Please, cite this publication as follows: Burgos, D., Tattersall, C., Dougiamas, M., Vogten, H., & Koper, E. J. R. (2006). Mapping IMS Learning Design and Moodle. A first understanding. Proceedings of Simposo Internacional de Informática Educativa (SIIE06), León, Spain: IEEE Technical Committee on Learning Technology. Retrieved September 12th, 2006, from http://dspace.learningnetworks.orgThe specification IMS Learning Design (IMS LD) and Moodle look
for a common understanding focused on the integration of both e-learning
approches. The final goal is that Moodle will be able to play an IMS LD
package and any IMS LD tool will be able to import a Moodle course and use it
as a base, or even to import a Unit of Learning made in IMS LD to be used and
played in the Moodle Course Management System. The Unit of Learning in
IMS LD (UoL) and the course in Moodle become the perfect marriage where to
find several elements that should match one to each other. This paper show how
to make this understanding between notations, mapping related elements in both
to get a list of pairs easy to translate from one to each other, and to define also a
list of requirements for this protocol.UNFOLD Project and ProLearn Projec

Burgos, Daniel

Dougiamas, Martin

Koper, Rob

Tattersall, Colin

Vogten, Hubert

The specification IMS Learning Design (IMS LD) and Moodle look for a common understanding focused on the integration of both e-learning approches. The final goal is that Moodle will be able to play an IMS LD package and any IMS LD tool will be able to import a Moodle course and use it as a base, or even to import a Unit of Learning made in IMS LD to be used and played in the Moodle Course Management System. The Unit of Learning in IMS LD (UoL) and the course in Moodle become the perfect marriage where to find several elements that should match one to each other. This paper show how to make this understanding between notations, mapping related elements in both to get a list of pairs easy to translate from one to each other, and to define also a list of requirements for this protocol

