Technology Standarization Commitees

322 views

Published on

Technology Standarization Commitees

Published in: Technology, Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
322
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Technology Standarization Commitees

  1. 1. IMS Global and IEEE LTSC
  2. 2.  The IEEE Learning Technology Standards Committee (LTSC) is chartered by the IEEE Computer Society Standards Activity Board to develop internationally accredited technical standards, recommended practices, and guides for learning technology.  The IEEE LTSC follows an open and transparent, formal standards development process.  The IEEE LTSC coordinates with other organizations, both formally and informally, that produce specifications and standards for learning technologies.  The IEEE LTSC is governed by a Sponsor Executive Committee (SEC) consisting of working group chairs and elected officers.  Membership is required to view Working Group and Study Group documents and post to email lists, and to vote on draft standards and participate in ballot resolution. Individuals interested in participating are encouraged to contact the relevant Working Group and Study Group chairs and explore the Working Groups and Study Groups portion Web site before becoming a member.
  3. 3.  IMS Global Learning Consortium (usually referred to as IMS GLC, IMS Global or simply IMS) is a global, nonprofit, member organization that strives to enable the growth and impact of learning technology in the education and corporate learning sectors worldwide  IMS GLC members provide leadership in shaping and growing the learning industry through community development of interoperability and adoption practice standards and recognition of the return on investment from learning and educational technology  Their main activity is to develop interoperability standards and adoption practice standards for distributed learning, some of which like Learning Tools Interoperability (LTI), Question & Test Interoperability/Accessible Portable Item Protocol (QTI/APIP), Common Cartridge, Learning Information Services and Content Packaging are very widely used.
  4. 4.  Standards for accessibility, inclusive design, and personalization of online learning resources to meet the needs of all users/learners. The IMS Accessibility project group focuses on adaptation or personalization of resources, interfaces and content to meet the needs of individuals. More info in: http://www.imsglobal.org/accessibility/index.html  APPLIES TO: All systems that access or supply digital content and learner information - such as learning platforms (LMS, CMS, VLE, IMS), digital content, content management/repository systems, student systems , mobile technology, authoring tools, assessment systems  ONGOING PROJECTS: o Access for All v3.0: implement a simpler and more precise data model than earlier versions to ease the path for adopting organisations and implementers. The data model is small but easily extendable and includes a Core Profile that gives an even smaller and tighter set of essential elements. The 2.0 version was released in July 2003. o IMS AccessForAll Meta-data Specification: is intended to make it possible to identify resources that match a user's stated preferences or needs. These preferences or needs would be declared using the IMS Learner Information Package Accessibility for LIP specification. The group is composed by IMS, Dublin Core, IEEE, CEN-ISSS, Eduspecs as well as other groups. o IMS Learner Information Package Accessibility for LIP: defines two new sub-schemas for the IMS Learning Information Package that defines a means to specify accessibility preferences and learner accommodations. The 1.0 version was released in July 2003. o IMS Guidelines for Developing Accessible Learning Applications: provide a framework for the distributed learning community. This framework will set the stage for what solutions currently exist, what the opportunities and possibilities are for implementing them, and the areas where more development and innovation are still needed in educational technologies to ensure education that is truly accessible to anyone, anytime, anywhere. The working documents are available on http://www.imsglobal.org/specificationdownload.cfm
  5. 5.  Standards for the development and exchange of test items to meet the needs of test candidates with diverse accessibility requirements. More info in: http://www.imsglobal.org/apip.html  APPLIES TO: All systems that access or supply digital test items or tests - such as learning platforms (LMS, CMS, VLE, IMS), digital content, content management/repository systems, test item banking systems, mobile technology, authoring tools, assessment systems, data analytics systems  MORE INFO: The APIP Standard builds on the IMS GLC Question and Test Interoperability (QTI) specification (which also makes use of the IMS Content Packaging (CP) v1.2 specification), and the Access for All Personal Needs and Preferences (AfA PNP) specifications. APIP is limited to exchanging question Items only
  6. 6.  Standards for distribution of distributed digital learning content and resources. More info in: http://www.imsglobal.org/contentpackaging.html  APPLIES TO: All systems that access or supply digital content - such as learning platforms (LMS, CMS, VLE, IMS), digital content, content management/repository systems, mobile technology, authoring tools  MORE INFO: ◦ CP is used to define the data format for the exchange of learning resources (or learning objects) from one learning system to another, facilitating easier delivery, reuse and sharing of materials. ◦ IMS Content Packages enable you to export content from one Learning Content Management System or digital repository, and import it into another while retaining information describing the media in the IMS Package, and how it is structured, such as a table of contents or which web page to show first. ◦ The IMS CP specification focuses on the packaging and transport of resources, but doesn't determine the nature of those resources. This is because the specification allows adopters to gather, structure and aggregate content in an unlimited variety of formats. ◦ The latest v1.2 adds important new features for linking to content that may be distributed via the Internet – “virtual content”. ◦ IMS CP is the most widely used learning technology standard in the world. It is the basis for SCORM and is also used standalone as a simpler way to achieve interoperability. ◦ IMS Content Packaging is currently being considered as a new work item for standardization in ISO/IEC JTC1 SC36. ◦ Conformance and development of accredited profiles of IMS CP, including the profile used in SCORM is offered solely under the auspices of the Common Cartridge & Learning Tools Interoperability Alliance: http://www.imsglobal.org/cc/alliance.html
