1. E-Learning and pedagogical approaches

The technical possibilities of IT and of the Internet have during the last decades greatly increased the use of these media for educational and pedagogic purposes. ICT are nowadays widely used in many different pedagogic contexts such as blended learning, online courses, platforms, etc. They also have become one of the main vehicle for the propagation of new approaches in pedagogy - as well for purely online material as for pedagogic approaches in general.

One of the first to suggest the use of machines in education was B. Skinner who can be seen as the father of mastery learning and subsequent methodological approaches such as Instructional design. The pedagogical model and effectiveness of this approach have been analysed in several studies (R Riding P Chambers, 1992, D More, CL Ralph, 1992) The idea of these approaches is twofold:

• 1. Present the learning content in small and logically subsequent chunks
• 2. Frequently test the progress in a way which allows immediate feedback for the learner

This approach has for example led to the development of a great number of drill and practice programs, as well as more sophisticated "learning material" for industrial or pedagogical use. Normally the role of the learner in these environments can be described as receptive or passive, but more recently developed material often also includes exploratory and other more "active learning" approaches and take into account the different learning types.

A completely different approach was taken by the developers of systems of artificial intelligence (AI) whose aim it was to implement mathematical concepts, scientific theories or phenomena into a computer program and to allow students a more or less guided and interactive approach to find out about the underlying theories (see eg K Koedinger, J Anderson, 1980, B Woolf , D McDonald, 1984).
During the 1990s the constructivistic approach gained increasing popularity and several new concepts (although partially based on already existing theories - see eg L Shulmann, ER Keisler, 1966) for online-learning were brought forward like 'learning by discovery' , 'Inquiry learning' (WL Bateman, 1990), 'Experiential Learning' (D Kolb, 1984). In accordance with these approaches a number of studies (MP Driscoll, 1994, MP Driscoll, 2000, RA Reiser, 2001) have shown that learning is greatly improved if learners have to

• solve realistic and complex problems
• work together to solve those problems
• examine the problems from multiple perspectives
• take ownership of the leearning process
• become aware of their role in the process of acquiring knowledge

The most recent development in this field is the socio-constructivistic approach based on the works of Piaget and Vygotsky (L Vygotsky, 1978), whose main point is the significance of social interaction and collaborative solving of problems as a learning method (J Roschelle, S Behrend, 1995). A recent review of the literature on Web course design (DL Hobbs, 2002) states that optimistically, methodologies should support active learning strategies. It also emphasises an aspect brought up earlier eg by Ross and Schulz (JL Ross, RA Schultz, 19999) and which states that with rich learning material supporting aa broad range of learning type the Web can play an important role in helping to serve the needs of students with different learning types. Last but not least in several studies (ref 5) course communication is listed as an important element of first-rate pedagogy. The following table lists the most important criteria for qualitatively high standard online material:

• good study guide
• clear description of the learning objectives and instructional aims
• information presentation in a way that allows varied approaches for different learning styles
• presentation of the material and formulation of the assignments in a way that demands active learning strategies of the learner (e.g. by guided inquiries)
• Set of student tasks that promote application in real-world setting
• Using synchronous and asynchronous communication for learning processes within learning groups

To summarise these studies one can state that today there is no gap between the current paradigms of pedagogy and high quality online teaching material. Best practice online material clearly tends to offer all possibilities and approaches that are preconised for high quality teaching: Clear structuration and modular architecture of the material, assessment of each module, active learning pedagogy with diversified approaches that enable different learning strategies, integration of socio-constructivitic elements that ask for communication and collaborative work as an important part of the learning process. At the same time the average quality of online educational material only partly complies with these standards and tends to support only the more transmissive and less interactive approaches for learning.

2. E-Learning Standards

A synopsis of the most important current E-learning Standards and their history shows several aspects:

1. Quite a number of public and private organisations have helped (and still do) to develop current E-standards
2. The philosophies of approach of the diffferent organisations are quite different - while european (EU) and international organisations focus on the 'community' and pluralistic aspects, the philosophy behind the american approach is more that of "proprietary" concepts like SCORM
3. Up to now a standardized view of one of the main concepts of e-learning is missing: Key aspects of Learning Object characterisation like granularity and pedagocial function remain to be agreed upon