NARCIS 

Mapping IMS Learning Design and Moodle. A first understanding

Open University of the Netherlands Research Portal

Open Universiteit www.ou.nl Mapping IMS Learning Design and Moodle. A firstunderstandingCitation for published version (APA):Burgos, D., Tattersall, C., Dougiamas, M., Vogten, H., & Koper, R. (2006). Mapping IMS Learning Design andMoodle. A first understanding.Document status and date:Published: 13/09/2006Document Version:Peer reviewed versionDocument license:CC BY-NC-NDPlease check the document version of this publication:• A submitted manuscript is the version of the article upon submission and before peer-review. There can be important differences betweenthe submitted version and the official published version of record. People interested in the research are advised to contact the author for thefinal version of the publication, or visit the DOI to the publisher's website.• The final author version and the galley proof are versions of the publication after peer review.• The final published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers.Link to publicationGeneral rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright ownersand it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research.• You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain• You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal.If the publication is distributed under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license above, pleasefollow below link for the End User Agreement:https://www.ou.nl/taverne-agreementTake down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us at:pure-support@ou.nlproviding details and we will investigate your claim.Downloaded from https://research.ou.nl/ on date: 29 Nov. 2023Mapping IMS Learning Design and Moodle. A first understanding Daniel Burgos1, Colin Tattersall1, Martin Dougiamas2, Hubert Vogten1 and Rob Koper1  1Open University of the Netherlands PO BOX 2690,  6401 DL Heerlen {daniel.burgos, colin.tattersall, hubert.vogten, rob.koper}@ou.nl 2 Moodle 16 Wickham St, East Perth, Western Australia martin@moodle.org  Abstract. The specification IMS Learning Design (IMS LD) and Moodle look for a common understanding focused on the integration of both e-learning approches. The final goal is that Moodle will be able to play an IMS LD package and any IMS LD tool will be able to import a Moodle course and use it as a base, or even to import a Unit of Learning made in IMS LD to be used and played in the Moodle Course Management System. The Unit of Learning in IMS LD (UoL) and the course in Moodle become the perfect marriage where to find several elements that should match one to each other. This paper show how to make this understanding between notations, mapping related elements in both to get a list of pairs easy to translate from one to each other, and to define also a list of requirements for this protocol.  Keywords: Moodle, IMS Learning Design, mapping, e-learning notation 1 Introduction: Why mapping IMS LD and Moodle IMS Learning Design [1] is aimed to transform regular lesson plans into interoperable Units of Learning (UoL). This specificatiobn is able to use any pedagogical model to get a UoL runnable and editable in an interopable way. Furthermore, IMS LD is able to describe a full learning flow with several elements -such as roles, activities, environments or resources- and features -such as properties, conditions, monitoring services or notifications- [2, 3]. The interoperable UoL can be edited with any LD editor, like CopperAuthor [4] or Reload LD Editor [5], and later played with any LD player, like CopperCore Player [6], Reload LD Player [5] and Sled [7]. On the other hand, there are a couple of challenges related to the spec: a) IMD LD has no Learning Management System able to handle and to play these UoLs; and b) there is a low-level approach of the editors and the technical profile that a learning designer or teacher needs to hold in order to create a UoL in an easy way [8]. Moodle [9] is a Course Management System (CMS) easy to install and to use and wide abroad disseminated, with more than 100.000 registered users, 12.000 registered websites and translation into 70 languages. Also, Moodle has a very strong virtual community of active users carrying out an increasing amount of face-to-face and  online activities, and supporting each other via the official site1 and a number of ad hoc assorted websites. Moodle is able to manage every feature of a course and the related environment, such as user definition, groups, access, resources, internal links and a long et cetera. This is a difference with IMS LD. From a social constructionist approach a course is created from scratch in a few minutes. Moodle also allows for the execution of other information packages, like Scorm and Lams, as an encapsulated module inside a course. On the other hand, the pedagogical expressiveness of Moodle is limited by the absence of features included in the IMS LD model, such as defined adaptive learning flow, flexible roles and adaptive content. Currently, Moodle is working intensively to provide these missing features so that it is able to support IMS LD more fully over time. The main issue is that IMS LD and Moodle are not comparable at all, as they have different approaches to work on e-learning as well as they are different releases [10]. In this context, the mutual understanding between IMS LD and Moodle seems like an improvement for both parts. IMS LD provides a pedagogical flexible approach in the creation of UoLs, as well as the specification support and the technical background focused on standardization and interoperability, and Moodle provides a well-known and easy-to-learn CMS and an active community of non-technical profile. To this end, Moodle and The Open University of The Netherlands2 founded a working group in June 2005, then hosted by the UNFOLD Project3 and Learning Network for Learning Design4 and currently supported by the ProLearn5 and TENCompetence6 projects. 2 How to make it: basic structure and mapping There are a few attempts to integrate UoLs with stand-alone LD players like Sled and Moodle [11]. Sled is able to run a UoL stored in a LD server via an Internet Explorer player in the client (Telcert). A link from a Moodle resource to the ip address where Sled is allocated allows a simple first level of integration. This structure is not focused on the reusability of the lesson plans but on the integration of current systems to form a de facto more complex approach, collecting several technologies. What the mapping of Moodle and IMS LD aims to is the re-usability of a lesson plan/course/UoL of one of them into the another, to be used as a base for a further development or as they are actually defined. Furthermore, it is focused on the interoperability and the reusability of an information package/UoL, no matter the original platform that is used for it. In order to achieve the best understanding between IMS LD and Moodle, the mapping process is divided in three steps:                                                   1 http://moodle.org 2 www.ou.nl and www.learningnetworks.org 3 www.unfold-project.net 4 http://moodle.learningnetworks.org 5 www.prolearn-project.org 6 www.tencompetence.org  1. Moodle is able to export one course to a UoL, translating the Moodle notation to IMS LD 2. Moodle is able to import one UoL into the Content Management System and translate the IMS LD notation into a Moodle notation 3. Moodle is able to play a UoL inside the system, following one of the approaches on types of integration between information packages and players suggested in Tattersall et al, 2006: Moodle stores an IMS LD information package and it runs an internal player  To realize this three blocks we need to establish a general framework:  − Besides the Moodle course, the rest of the Course Management System environment is out of scope (calendars, blocks, log-in, language…) as they are used as processes and instructions and not like a core part of the basic unit of interchange for information (i.e., a Moodle course or an IMS LD UoL) − There is a need of matching every single Moodle feature-component