  7. 7.  Standards for organization, publishing, distribution, delivery, search and authorization of a wide variety of collections of digital learning content, applications, and associated online discussion forums used as the basis for or in support of online learning of any type. More info in: http://www.imsglobal.org/commoncartridge.html  APPLIES TO: All systems that access or supply digital content for learning - such as learning platforms (LMS, CMS, VLE, IMS), digital content, web-served content, content management/repository systems, mobile technology, authoring tools, learning portals.  MORE INFO: ◦ IMS CC enables learning content and web application interoperability for rich, interactive digital content, including assessments, collaboration, confederations of learning applications, with web-based authorization to all included resources. ◦ CC includes application profiles of some of the most widely used IMS standards, including Content Packaging, Question and Test Interoperability, and Learning Tools Interoperability. ◦ CC enables collections of learning resources of various types and sources. ◦ CC establishes course cartridge native formats endorsed by educational publishers, and supports a wide variety of established content formats, eliminating platform lock-in. ◦ CC explicitly supports the most widely used standards for exchanging and tracking assessment items (IMS QTI) providing a standard scoring and tracking alternative that does not require the complexity or overhead of a CBT-like runtime interaction. ◦ CC fits within the educational context of enabling instructors to assemble lesson plans of various resources and publish those as reusable and changeable packages that are easy to create, share, and improve. ◦ CC is based on an application profile of IMS Content Packaging v1.2, Common Cartridge manifests support "virtual content" organizations through URL references, thus reducing the size of cartridges while increasing flexibility. ◦ CC Includes an exchange standard for online discussion forums. ◦ CC has been designed to allow future incorporation of IMS Learning Tools Interoperability to enable web service launch and data exchange of distributing learning applications and systems from within Common Cartridges. ◦ Cartridges or portions of cartridges can be protected through a standard open authorization protocol. ◦ CC allows straightforward migration from SCORM 2004: Common Cartridge and SCORM 2004 are both based on IMS Content Packaging allowing use of tools to convert from SCORM to the advantages of Common Cartridge. ◦ The Common Cartridge & Learning Tools Interoperability Alliance provides open source and community source tools for automated conformance testing of cartridges, testing of learning platforms, a reference implementation of the authorization service, future incorporation of LTI, and much more. http://www.imsglobal.org/cc/alliance.html
  8. 8.  Standards for exchange of digital information (ePortfolios) that contain evidence of learning, education, training, and life experiences resulting in a more effective matching than traditional resumes of applicants to the offerings of potential employers, admissions offices, and so forth. More info in: http://www.imsglobal.org/ep.html  APPLIES TO: All systems that desire to store digital portfolios or exchange these portfolios with other systems - such as ePortfolio systems, learning platforms (LMS, CMS, VLE, IMS), learning portals, assessment systems, student systems, talent management systems, data analytics, social web  MORE INFO: ◦ IMS ePortfolio supports the advancement of lifelong learning important to many government initiatives. ◦ IMS ePortfolio makes exchanging portfolios from school to work transitions easier. ◦ IMS ePortfolio allows educators and institutions to better track competencies. ◦ IMS ePortfolio enhances the learning experience and improves employee development. ◦ IMS ePortfolio has been profiled for use throughout Dutch education by Kennisnet through the ePortfolio NL project and has been implemented on a number of ePortfolio platforms, such as PebblePad, Sakai/OSP, and Winvision. The experiences of these implementers have pointed to the need for stronger examples of portfolios encoded following the specification, more extensive best practices guidelines, and several minor technical enhancements. ◦ The next phase of IMS ePortfolio will include a maintenance release that would implement these suggestions, drawing primarily on materials already developed by ePortfolio NL and others. ◦ There is widespread agreement within the IMS and ePortfolio communities that facilitating the transition between education and the workplace is of utmost importance to the eventual success of ePortfolios in supporting lifelong learning. In the next phase of IMS ePortfolio, IMS is collaborating with HR-XML to create mappings between both the IMS ePortfolio Specification and the several HR-XML specifications that are designed to accommodate similar information to a common semantic representation, using the core components (ISO 15000-5) approach that has proved successful in a range of e-business applications. This will enable easy translation from IMS ePortfolio, which will focus on the needs of education, and HR-XML, which is seeing widespread adoption by business.
