Learning patterns and learner profiles in learning object design

The questions that Andy Heath has posed are challenging and need more time for reflection than is possible here. The questions posed will inform the research as it develops further. However, in the interests of debate we would like to give our initial replies. We agree in general with Andy Heath's assessment of the limitations of the approach we are adopting. We recognise that this approach uses a very limited response to AccessForAll principles: our Transformation Augmentation and Substitution Service (TASS) is localised, not global, and relies on a limited set of learning patterns matched against a small subset of the potentially infinite set of learner profiles. Our intention is certainly not to reproduce the considerable efforts of the IMS AccessForAll or Dublin Core Adaptability working groups, but to interpret their potential impact on the thinking of courseware designers, tutors and students

Accessibility and adaptability of learning objects: responding to metadata, learning patterns and profiles of needs and preferences

The case for learning patterns as a design method for accessible and adaptable learning objects is explored. Patterns and templates for the design of learning objects can be derived from successful existing learning resources. These patterns can then be reused in the design of new learning objects. We argue that by attending to criteria for reuse in the definition of these patterns and in the subsequent design of new learning objects, those new resources can be themselves reusable and also adaptable to different learning contexts. Finally, if the patterns identified can be implemented as templates for standard authoring tools, the design of effective, reusable and adaptable resources can be made available to those with limited skills in multimedia authoring and result in learning resources that are more widely accessible

Enabling learning for all through adaptable personal learning environments

environment