to an equivalent in IMS LD or to define it like an external process/instruction − In order to make a taxonomy of the elements in a Moodle course and to find a mirror in the IMS LD specification, we define four main groups: 1) Setting -basic configuration-, 2) Activity, 3) Resource, 4) Administration –out of scope-  If we take a Moodle course we can match every element of the course with an element in the basic structure of an IMS LD Unit of Learning. Table 1 shows the result: Table 1. Elements in an IMS LD Unit of Learning mapped to elements in a Moodle course. Issue Moodle feature-component IMS LD structure Remarks 0 Full course 1 UoL, 1 play, 1 act, 1 activity structure (type selection)  1.1 Setting: Full name Title of Learning Design  1.2 Setting: Short name Title of Play  1.3 Setting: Hidden sections Activity Structure:IsVisible Possible, but suggested for a next iteration 1.4 Setting: summary LD learning objectives  1.5 Setting: Your word for Students roles:learner:title  1.6 Setting: Your word for Teachers roles:staff:title  2.0 Topic Learning activity 2.1 Topic 0 Learning activity (first one) If a resource or an activity is defined  2.2 Summary of Topic Activity Description there will be an environment If there is no activity description in Topic it should be auto-generated with a standard text or just empty 2.3 Activity: Chat Synchronous conference (conference-type) Services 2.4 Activity: Forum Asynchronous conference (conference-type) Services 2.5 Activity: Glossary - Generate as dynamic HTML 2.6 Activity: Quiz - Possibly it generates QTI 2.7 Activity: Scorm No match For a next iteration 2.8 Activity: Survey External Generated by Level B 2.9 Activity: Workshop External Generated by Level B 3.0 Resource Learning object All the resources ended as learning objects except Directory and Link 3.1 Resource: Directory - Generated by Level B 3.2 Resource: Label Learning object Could map to a title of environment if needed 3.3 Resource: Link to file Learning object File should be included in content pack 3.4 Resource: Link to website Learning object Link should be an absolute URI 3 The first step: Exporting a Moodle course to an IMS LD Unit of Learning The first step in the integration process is focused on the exportation of a Moodle single course to an IMS LD UoL. In order to achieve this goal we establish a list of assumptions: a) there is no round tripping for the first stage, b) the exportation is completely made in batch mode (therefore, no dialog nor user interaction), and c) this task is planned as an iterative process where the first iteration gets the basic skeleton for conversion and the subsequent versions will extend it. IMS LD is defined as a metaphor built around a theater using roles, plays and acts. Inside, some elements describe the educational framework: learning objectives, activities, environments, property of visibility, method, type of learning flow, etc. In Figure 1, there are several couples of elements IMS LD-Moodle for the most basic structure of a Moodle course:     Fig. 1. Basic match between an IMS LD UoL and a Moodle course. 4 Mapping services Some activities in Moodle need a special process, as they have some basic data used for the appropiate execution (i.e., forum, wiki, quiz…). Every activity or resource in Moodle needs to export some additional information that is not supported by IMS LD, i.e., timing in Forums or grades in Workshops. If IMS LD is not able to manage this information it will be lost and no later retrieval will be possible from IMS LD to Moodle, in future versions, although no round tripping is assumed in the first approach. A possible way is to associate a file with all the extra information related to an activity. For instance, a Moodle Forum is matched to an asynchronous conference-type service in IMS LD and there is a linked file with the information about starting time, ending time, or discussions policy. We could call the file serviceparams.xml. This file is a resource in the content package, type servicecontent, although other types are possible: webcontent, imsldcontent and imsqti_item_xmlv2p0. The field serviceparams.xml needs to be associated with the service service-conference, but this is not possible yet in the current IMS LD 1.0´s information model. One approach is to associate an additional learning-object with a service. The final approach is as follows:  <imsld:environment>      identifier="env-Topic-0-News-Forum">  <imsld:title> Moodle Summary Topic </imsld:title>     <imsld:service identifier="service-conference" isvisible="true">        <imsld:conference conference-type="synchronous">   ...    </imsld:conference>  </imsld:service>  <imsld:learning-object identifier="ForumParams">      <imsld:item identifier="PARAMS" identifierref="RefToParams"/>  </imsld:learning-object> </imsld:environment>  …  <imscp:resource identifier="RefToParams" type="servicecontent" href="params.xml">  <imscp:file href="params.xml" /> </imscp:resource>  Following this structure we could map any resource or activity without any lost of important information in Moodle. Although this approach of Moodle is mis-using the notion of a learning object, it could serve as a temporary solution until a modification of the XML Schema in a new version of IMS LD could happen. 5 Conclusions IMS Learning Design and Moodle are two entities that work on the process to reach a kind of integration that allows for the exportation of a Moodle course to an IMS LD format, the importation a UoL to a Moodle CMS, and the execution of an IMS LD information package into a Moodle CMS. Following this three-step process a working group formed by Moodle and The Open University of The Netherlands looks for an understanding between both e-learning notations in order to achieve some degree of interoperability and re-usability of online lesson plans and courses. The first step to take is focused on the exportation issue and it aims to get a basic mapping between both, taking a simple Moodle course that could be extended with additional features in a second round. For this exportation, a challenge is to keep some information in services or activities that Moodle uses for their configuration and execution. An approach points to keep this information in a file stored inside the information package as a resource and to link it as a learning object to the called service. This way, all the needed information is fully exported to an IMS LD package but leaving it out of the main manifest, where it couldn´t be properly handle, as there are no possible match yet. A second approach points to a modification of the XML Schema in IMS LD 1.0 where this situation could be manage directly. References 1. IMS, IMS Learning Design [www.imsglobal.org]. 2003, IMS Global Consortium. 2. Learning Design: A handbook on modelling and delivering networked education and training, ed. R. Koper and C. Tattersall. 2005, Germany: Springer Verlag.  3. The UNFOLD Project. Understanding and Using Learning Design, ed. D. Burgos and D. Griffiths. 2005, Heerlen: Open University of The Netherlands. 4. Van der Vegt, W., CopperAuthor. 2005, Open University of The Netherlands: Heerlen. 5. Reload, The Reload Project [http://www.reload.ac.uk]. 2004, The University of Bolton, The University of Strathclyde and JISC. 6. Vogten, H. and H. Martens, CopperCore 3.0. 2005, Open University of The Netherlands: Heerlen. 7. OUUK, Sled player [http://sled.open.ac.uk]. 2005, Open University of United Kingdom: United Kingdom. 8. Burgos, D., Arnaud, M., Neuhauser, P. & R. Koper, IMS Learning Design : la flexibilité pédagogique au service des besoins de la e-formation, in La Revue de l'EPI. 2005. 9. Dougiamas, M., Moodle [www.moodle.org]. 2003. 10. Berggren, A., Burgos, D., Fontana, J.M., Hinkelman, D., Hung, V., Hursh, A. & G. Tielemans, Practical and Pedagogical Issues for Teacher Adoption of IMS Learning Design Standards in Moodle LMS. Journal of Interactive Media, 2005(Special issue on Learning Design). 11. Burgos, D. and G. Corbalan. Modelado y uso de escenarios de aprendizaje en entornos b-learning desde la práctica educativa. in III Jornadas Campus Virtual. 2006. Madrid: Universidad Complutense.  