  9. 9.  Standards to support interactions and data exchange between learning systems and administrative, student, or human resource systems, including exchange of course rosters, learner profiles, competencies/learning objectives and learning outcomes. More info in: http://www.imsglobal.org/lis.html  APPLIES TO: All learning systems that provide access to online course materials in cooperation with an enterprise administrative system and administrative systems that exchange administrative data and learning outcomes with learning platforms - such as learning platforms (LMS, CMS, VLE, IMS), web-served content, assessment systems, learning portals, group collaboration systems, adaptive tutors, simulations, gaming systems, ePortfolio systems, classroom capture and management systems, student systems, data analytics systems, talent management systems  MORE INFO: ◦ IMS Learning Information Services (LIS) defines standards for complex hierarchical organizational relationships among courses, sections, groups, roles, and so forth. ◦ IMS Learning Information Services defines a standard for a course management information model. ◦ IMS Learning Information Services defines standards for mapping multiple sections to a single course site. ◦ IMS Learning Information Services defines an expanded person to align with IMS Learner Information Profile (LIP) and includes an LDAP binding. ◦ IMS Learning Information Services v2.0 revises the Enterprise Services v1.0 specification to extend the set of service behaviors, define new services, fully support the IMS General Web Services v1.0 specification, and enhance the data model, based on over five years of deployment. ◦ A LIS Alliance user community will be launched after there are additional prototypes and pilots, providing conformance profiles and open source/community tools.
  10. 10.  Aims to facilitate the discovery and retrieval of learning content stored in repositories, such as Common Cartridges, online library resources, and so forth by leveraging combinations and profiles of existing standards in use. More info in: http://www.imsglobal.org/lode.html  APPLIES TO: All systems that search, access and supply digital content for learning from repositories or standards-based content management systems - such as learning platforms (LMS, CMS, VLE, IMS), content management/repository/document management systems, mobile technology, authoring tools, learning portals, search systems, assessment systems  MORE INFO: ◦ Learning Object Discovery & Exchange provides educators will an easier way to discover learning content that addresses the needs of their students, making their jobs easier, and maximizing re- use and minimizing the cost of re-invention of materials. ◦ Learning Object Discovery & Exchange provides students with access to the highest-quality learning resources available, making a significant impact on the quality of their learning experience and their learning outcomes. ◦ Learning Object Discovery & Exchange support content providers to be able to advertise their products by making them globally discoverable. ◦ Learning Object Discovery & Exchange supports system with a limited set of specifications to support to make their systems compliant with major federations of learning resources. ◦ Learning Object Discovery & Exchange supports federation builders through securing their investment by developing infrastructures based on standard specifications. ◦ Learning Object Discovery & Exchange will examine, select, and adapt specifications that are being applied to digital libraries, generic repositories, and learning repositories. ◦ A key objective of Learning Object Discovery & Exchange will be the support of harvesting, search and discovery of Common Cartridges and Learning Tools Interoperability compliant applications.
