toolboxes, allowing simple production of learning objects, is it then possible to gain extra value for the framework by using the templated model to support interoperable, Innovations projects. This would change the focus of the Innovations projects from 'building' web material, to producing high quality content. It would also reduce the requirement for high level technical skills and involement opening up participation.
 * 3) If we were to use external xml - and to separate presentation layer from content (as in a CMS), the content could be:
 * 4) reused in multiple environments
 * 5) edits to presentation layers would be able to be made without affecting content.
 * 6) edits to content could be made without affecting presentation.
 * 7) Removing context from content would increase the reusability of content.
 * 8) How do we support the creation of reliable content - do we need new models to evaluate content?
 * 9) How does content support the learner, how does content support the teacher?
 * 10) Investment should be in broadening the reach of Toolboxes - perhaps by creating a simpler modeling allowing greater participation and engagement in content customisation with lower overheads. A more simple model would allow Champions to work with a larger range of clients, as time taken to embed skills is reduced.
 * 11) Do teachers know how to do what is required of them to use a Toolbox/customise a Toolbox?
 * 12) If you pull apart a Toolbox - is the content compliant to AQF - is this information made clear in TBs?
 * 13) How do we assess the value of the Toolbox itself?
 * 14) What are the essentials for creating a complex learning experience?
 * 15) Requirement for a model that can receive content all the way through the design process as opposed to just at the end.
 * 16) How are Toolboxes designed - should the structure a unit based design, or is there a more intuitive, more reusable design that could respond to a wider spectrum of needs?
 * 17) Concept based design - i.e. build concepts as opposed to units?
 * 18) Outcomes based design
 * 19) Incorporate User Generated content
 * 20) Bring broad experiences and needs in at the definition stage.
 * 21) How do we monitor projects, and quality manage projects more efficiently to assess not just quality of overall product, but of learning design, design itself, and technical build