English

Open Universiteit www.ou.nl Mapping IMS Learning Design and Moodle. A firstunderstandingCitation for published version (APA):Burgos, D., Tattersall, C., Dougiamas, M., Vogten, H., & Koper, R. (2006). Mapping IMS Learning Design andMoodle. A first understanding.Document status and date:Published: 13/09/2006Document Version:Peer reviewed versionDocument license:CC BY-NC-NDPlease check the document version of this publication:• A submitted manuscript is the version of the article upon submission and before peer-review. There can be important differences betweenthe submitted version and the official published version of record. People interested in the research are advised to contact the author for thefinal version of the publication, or visit the DOI to the publisher's website.• The final author version and the galley proof are versions of the publication after peer review.• The final published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers.Link to publicationGeneral rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright ownersand it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research.• You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain• You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal.If the publication is distributed under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license above, pleasefollow below link for the End User Agreement:https://www.ou.nl/taverne-agreementTake down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us at:pure-support@ou.nlproviding details and we will investigate your claim.Downloaded from https://research.ou.nl/ on date: 08 Sep. 2023Mapping IMS Learning Design and Moodle. A first understanding Daniel Burgos1, Colin Tattersall1, Martin Dougiamas2, Hubert Vogten1 and Rob Koper1  1Open University of the Netherlands PO BOX 2690,  6401 DL Heerlen {daniel.burgos, colin.tattersall, hubert.vogten, rob.koper}@ou.nl 2 Moodle 16 Wickham St, East Perth, Western Australia martin@moodle.org  Abstract. The specification IMS Learning Design (IMS LD) and Moodle look for a common understanding focused on the integration of both e-learning approches. The final goal is that Moodle will be able to play an IMS LD package and any IMS LD tool will be able to import a Moodle course and use it as a base, or even to import a Unit of Learning made in IMS LD to be used and played in the Moodle Course Management System. The Unit of Learning in IMS LD (UoL) and the course in Moodle become the perfect marriage where to find several elements that should match one to each other. This paper show how to make this understanding between notations, mapping related elements in both to get a list of pairs easy to translate from one to each other, and to define also a list of requirements for this protocol.  Keywords: Moodle, IMS Learning Design, mapping, e-learning notation 1 Introduction: Why mapping IMS LD and Moodle IMS Learning Design [1] is aimed to transform regular lesson plans into interoperable Units of Learning (UoL). This specificatiobn is able to use any pedagogical model to get a UoL runnable and editable in an interopable way. Furthermore, IMS LD is able to describe a full learning flow with several elements -such as roles, activities, environments or resources- and features -such as properties, conditions, monitoring services or notifications- [2, 3]. The interoperable UoL can be edited with any LD editor, like CopperAuthor [4] or Reload LD Editor [5], and later played with any LD player, like CopperCore Player [6], Reload LD Player [5] and Sled [7]. On the other hand, there are a couple of challenges related to the spec: a) IMD LD has no Learning Management System able to handle and to play these UoLs; and b) there is a low-level approach of the editors and the technical profile that a learning designer or teacher needs to hold in order to create a UoL in an easy way [8]. Moodle [9] is a Course Management System (CMS) easy to install and to use and wide abroad disseminated, with more than 100.000 registered users, 12.000 registered websites and translation into 70 languages. Also, Moodle has a very strong virtual community of active users carrying out an increasing amount of face-to-face and  online activities, and supporting each other via the official site1 and a number of ad hoc assorted websites. Moodle is able to manage every feature of a course and the related environment, such as user definition, groups, access, resources, internal links and a long et cetera. This is a difference with IMS LD. From a social constructionist approach a course is created from scratch in a few minutes. Moodle also allows for the execution of other information packages, like Scorm and Lams, as an encapsulated module inside a course. On the other hand, the pedagogical expressiveness of Moodle is limited by the absence of features included in the IMS LD model, such as defined adaptive learning flow, flexible roles and adaptive content. Currently, Moodle is working intensively to provide these missing features so that it is able to support IMS LD more fully over time. The main issue is that IMS LD and Moodle are not comparable at all, as they have different approaches to work on e-learning as well as they are different releases [10]. In this context, the mutual understanding between IMS LD and Moodle seems like an improvement for both parts. IMS LD provides a pedagogical flexible approach in the creation of UoLs, as well as the specification support and the technical background focused on standardization and interoperability, and Moodle provides a well-known and easy-to-learn CMS and an active community of non-technical profile. To this end, Moodle and The Open University of The Netherlands2 founded a working group in June 2005, then hosted by the UNFOLD Project3 and Learning Network for Learning Design4 and currently supported by the ProLearn5 and TENCompetence6 projects. 2 How to make it: basic structure and mapping There are a few attempts to integrate UoLs with stand-alone LD players like Sled and Moodle [11]. Sled is able to run a UoL stored in a LD server via an Internet Explorer player in the client (Telcert). A link from a Moodle resource to the ip address where Sled is allocated allows a simple first level of integration. This structure is not focused on the reusability of the lesson plans but on the integration of current systems to form a de facto more complex approach, collecting several technologies. What the mapping of Moodle and IMS LD aims to is the re-usability of a lesson plan/course/UoL of one of them into the another, to be used as a base for a further development or as they are actually defined. Furthermore, it is focused on the interoperability and the reusability of an information package/UoL, no matter the original platform that is used for it. In order to achieve the best understanding between IMS LD and Moodle, the mapping process is divided in three steps:                                                   1 http://moodle.org 2 www.ou.nl and www.learningnetworks.org 3 www.unfold-project.net 4 http://moodle.learningnetworks.org 5 www.prolearn-project.org 6 www.tencompetence.org  1. Moodle is able to export one course to a UoL, translating the Moodle notation to IMS LD 2. Moodle is able to import one UoL into the Content Management System and translate the IMS LD notation into a Moodle notation 3. Moodle is able to play a UoL inside the system, following one of the approaches on types of integration between information packages and players suggested in Tattersall et al, 2006: Moodle stores an IMS LD information package and it runs an internal player  To realize this three blocks we need to establish a general framework:  − Besides the Moodle course, the rest of the Course Management System environment is out of scope (calendars, blocks, log-in, language…) as they are used as processes and instructions and not like a core part of the basic unit of interchange for information (i.e., a Moodle course or an IMS LD UoL) − There is a need of matching every single Moodle feature-component to an equivalent in IMS LD or to define it like an