  11. 11.  Standards to support interactions, namely launching and data exchange, between learning systems or related applications, either in the enterprise or web-based, enabling incorporation of learning tools, applications, mash-ups, and software as a service within the context of a learning portal or other learning environment. More info in: http://www.imsglobal.org/toolsinteroperability2.cfm  APPLIES TO: All learning applications or systems that may need to be launched from or exchange data with user portals or systems acting as a portal - such as learning platforms (LMS, CMS, VLE, IMS), web-served content, assessment systems, authoring tools, learning portals, group collaboration systems, adaptive tutors, simulations, gaming systems, social networking systems, virtual tutoring systems, plagiarism systems, search systems, ePortfolio systems, classroom capture and management systems, and a variety of ancillary tools (grade books, calendars, etc)  MORE INFO: ◦ Learning Tools Interoperability aims to improve interaction between external tools/applications/systems, whether enterprise or web-based, and learning/course management systems. ◦ Learning Tools Interoperability extends the Tools Interoperability v1.0 Guidelines to address tool configuration, presentation, accessibility, and access to LMS data such as calendar, grade book, and content. ◦ Learning Tools Interoperability enables software as a service (SaaS), which are becoming more prevalent in all segments of the market. ◦ Learning Tools Interoperability enables mash-ups of applications within the learning system or portal. ◦ Learning Tools Interoperability enables configuration of tools, applications, and systems into the single sign-on environment of choice. ◦ Learning Tools Interoperability enables one learning platform to be launched from and contained within another learning platform. This enables enterprise to utilize a number of learning platforms. ◦ Learning Tools Interoperability enables “content-less tracking” because one system can launch another that runs content of arbitrary complexity. The launched system returns results to the launching system. This eliminates the need to port content to a standard format, such as SCORM, which often results in a dumbing down of the original system features and a significantly reduced learning experience. ◦ Learning Tools Interoperability enables definition and registration of outcome/results schemas that are application dependent. ◦ The CC-LTI Alliance user community offers conformance profiles and open source/community tools available to Alliance members. ◦ LTI will be an important component of the IMS Common Cartridge standard
  12. 12.  Standards for constructing, processing, and exchanging online assessment information, test items, tests, and the reporting of test results. More info in: http://www.imsglobal.org/QTI.html  APPLIES TO: All systems that access or supply digital test items or tests - such as learning platforms (LMS, CMS, VLE, IMS), digital content, content management/repository systems, test item banking systems, mobile technology, authoring tools, assessment systems, data analytics systems  MORE INFO: ◦ Question and Test Interoperability provides formats for constructing, processing, and exchanging assessment information and addresses the aggregation of items into tests and the reporting of test results. ◦ QTI is the leading open standard for defining test assessment questions, test, and results. ◦ QTI provides “tracking” of test results without requiring complex APIs or runtimes as the question and test information can be natively understood by the host learning system. ◦ The latest v2.1 specification provides numerous enhancements to support interaction with dynamic/adaptive content, sophisticated control of feedback, cloning using item templates, distribution using IMS content packaging, and collection of item statistics. ◦ V2.1 also describes a method for using QTI with Learning Design, Simple Sequencing, and the CMI data model. ◦ Conformance and development of accredited profiles of IMS Question and Test Interoperability, is offered solely under the auspices of the Common Cartridge & Learning Tools Interoperability Alliance: http://www.imsglobal.org/cc/alliance.html
  13. 13.  This project should produce a recommended practice identifying Digital Rights (DR) requirements for eLearning technologies. These requirements should be aligned with the most widely known standards-based specifications for DREL that are being adopted or developed by international, regional, national and private organizations and consortia.  The purpose of this project is to facilitate the creation, management and delivery of digital content for eLearning by technology that implements digital rights expression languages. The recommended practice should determine what, if any, extensions are needed so that these DREL can meet the identified requirement  WORKING ON: the document “Recommended Practice for Digital Rights Expression Languages (DRELs) Suitable for eLearning Technologies”  The IEEE LTSC DREL Study Group has accomplished the following: established liaison with MPEG (SC29) and CEN/ISSS.  Produced Draft White Paper in October. - Input sought from some domain experts. Received and incorporated contributions from 14 experts. - Reviewed the WP in the IEEE LTSC quarterly meeting that was held in Copenhagen in December 2002. - The DREL session in the Copenhagen meeting was collocated with the CEN/ISSS and was attended by 46 participants. This demonstrates the significant importance of this work. - Released the WP in December 2002 for SG review before submission to LTSC. http://ltsc.ieee.org/meeting/200212/doc/DREL_White_paper.doc . - The current DREL white paper was circulated for further comments via the LTSC reflector through January 15 2003, followed by a two-week letter ballot for approval by the study group; and recommend to the SEC that a preliminary version of the white paper be permitted to be released for liaison purposes.- The SG had issued a call soliciting committee members to work on the PAR for the formation of the new DREL WG. About 22 persons volunteered to serve on this PAR drafting committee and subsequently the WG
