Show Advanced KnowledgeHide Advanced Knowledge

Clarification of Learning Progress data regarding SCORM modules (and others)

1 Requirements

In Learning Progress reports, 2 values are confusing for some users:

• Percentage: it is currently based on a mix of completion and success concepts
• Status: it is also currently based on a mix of completion and success concepts

Indicators in the Learning Progress report should be clarified. My proposal is:

• To keep the "percentage" and "status" values for consistency with previous ILIAS versions (may be hidden or displayed by selecting columns)
• To add a "Progress" value (percentage)
• To add a "Success status"
• To add a "Score"

In case of SCORM modules, these 3 new values would be calculated depending of new SCORM module settings:

• "Relevant for progress": checkboxes in from of each SCO to select SCOs which are relevant for progress calculation
• "Relevant for success": checkboxes in from of each SCO to select SCOs which are relevant for success status and score calculation

2 Status

• Scheduled for: Not scheduled yet (will be set by Jour Fixe)
• Funding: Required / Partly funded by / Funded by ... (please indicate if you have funding for feature)
• Maintainer: (will be set by Jour Fixe)
• Implementation of the feature is done by (company, developer)
• Contract settled: (fill in "Yes" if a contract is already settled, otherwise "No" )
• Tested by / status: (name, e-mail), (status information set after implementation)

3 Additional Information

Contact the following persons if you want to know more about this feature, its implementation or funding:

• Information about concept: (name, e-mail)
• Information about funding: (name, e-mail)
• Information about implementation: (name, e-mail)

4 Discussion

Often single-sco-SCORM-learning modules are used. For these displaying score and progress_measure would be simple.

JL, 10 Apr 2014: the core concept of the learning progress is that it has the same status for all the different object types in ILIAS. I know that it is sometimes difficult to grasp (and explain) the difference between SCORM tracking data and ILIAS / LP tracking data (and we are guilty of already adding the score to the SCORM LP), but to basically give up the SCORM-to-LP-status-mapping in favour of the SCORM status seems at least 1 step too far for me.
 
If you are interested in the "raw" SCORM tracking data why not enhance the reports based on those?   As we have the LP collections in ILIAS it is very, very mandatory that all object types have comparable LP status. For me this is a mixture of 2 different concepts.
 
Just my 2 cents.

Uwe Kohnle, 26 May 2014: i also don't want to give up the SCORM-to-LP-status-mapping. A small solution could be: For all SCORM-Modules with only one SCO selected for learning progress (note: most SCORM-Modules have only one SCO) there is an option to display the score in the field 'percentage'.

JF 18 Aug 2014: We would like to prevent the presentation of object type specific data in the general learning progress presentations whenever possible. Could the requirements be met by additional learner views of the scorm tracking data? We reject the original request.

5 Implementation