external process/instruction − In order to make a taxonomy of the elements in a Moodle course and to find a mirror in the IMS LD specification, we define four main groups: 1) Setting -basic configuration-, 2) Activity, 3) Resource, 4) Administration –out of scope-  If we take a Moodle course we can match every element of the course with an element in the basic structure of an IMS LD Unit of Learning. Table 1 shows the result: Table 1. Elements in an IMS LD Unit of Learning mapped to elements in a Moodle course. Issue Moodle feature-component IMS LD structure Remarks 0 Full course 1 UoL, 1 play, 1 act, 1 activity structure (type selection)  1.1 Setting: Full name Title of Learning Design  1.2 Setting: Short name Title of Play  1.3 Setting: Hidden sections Activity Structure:IsVisible Possible, but suggested for a next iteration 1.4 Setting: summary LD learning objectives  1.5 Setting: Your word for Students roles:learner:title  1.6 Setting: Your word for Teachers roles:staff:title  2.0 Topic Learning activity 2.1 Topic 0 Learning activity (first one) If a resource or an activity is defined  2.2 Summary of Topic Activity Description there will be an environment If there is no activity description in Topic it should be auto-generated with a standard text or just empty 2.3 Activity: Chat Synchronous conference (conference-type) Services 2.4 Activity: Forum Asynchronous conference (conference-type) Services 2.5 Activity: Glossary - Generate as dynamic HTML 2.6 Activity: Quiz - Possibly it generates QTI 2.7 Activity: Scorm No match For a next iteration 2.8 Activity: Survey External Generated by Level B 2.9 Activity: Workshop External Generated by Level B 3.0 Resource Learning object All the resources ended as learning objects except Directory and Link 3.1 Resource: Directory - Generated by Level B 3.2 Resource: Label Learning object Could map to a title of environment if needed 3.3 Resource: Link to file Learning object File should be included in content pack 3.4 Resource: Link to website Learning object Link should be an absolute URI 3 The first step: Exporting a Moodle course to an IMS LD Unit of Learning The first step in the integration process is focused on the exportation of a Moodle single course to an IMS LD UoL. In order to achieve this goal we establish a list of assumptions: a) there is no round tripping for the first stage, b) the exportation is completely made in batch mode (therefore, no dialog nor user interaction), and c) this task is planned as an iterative process where the first iteration gets the basic skeleton for conversion and the subsequent versions will extend it. IMS LD is defined as a metaphor built around a theater using roles, plays and acts. Inside, some elements describe the educational framework: learning objectives, activities, environments, property of visibility, method, type of learning flow, etc. In Figure 1, there are several couples of elements IMS LD-Moodle for the most basic structure of a Moodle course:     Fig. 1. Basic match between an IMS LD UoL and a Moodle course. 4 Mapping services Some activities in Moodle need a special process, as they have some basic data used for the appropiate execution (i.e., forum, wiki, quiz…). Every activity or resource in Moodle needs to export some additional information that is not supported by IMS LD, i.e., timing in Forums or grades in Workshops. If IMS LD is not able to manage this information it will be lost and no later retrieval will be possible from IMS LD to Moodle, in future versions, although no round tripping is assumed in the first approach. A possible way is to associate a file with all the extra information related to an activity. For instance, a Moodle Forum is matched to an asynchronous conference-type service in IMS LD and there is a linked file with the information about starting time, ending time, or discussions policy. We could call the file serviceparams.xml. This file is a resource in the content package, type servicecontent, although other types are possible: webcontent, imsldcontent and imsqti_item_xmlv2p0. The field serviceparams.xml needs to be associated with the service service-conference, but this is not possible yet in the current IMS LD 1.0´s information model. One approach is to associate an additional learning-object with a service. The final approach is as follows:  <imsld:environment>      identifier="env-Topic-0-News-Forum">  <imsld:title> Moodle Summary Topic </imsld:title>     <imsld:service identifier="service-conference" isvisible="true">        <imsld:conference conference-type="synchronous">   ...    </imsld:conference>  </imsld:service>  <imsld:learning-object identifier="ForumParams">      <imsld:item identifier="PARAMS" identifierref="RefToParams"/>  </imsld:learning-object> </imsld:environment>  …  <imscp:resource identifier="RefToParams" type="servicecontent" href="params.xml">  <imscp:file href="params.xml" /> </imscp:resource>  Following this structure we could map any resource or activity without any lost of important information in Moodle. Although this approach of Moodle is mis-using the notion of a learning object, it could serve as a temporary solution until a modification of the XML Schema in a new version of IMS LD could happen. 5 Conclusions IMS Learning Design and Moodle are two entities that work on the process to reach a kind of integration that allows for the exportation of a Moodle course to an IMS LD format, the importation a UoL to a Moodle CMS, and the execution of an IMS LD information package into a Moodle CMS. Following this three-step process a working group formed by Moodle and The Open University of The Netherlands looks for an understanding between both e-learning notations in order to achieve some degree of interoperability and re-usability of online lesson plans and courses. The first step to take is focused on the exportation issue and it aims to get a basic mapping between both, taking a simple Moodle course that could be extended with additional features in a second round. For this exportation, a challenge is to keep some information in services or activities that Moodle uses for their configuration and execution. An approach points to keep this information in a file stored inside the information package as a resource and to link it as a learning object to the called service. This way, all the needed information is fully exported to an IMS LD package but leaving it out of the main manifest, where it couldn´t be properly handle, as there are no possible match yet. A second approach points to a modification of the XML Schema in IMS LD 1.0 where this situation could be manage directly. References 1. IMS, IMS Learning Design [www.imsglobal.org]. 2003, IMS Global Consortium. 2. Learning Design: A handbook on modelling and delivering networked education and training, ed. R. Koper and C. Tattersall. 2005, Germany: Springer Verlag.  3. The UNFOLD Project. Understanding and Using Learning Design, ed. D. Burgos and D. Griffiths. 2005, Heerlen: Open University of The Netherlands. 4. Van der Vegt, W., CopperAuthor. 2005, Open University of The Netherlands: Heerlen. 5. Reload, The Reload Project [http://www.reload.ac.uk]. 2004, The University of Bolton, The University of Strathclyde and JISC. 6. Vogten, H. and H. Martens, CopperCore 3.0. 2005, Open University of The Netherlands: Heerlen. 7. OUUK, Sled player [http://sled.open.ac.uk]. 2005, Open University of United Kingdom: United Kingdom. 8. Burgos, D., Arnaud, M., Neuhauser, P. & R. Koper, IMS Learning Design : la flexibilité pédagogique au service des besoins de la e-formation, in La Revue de l'EPI. 2005. 9. Dougiamas, M., Moodle [www.moodle.org]. 2003. 10. Berggren, A., Burgos, D., Fontana, J.M., Hinkelman, D., Hung, V., Hursh, A. & G. Tielemans, Practical and Pedagogical Issues for Teacher Adoption of IMS Learning Design Standards in Moodle LMS. Journal of Interactive Media, 2005(Special issue on Learning Design). 11. Burgos, D. and G. Corbalan. Modelado y uso de escenarios de aprendizaje en entornos b-learning desde la práctica educativa. in III Jornadas Campus Virtual. 2006. Madrid: Universidad Complutense.  