2.1. Synopsis of important e-Learning Standards and implicated organisations

Tab.1: E-Learning Standards

2.2. Interrelations of the different standards

Ref: SeLeNe, E-Learning Standards

Orange: Specifications Metadata
Blue: Spécifications Content Structure Modelling
Arrows 'Metadata': Contributions of the partners to the standard LOM
Arrows CMI et CSF: Contributions of the partners to the standard for 'content structure modelling' (the version of SCORM being derived from CMI of AICC)

The 'Learning Design Information Model' standard is a quite recent (final specification Jan 2003) - its main purpose being to integrate pedagogical aspects into the management of Learning objects by
- classification of Lo's in the context of the semantic network of a pedagogic Metamodel
- modelling of the role of the Lo in its pedagogic context
- structural definition and analysis of the conteent of different pedagogical types of Lo's

2.3. The Philosophy behind the standards - different points of view

The citations below clearly show the philosophy of the different organisations, which range from more pedagogically centered approaches like SCORM (tool for standardized creation of learning material) or ARIADNE and DCMI (Tools for the indexation, repertorisation and sharing of pedagogical material from different sources) to more technically based approaches like IEEE (active standards in the field of electrical engineering, computers, Internet and control technology).

ADL-SCORM:
The adoption of ADL is evolving rapidly throughout the e-learning community and is changing the way we create, deliver and manage learning content. The National Guard has developed a communications backbone with distributive training classrooms in all 50 states and territories to reach National Guard personnel where they live. The U.S. Military Services have already converted numerous courses to ADL and are undergoing a training revolution to provide the requisite knowledge and skills to personnel in their homes, classrooms, on Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs) and in operational environments around the world. (citation from http://www.adlnet.org/aboutadl/stagegy.cfm)

ARIADNE:
The Association works for the widespread adoption of educational technologies by the European Society at large, in their best, state-of-the-art and - as far as possible -, platform-independent practices. This entails a very low profile and modest approach, given the accute national and regional sensibilities and preferences in all what regards education. The ARIADNE approach and tools, given their generally neutral pedagogical character, are well suited as a starting, practical point, to such an ambitious purpose.
The following educational technologies and methodologies are immediately available to Members:
- Learning objects multilingual indexation.
- Learning objects capitalization, sharing and reuse.
- Learning objects authoring (courseware-type-specific authoring).
- Capture of socio-geographical learners' data.
- Design of socio-geographically targeted curricula.
- Learning objects selection and assembling in targeted curricula.
- Design of web distributed distance courses.
- Best practices in the use of interactive communication technologies.
- Best practices in management of small, medium and large ODL courses.
(cited from http://www.ariadne-eu.org/ - learn more)

DCMI:
The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI) is an organization dedicated to promoting the widespread adoption of interoperable metadata standards and developing specialized metadata vocabularies for describing resources that enable more intelligent information discovery systems. Mission and Scope
The mission of DCMI is to make it easier to find resources using the Internet through the following activities:
1. Developing metadata standards for discovery across domains,
2. Defining frameworks for the interoperation of metadata sets, and
3. Facilitating the development of community- or disciplinary-specific metadata sets that are consistent with items 1 and 2

The range of activities of DCMI includes:
- Standards development and maintenance, such as organizing international workshops and working group meetings directed toward developing and maintaining DCMI recommendations.
- Tools, services, and infrastructure, including the DCMI metadata registry to support the management and maintenance of DCMI metadata in multiple languages.
- Educational outreach and community liaison, including developing and distributing educational and training resources, consulting, and coordinating activities within and between other metadata communities.
(cited from http://dublincore.org/about/ )

IEEE:
The IEEE (Eye-triple-E) is a non-profit, technical professional association of more than 360,000 individual members in approximately 175 countries. The full name is the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., although the organization is most popularly known and referred to by the letters I-E-E-E.

Through its members, the IEEE is a leading authority in technical areas ranging from computer engineering, biomedical technology and telecommunications, to electric power, aerospace and consumer electronics, among others.
Through its technical publishing, conferences and consensus-based standards activities, the IEEE
- produces 30 percent of the world's published literature in electrical engineering, computers and control technology,
- holds annually more than 300 major conferences and
- has nearly 900 active standards with 700 under development.
- (cited from http://www.ieee.org/portal/site/mainsite/menuitem.818c0c39e85ef176fb2275875bac26c8/index )

2.4. Learning Objects

Learning Objects can be seen as one key element of e-learning material standardization. The Learning Object Metadata Standard (LOM for short) [LOM2001] defines a structure for interoperable descriptions of learning objects. It "aims at facilitating search, management and (re)use of learning objects by authors of online-courses, teachers and learners." As is also visualized in Fig.2 a learning object is defined in the LOM specification as 'an entity, digital or non-digital, that may be used for learning, education or training.' [LOM2001] The LOM basic schema consists of nine categories: the General category, the Lifecycle category, the Metametadata category, the Technical category, the Educational category, the Rights category, the Relation category, the Annotation category, and the Classification category. Each category is a grouping of data elements describing a learning object, for instance the General category groups general information about the learning objects such as title, description and keywords (Property, Attribute)." While this model describes many (Metadata) specifications of a Learning Object, there exists common meta-model within the LOM specification concerning the structure of a Learning Object itself.

