In the eLearning field, we usually come across SCORM/AICC as the standards to which the courseware should adhere to. But how far are these standards learner-centric? Are these standards impeding learning?
I found that these standards, being of technical nature (LMS/ LCMS compatibility), do not add anything to the learner. On the other hand, sometimes I found that breaking the course into SCOs or not able to create links between SCOs can be a little bothersome.
On the other hand, I found the lesser talked about standards like ASTD’s E-Learning Courseware Certification Standards and the standards used by Michigan Virtual University in producing specifications for, and evaluating, e-learning not only learner-centric but also very comprehensive. (I am, of course, not suggesting that these standards are in any way substitutes for SCORM/ AICC)
ASTD’s E-Learning Courseware Certification Standards are grouped into four principal categories to reflect the various elements of courseware design.
- Interface Standards address the relationship between the learner and the courseware itself. There are five interface standards.
- Compatibility Standards address the relationship between the courseware, the Operating system and related applications. There are four compatibility standards.
- Production Quality Standards examine the quality of the courseware’s text, graphics, grammar, and visual presentation. There are two production quality standards.
- Instructional Design Standards examine the relationship between the course purpose, objectives, instructional content, instructional methods, and the learner.
CommLab has been one of the earliest companies in the e-learning space to adopt these standards. There were times when these standards were the deciding factor in winning a project for us.
I am, of course, not suggesting that these standards are a substitute to SCORM/ AICC but that they add value to the course. I will be interested to learn about your views on this subject. Thank you for reading my blog.