DSpace at Open Universiteit Nederland

Mapping IMS Learning Design and Moodle. A first 
understanding 
Daniel Burgos1, Colin Tattersall1, Martin Dougiamas2, 
Hubert Vogten1 and Rob Koper1 
 
1Open University of the Netherlands 
PO BOX 2690,  6401 DL Heerlen 
{daniel.burgos, colin.tattersall, hubert.vogten, rob.koper}@ou.nl 
2 Moodle 
16 Wickham St, East Perth, Western Australia 
martin@moodle.org 
 
Abstract. The specification IMS Learning Design (IMS LD) and Moodle look 
for a common understanding focused on the integration of both e-learning 
approches. The final goal is that Moodle will be able to play an IMS LD 
package and any IMS LD tool will be able to import a Moodle course and use it 
as a base, or even to import a Unit of Learning made in IMS LD to be used and 
played in the Moodle Course Management System. The Unit of Learning in 
IMS LD (UoL) and the course in Moodle become the perfect marriage where to 
find several elements that should match one to each other. This paper show how 
to make this understanding between notations, mapping related elements in both 
to get a list of pairs easy to translate from one to each other, and to define also a 
list of requirements for this protocol. 
 
Keywords: Moodle, IMS Learning Design, mapping, e-learning notation 
1 Introduction: Why mapping IMS LD and Moodle 
IMS Learning Design [1] is aimed to transform regular lesson plans into interoperable 
Units of Learning (UoL). This specificatiobn is able to use any pedagogical model to 
get a UoL runnable and editable in an interopable way. Furthermore, IMS LD is able 
to describe a full learning flow with several elements -such as roles, activities, 
environments or resources- and features -such as properties, conditions, monitoring 
services or notifications- [2, 3]. The interoperable UoL can be edited with any LD 
editor, like CopperAuthor [4] or Reload LD Editor [5], and later played with any LD 
player, like CopperCore Player [6], Reload LD Player [5] and Sled [7]. On the other 
hand, there are a couple of challenges related to the spec: a) IMD LD has no Learning 
Management System able to handle and to play these UoLs; and b) there is a low-
level approach of the editors and the technical profile that a learning designer or 
teacher needs to hold in order to create a UoL in an easy way [8]. 
Moodle [9] is a Course Management System (CMS) easy to install and to use and 
wide abroad disseminated, with more than 100.000 registered users, 12.000 registered 
websites and translation into 70 languages. Also, Moodle has a very strong virtual 
community of active users carrying out an increasing amount of face-to-face and 
 online activities, and supporting each other via the official site1 and a number of ad 
hoc assorted websites. Moodle is able to manage every feature of a course and the 
related environment, such as user definition, groups, access, resources, internal links 
and a long et cetera. This is a difference with IMS LD. From a social constructionist 
approach a course is created from scratch in a few minutes. Moodle also allows for 
the execution of other information packages, like Scorm and Lams, as an 
encapsulated module inside a course. On the other hand, the pedagogical 
expressiveness of Moodle is limited by the absence of features included in the IMS 
LD model, such as defined adaptive learning flow, flexible roles and adaptive content. 
Currently, Moodle is working intensively to provide these missing features so that it 
is able to support IMS LD more fully over time. The main issue is that IMS LD and 
Moodle are not comparable at all, as they have different approaches to work on e-
learning as well as they are different releases [10]. 
In this context, the mutual understanding between IMS LD and Moodle seems like 
an improvement for both parts. IMS LD provides a pedagogical flexible approach in 
the creation of UoLs, as well as the specification support and the technical 
background focused on standardization and interoperability, and Moodle provides a 
well-known and easy-to-learn CMS and an active community of non-technical profile. 
To this end, Moodle and The Open University of The Netherlands2 founded a working 
group in June 2005, then hosted by the UNFOLD Project3 and Learning Network for 
Learning Design4 and currently supported by the ProLearn5 and TENCompetence6 
projects. 
2 How to make it: basic structure and mapping 
There are a few attempts to integrate UoLs with stand-alone LD players like Sled and 
Moodle [11]. Sled is able to run a UoL stored in a LD server via an Internet Explorer 
player in the client (Telcert). A link from a Moodle resource to the ip address where 
Sled is allocated allows a simple first level of integration. This structure is not focused 
on the reusability of the lesson plans but on the integration of current systems to form 
a de facto more complex approach, collecting several technologies. 
What the mapping of Moodle and IMS LD aims to is the re-usability of a lesson 
plan/course/UoL of one of them into the another, to be used as a base for a further 
development or as they are actually defined. Furthermore, it is focused on the 
interoperability and the reusability of an information package/UoL, no matter the 
original platform that is used for it. 
In order to achieve the best understanding between IMS LD and Moodle, the 
mapping process is divided in three steps: 
 