The element 'educational', which is shown below, is container for number of pedagogical metadata:

Tab 2: The 'educational' Element in LOM Specifications

(For more details to the other metadata specifications of LOM see the reference mentioned below)
resource: SCORM-Documentation of the ADL-site

A preliminary analysis of these specification already reveals some limitations:

The LOM standard does not cover collaborative or socio-constructivisitc approaches for learning.

Several specifications (interactivity level, semantic density, difficulty) are declared as being useful only in a community context - they are of little use if a LO shall be re-used.
Despite the specifications given the precise nature of a Learning Object is not defined. As a matter of fact, since there is no IEEE standard for Learning Objects themselves, the concept of LO is seen quite differently in different organisations:

Tab 3:Learning Object definitions

2.4.1. The Granularity of Learning Objects

The upmentioned definitions clearly show that almost any material from a diapositive to a complete course can be seen as a learning object. One attempt to clarify the situation has led to the concept of 5 granularity levels of LO (AICC): Component, Lesson, Module, Course, Program. While this approach may go into the right direction it unfortunately is not generally accepted till today (HW Hodgins, 2004). The IEEE LOM standard as an example defines only three granularity levels. In an article dealing with approaches to transform existing content into reusable Learning Objects M Dorten (M Dorten etal, 2003) points to the fact that there still exist several different approaches to this question and that a general agreement on questions of granularity and definition of LO still has to be found.

2.4.2. Learning Objects in different pedagogical contexts

Several authors mention the fact that, even though the LOM standard includes a category 'education' (details mentioned further up), it is at the moment not possible to integrate specifications that define the pedagogical role that a LO can take in the context of a course. (SeLeNe pp41 ff). Greenagel has found a drastic formulation fot the problem in asking: 'How do we know that anyone has ever learned anything from a learning object'?
This is because the efforts of standardisation primarily aimed at the interoperability of LO's and at 'content packaging', but till now there a no reliable standards neither for the efficiency of the material nor for the pedagogical approach behind a LO.Rob Koper says the same: The major question from a perspective of use in real educational practice is: does this model of LO's and package provide us sufficient means to build complete, flexible and valid units of study to be delivered through learning manageement systems? The answer is clearly 'no': The main problem being that different types of LO have different (pedagogical) functions in the context of education. The existing model offers no classification of LO's in relation of their posssible (re)utilisation in the context of a study unit.
In the same article Rob Coper proposes EML (Educational modelling Language) as a means for

- classification of LO in the semantic network of a pedagogic metamodel
- modelling of the pedagogic role in the actual context
- structural definition and 'content' of different pedagogical types of LO
At the same time, as is mentioned beelow, the definition of a learning object in the context of EML brings about problems of interoperability with the existing standards.

2.4.3. Learning Objects and Learning Theories

The pedagogical neutrality of Learning Objects has been discussed by several authors. Koper (cited from B Blandin, 2004) argues that the concept of a Learning Object is pedagogically neutral, because it does not provide by itself "sufficient means to build complete, flexible and valid units of study." The key point for Koper is, that the learning environment and the activities proposed to the learner define the pedagogical context of the use of Learning (and other) Objects.
This idea of pedagogical neutrality of (the existing specifications of) LO's is rejected by several other authors. As Blandin etal. show (B Blandin, 2004) it is obvious that the current specifications for LOM do not cover all possible learning situations and clearly omit some pedagogic approaches. Kraan and Wilson (cited from B Blandin, 2004) mention that SCORM "has nothing in it about collaboration because it is essentially about a single learner, self-paced and self-directed". Looking at interactivity type specifications (see Tab 2), LOM offers 'active', 'expositive', 'mixed'. Neither 'behaviourist' nor 'interrogative' type of interactivity are implemented, which means that two pedagogic approaches are omitted. Similarily the possible end User Roles are limited to an instructivistic model, namely there are 'teacher', 'learner', 'author' and 'manager', while others like 'tutor', 'coach', 'mentor' dont appear.