                                                 
1 http://moodle.org 
2 www.ou.nl and www.learningnetworks.org 
3 www.unfold-project.net 
4 http://moodle.learningnetworks.org 
5 www.prolearn-project.org 
6 www.tencompetence.org 
 1. Moodle is able to export one course to a UoL, translating the Moodle notation to 
IMS LD 
2. Moodle is able to import one UoL into the Content Management System and 
translate the IMS LD notation into a Moodle notation 
3. Moodle is able to play a UoL inside the system, following one of the approaches 
on types of integration between information packages and players suggested in 
Tattersall et al, 2006: Moodle stores an IMS LD information package and it runs an 
internal player 
 
To realize this three blocks we need to establish a general framework: 
 
− Besides the Moodle course, the rest of the Course Management System 
environment is out of scope (calendars, blocks, log-in, language…) as they are 
used as processes and instructions and not like a core part of the basic unit of 
interchange for information (i.e., a Moodle course or an IMS LD UoL) 
− There is a need of matching every single Moodle feature-component to an 
equivalent in IMS LD or to define it like an external process/instruction 
− In order to make a taxonomy of the elements in a Moodle course and to find a 
mirror in the IMS LD specification, we define four main groups: 1) Setting -basic 
configuration-, 2) Activity, 3) Resource, 4) Administration –out of scope- 
 
If we take a Moodle course we can match every element of the course with an 
element in the basic structure of an IMS LD Unit of Learning. Table 1 shows the 
result: 
Table 1. Elements in an IMS LD Unit of Learning mapped to elements in a Moodle course. 
Issue Moodle feature-component IMS LD structure Remarks 
0 Full course 1 UoL, 1 play, 1 act, 1 
activity structure (type 
selection) 
 
1.1 Setting: Full name Title of Learning Design  
1.2 Setting: Short name Title of Play  
1.3 Setting: Hidden sections Activity Structure:IsVisible Possible, but 
suggested for a next 
iteration 
1.4 Setting: summary LD learning objectives  
1.5 Setting: Your word for 
Students 
roles:learner:title  
1.6 Setting: Your word for 
Teachers 
roles:staff:title  
2.0 Topic Learning activity 
2.1 Topic 0 Learning activity (first one) 
If a resource or an 
activity is defined 
 2.2 Summary of Topic Activity Description there will be an 
environment 
If there is no activity 
description in Topic 
it should be auto-
generated with a 
standard text or just 
empty 
2.3 Activity: Chat Synchronous conference 
(conference-type) 
Services 
2.4 Activity: Forum Asynchronous conference 
(conference-type) 
Services 
2.5 Activity: Glossary - Generate as dynamic 
HTML 
2.6 Activity: Quiz - Possibly it generates 
QTI 
2.7 Activity: Scorm No match For a next iteration 
2.8 Activity: Survey External Generated by Level B 
2.9 Activity: Workshop External Generated by Level B 
3.0 Resource Learning object All the resources 
ended as learning 
objects except 
Directory and Link 
3.1 Resource: Directory - Generated by Level B 
3.2 Resource: Label Learning object Could map to a title 
of environment if 
needed 
3.3 Resource: Link to file Learning object File should be 
included in content 
pack 
3.4 Resource: Link to website Learning object Link should be an 
absolute URI 
3 The first step: Exporting a Moodle course to an IMS LD Unit 
of Learning 
The first step in the integration process is focused on the exportation of a Moodle 
single course to an IMS LD UoL. In order to achieve this goal we establish a list of 
assumptions: a) there is no round tripping for the first stage, b) the exportation is 
completely made in batch mode (therefore, no dialog nor user interaction), and c) this 
task is planned as an iterative process where the first iteration gets the basic skeleton 
for conversion and the subsequent versions will extend it. 
IMS LD is defined as a metaphor built around a theater using roles, plays and acts. 
Inside, some elements describe the educational framework: learning objectives, 
activities, environments, property of visibility, method, type of learning flow, etc. In 
Figure 1, there are several couples of elements IMS LD-Moodle for the most basic 
structure of a Moodle course: 
  