2.5. Learning Activities vs. Learning Objects - Simple Sequencing and EML

2.5.1. Simple Sequencing

Learning Objects are the containers for the learning content. In addition important efforts have been made to characterize and normatize the structuralisation of learning activities according to the needs, the specific actions and the performance of different users. These efforts led to the IMS standard of 'Simple Sequencing', which is also part of the SCORM standard.

Fig 2: Pedagogical range of Simple sequencing
(taken from: IMS standards)

The basic idea behind this standard is that the sequence and choice of Learning Objects to be presented are determined by predefined parameters. These can be the score in a pretest, the predefined sequence of elements and child elements, the choice of the learner, the performance of the learner at a specific task or learning objective, and others. The steps of the sequencing process are shown in the picture below.

Fig 3: The steps of Simple sequencing
(taken from: IMS standards)

As Fig 2 shows, Simple Sequencing only covers directed, self-guided and partially adapted e-learning situations and completely omits collaborative approaches of learning.
Furthermore the fact, that different aspects of LO like granularity, semantic density, difficulty, and others are not covered by specifications make it very difficult to reuse existing LO other than in a closed context like SCORM.

2.5.2. EML - Education Modeling Language

A similar but much more sophisticated approach has been defined with the concept of Education Modeling Language (EML - for an overview see R Koper, 2001). EML defines a pedagogical meta-model which allows to cover a much broader range of pedagogical situations than Simple Sequencing or Scorm. EML also defines a wide variety of "Learning Object Types" to cover all possible situations. Fig. 4 below shows the XML-binding of the basic structure of the containing framework for LO's.
Fig 4: The binding of the basic structure of the containing framework for learning objects (EML) in an XML schema
(taken from R Koper, 2001)

3. Integrated Learning in Swiss Secondary Schools

If E-Learning material is to become relevant for integrated learning the question arises whether the pedagogical paradigms of public school and of the material offered in the Web are compatible, and if blended learning can be envisaged at all. Below are summarized the relevant parts of the MAR (which describes the pedagogical, didactical and educational goals of secondary schools in Switzerland), which describe the competencies to be acquired during the four years leading students to the Matura.

3.1. Pedagogical Paradigms in the MAR

Social competencies:

The ability to integrate in a community asks for basic social competencies and, whose acquisition is to be promoted in the school. This is done particularly via encouragement at cooperation, at solidarity and at the commitment for others and their rights.
Secondary Schools can offer a rich field of social experiences, which contribute to learning to live in a community. For this purpose the following abilities are important: Taking over responsibility, taking part in teamwork, mastering conflict situations, developing self-confidence, respecting other opininons and reflection own positions, analizing own and others behavior patterns and at the same time critically noticing the own role, being open to social innovations (e.g. the change of the traditional roles of man and woman).

Intellectual, scientific and cognitional Competences

Founded knowledge is an indispensable condition for a higher education and an academic career. Parallel to knowledge acquisition young people must learn to extend, structure and use this knowledge. This is an important competence which is acquired by means of representatively selected knowledge material. Preferred fields of knowledge for this aim are those, which activate thinking. Young people shall be acquainted with different learning and problem solution strategies. The basis for this are curiosity as well as the ability to argue. On the instrumental layer students learn to formulate theories, to set up hypotheses, to verify or falsify them and to draw appropriate conclusions. They are able to observe, to experiment, to abstract, to collect proof and to develop concepts and models.
The basis of any intellectual formation consists in a minimum of basic knowledge and the knowhow of acquiring additional knowledge.
These basic skills are essential for the secondary education. They allow students to continue their formation at university level without major difficulties, because these talents are an integrating component of any founded general education. In parallel to the instruction in the different subjects students must be made familiar with the most important aspects of scientific methodology. Students at Secondary Schools learn to judge objectively a scientific work, to analyze ideological points of view in an argumentative way and to recognize and bring up own points of view for discussion of view. By epistemologic reflection they learn to analyze important aspects of the scientific approach as well as to question implied points of view of knowledge transmission. In such a way they learn to deal resposibly with scientific discoveries.