 
 
Fig. 1. Basic match between an IMS LD UoL and a Moodle course. 
4 Mapping services 
Some activities in Moodle need a special process, as they have some basic data used 
for the appropiate execution (i.e., forum, wiki, quiz…). Every activity or resource in 
Moodle needs to export some additional information that is not supported by IMS LD, 
i.e., timing in Forums or grades in Workshops. If IMS LD is not able to manage this 
information it will be lost and no later retrieval will be possible from IMS LD to 
Moodle, in future versions, although no round tripping is assumed in the first 
approach. 
A possible way is to associate a file with all the extra information related to an 
activity. For instance, a Moodle Forum is matched to an asynchronous conference-
type service in IMS LD and there is a linked file with the information about starting 
time, ending time, or discussions policy. We could call the file 
serviceparams.xml. This file is a resource in the content package, type 
servicecontent, although other types are possible: webcontent, imsldcontent 
and imsqti_item_xmlv2p0. The field serviceparams.xml needs to be associated 
with the service service-conference, but this is not possible yet in the current 
IMS LD 1.0´s information model. One approach is to associate an additional learning-
object with a service. The final approach is as follows: 
 
<imsld:environment> 
     identifier="env-Topic-0-News-Forum"> 
 <imsld:title> Moodle Summary Topic </imsld:title> 
    <imsld:service identifier="service-conference" 
isvisible="true"> 
       <imsld:conference conference-type="synchronous"> 
  ... 
   </imsld:conference> 
 </imsld:service> 
 <imsld:learning-object identifier="ForumParams"> 
     <imsld:item identifier="PARAMS" 
identifierref="RefToParams"/> 
 </imsld:learning-object> 
</imsld:environment> 
 
… 
 
<imscp:resource identifier="RefToParams" type="servicecontent" 
href="params.xml"> 
 <imscp:file href="params.xml" /> 
</imscp:resource> 
 
Following this structure we could map any resource or activity without any lost of 
important information in Moodle. Although this approach of Moodle is mis-using the 
notion of a learning object, it could serve as a temporary solution until a modification 
of the XML Schema in a new version of IMS LD could happen. 
5 Conclusions 
IMS Learning Design and Moodle are two entities that work on the process to reach a 
kind of integration that allows for the exportation of a Moodle course to an IMS LD 
format, the importation a UoL to a Moodle CMS, and the execution of an IMS LD 
information package into a Moodle CMS. Following this three-step process a working 
group formed by Moodle and The Open University of The Netherlands looks for an 
understanding between both e-learning notations in order to achieve some degree of 
interoperability and re-usability of online lesson plans and courses. 
The first step to take is focused on the exportation issue and it aims to get a basic 
mapping between both, taking a simple Moodle course that could be extended with 
additional features in a second round. For this exportation, a challenge is to keep 
some information in services or activities that Moodle uses for their configuration and 
execution. An approach points to keep this information in a file stored inside the 
information package as a resource and to link it as a learning object to the called 
service. This way, all the needed information is fully exported to an IMS LD package 
but leaving it out of the main manifest, where it couldn´t be properly handle, as there 
are no possible match yet. A second approach points to a modification of the XML 
Schema in IMS LD 1.0 where this situation could be manage directly. 
References 
1. IMS, IMS Learning Design [www.imsglobal.org]. 2003, IMS Global Consortium. 
2. Learning Design: A handbook on modelling and delivering networked education and 
training, ed. R. Koper and C. Tattersall. 2005, Germany: Springer Verlag. 
 3. The UNFOLD Project. Understanding and Using Learning Design, ed. D. Burgos and D. 
Griffiths. 2005, Heerlen: Open University of The Netherlands. 
4. Van der Vegt, W., CopperAuthor. 2005, Open University of The Netherlands: Heerlen. 
5. Reload, The Reload Project [http://www.reload.ac.uk]. 2004, The University of Bolton, The 
University of Strathclyde and JISC. 
6. Vogten, H. and H. Martens, CopperCore 3.0. 2005, Open University of The Netherlands: 
Heerlen. 
7. OUUK, Sled player [http://sled.open.ac.uk]. 2005, Open University of United Kingdom: 
United Kingdom. 
8. Burgos, D., Arnaud, M., Neuhauser, P. & R. Koper, IMS Learning Design : la flexibilité 
pédagogique au service des besoins de la e-formation, in La Revue de l'EPI. 2005. 
9. Dougiamas, M., Moodle [www.moodle.org]. 2003. 
10. Berggren, A., Burgos, D., Fontana, J.M., Hinkelman, D., Hung, V., Hursh, A. & G. 
Tielemans, Practical and Pedagogical Issues for Teacher Adoption of IMS Learning Design 
Standards in Moodle LMS. Journal of Interactive Media, 2005(Special issue on Learning 
Design). 
11. Burgos, D. and G. Corbalan. Modelado y uso de escenarios de aprendizaje en entornos b-
learning desde la práctica educativa. in III Jornadas Campus Virtual. 2006. Madrid: 
Universidad Complutense. 
 


https://research.ou.nl/files/955094/BURGOSetal_MappingIMSLDandMoodle_20May06_ToSend.pdf

Mapping IMS Learning Design and Moodle. A first understanding

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

NARCIS

Open University of the Netherlands Research Portal

Open University of the Netherlands Research Portal

DSpace at Open Universiteit Nederland