Communication:

Communication is a constant challenge for men. Most communicative behaviors are spontaneously acquired, however they must be further developed and consciously maintained. Young people are in a phase of self-finding. During this period of their lives they develop their identity to a large extent by communication. On the search for models they are particularly unlocked to cultural and aesthetic values.
Young people acquire communication as a key competence by adequate didactical approaches both in the technical instruction and within all schoolreferred ranges.
Communication becomes possible primarily by extended language knowledge. Therefore the emphasis of language instruction lies on correct understanding, later on however on a mode of expression which is adequate, differentiated and above all complies with situations and norms.

Copmpetences in the field of individual learning and work strategies, knowledge procurement and information technologies

The accessibility of sources of information and data bases becomes ever simpler by the new information technologies. This easy access hower is useful only, if the user knows, how to search for information and how to select it. Today's demand for constant further training makes this "learning to learn" necessary
Students learn during the mandatory school time to procure information, to evaluate it, to work on it and to bring it up to date. Considering the shortlivedness of knowledge in a changing society the demand for acquiring knowledge beyond the school time is a commonplace. Thus the issue is to continuously extend the acquired learning and searching techniques. This needs lifelong motivation and joy of learning.
The work methods of secondary school students are based on the deepened knowledge of available sources of information. This is crucial for further studies. They know, where and how to procure themselves information, how to use information means (card indices, bibliographies, archives and others) and know their characteristics. Above all however they can seize the underlying logic of documentation systems. An important point is the competence of transfer from one field of knowledge to another.

The use of Information and communication technologies

Information technology is an important element of this field of competences. The use of IT is obligatory to the curriculum of the mandatory school.
Information technology is an instrument; as such it permits diverse interdisciplinary applications. It is to be judged regarding its use. Secondary school students use different media as sources of information and learn to deal with print media, television and interactive media. They learn to know the possibilities advantages and the disadvantages of the different information technologies.

Advantages and risks of the new technologies

Considerations to authorization, meaning, value, borders and risks of technologies and technique are inevitable nowadays. The teachers of individual schools deal with this issue. Students learn by this to understand new information and communication technologies as a social and economic phenomenon.
Secondary school students understand the functioning of different technologies, their potential and their risks; this is a basic condition to understand our world which is ever more dependent of technology. The technologies must be judged in their context and as to their effects on society. They are a subsystem of our sociopolitical order and must therefore also be regarded under ethical, economic and ecological criteria.

Transdisciplinary approach

Instead of the transdisciplinary approach the main goals of teaching Information technologies are to be specified here. Computer science is consciously not specified as own subject in the basic syllabus; the goal is rather to integrate IT as an instrument into the individual subjects to which the following goals are pointing the way.

Basic Competences

• Get Insight into fundamental principles of computers and programs
• Compare human thinking with models of artificial systems
• Understand the differences and relations between reality and models for reality (e.g. by simulation of procedures)
• Be able to apply IT knowledge in a project
• bring up for discussion effects of IT on everyday life (in family, school, working sphere and spare time)

Basic Skills

- Use the computer as a for different purposes (e.g. text processing, plot routines, spread-sheet analysis, simple data bases, telecommunications, use of instruction software)
- Decide, when it is possible, reasonable and appropriateto use the available IT means for data processing and communication
- Get a feeling for the analysis of problems, for logical sequences as well as for relations and structures (e.g. to develop simple algorithms, to read and explain programs)
As this resume clearly shows, the new MAR (1998) completely complies with a modern approach of blended learning, in which ICT play an important role for the enrichment of the pedagogical approaches and as a source for learning material. Emphasis is laid on the use of IT as a tool for communication and handling and structuration of "raw" information.

4. E-Learning Standards and Integrated Learning

Integrated learning in secondary schools uses ICT for the enrichment of classroom teaching and to make available to students additional sources of learning material which they can use at any time and place. While newly developed pedagogical approaches clearly support the first of the two aspects, there is also an evergrowing amount of teaching material which may be predominantly used for the second purpose. E-Learning standards are helpful only for second aspect. Theoretically this could mean that teacher can create individually structured learning units out of LO's they withdraw from repositories and combine according to their needs with the aid of the Metadata and EML or Simple Sequencing (or SCORM) to a customized study unit.
Unfortunately the LOM standard brings about major constraints to this model: There is no consense as to the granularity of Learning Objects. Fundamentally LO's are far from being pedagogically neutral, and they mainly represent instructivistic pedagogic approaches. Many of their metadata attributes are exclusive which means that they are registered for one specific use only. Last not least the fundamental principle of a self-contingent and "isolated" Learning Object brings about a flagrant conflict with the pedagogical principle of a knowledge and learning network (constructivistic approach).