  14. 14.  The CMI Working Group (WG11) was formed in 1998 to standardize portions of the Computer Managed Instruction (CMI) specification developed by the Aviation Industry CBT Committee (AICC). Between 1998 and 2005 WG11 produced three related standards, described below. The 1484.11.1-2004 and 1484.11.2-2003 achieved widespread international adoption through their use in the 2004 editions of the Sharable Content Object Reference Model (SCORM), developed by the U.S. Advanced Distributed Learning Initiative (ADL). The 1484.11 standards enabled the SCORM runtime environment, a mechanism to report learner performance in a technology-supported learning activity. With the exception of maintenance activities, WG11 was inactive for several years. As a result of discussions with the ADL, AICC and LETSI organizations, WG11 was reactivated in 2010 to undertake a revision of the 1484.11.1 data model standard. The revision intends to correct know defects, to better serve diverse communities of practice, and to enable a broader set of interactive learning experiences.  MEMBERS: http://www.ieeeltsc.org:8080/Plone/wg11-cmi/wg11-cmi-participation/members-and-observers  STANDARDS: ◦ 1484.11.1-2004 IEEE Standard for Learning Technology - Data Model for Content Object Communication: describes a data model to support the interchange of agreed upon data elements and their values between a learning-related content object and a runtime service (RTS) used to support learning management. Available in: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?reload=true&isnumber=30541&arnumber=1408444 ◦ 1484.11.2-2003 IEEE Standard for Learning Technology - ECMAScript Application Programming Interface for Content to Runtime Services Communication: describes an ECMAScript application-programming interface (API) for content-to-runtime-services communication. Available in: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?isnumber=28472&arnumber=1271478&count=1 ◦ 1484.11.3-2005 IEEE Standard for Learning Technology - Extensible Markup Language (XML) Schema Binding for Data Model for Content Object Communication: specifies a World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Extensible Markup Language (XML) Schema binding of the data model defined in IEEE 1484.11.1–2004, "Standard for Learning Technology – Data Model for Content Object Communication." The purpose of this Standard is to allow the creation of IEEE 1418.11.1–2004 data-model instances in XML. This Standard uses the W3C XML Schema definition language as the encoding. This allows for interoperability and the exchange of data-model instances between various systems. Available in: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=1633759
  15. 15.  This standard will specify the syntax and semantics of Learning Object Metadata, defined as the attributes required to fully/adequately describe a Learning Object. Learning Objects are defined here as any entity, digital or non-digital, which can be used, re-used or referenced during technology supported learning.  Examples of technology supported learning include: computer-based training systems, interactive learning environments, intelligent computer-aided instruction systems, distance learning systems, collaborative learning environments.  Examples of Learning Objects include: multimedia content, instructional content, learning objectives, instructional software and software tools, persons, organizations, or events referenced during technology supported learning.  STANDARDS: ◦ Learning Object Metadata Standard (IEEE LTSC 1484.12.1): This part of the LOM specifies a conceptual data schema that defines the structure of a metadata instance for a learning object. ◦ Learning Object Metadata (LOM) XML Binding (IEEE LTSC 1484.12.3): This part of the LOM standard describes an XML binding to enable the exchange of LOM instances between conforming systems that implement the 1484.12.1 data model.
  16. 16.  The IEEE LTSC WG13 RMLT Working Group is defining a conceptual model that includes an ontology and a nomenclature for enabling the interpretation of externalized representations of digital aggregates of resources for learning, education, and training applications. The conceptual model facilitates interoperability by providing an ontology that can be used to represent and compare a variety of resource aggregation formats.  Resource aggregation is the process of gathering digital resources, describing their structure, and often collecting or referring to their metadata so that the resulting resource aggregation can be used for transmission, storage, and delivery to users. Individual communities have developed different aggregation formats, each focusing on that community's special needs and requirements. There is a need to exchange resource aggregations between communities that may be using different aggregation formats. In these cases, it is necessary to map between aggregation formats.  STANDARDS: ◦ RAMLET Project Description: Developing a reference model for resource aggregation for learning, education, and training. This document describes the Ramlet project to produce an IEEE standard that will define a reference model for resource aggregation. Available in: http://www.ieeeltsc.org:8080/Plone/working- group/resource-aggregation-model-for-learning-education-and-training-ramlet-working-group- 13/RAMLET_project_description.pdf ◦ RAMLET Conceptual Overview: The LTSC Resource Models for Learning, Education, and Training (RAMLET) Working Group is undertaking a project to produce an IEEE standard that will define a conceptual model for digital aggregations of resources for learning, education, and training applications. The standard will facilitate interoperability by enabling the interpretation of external representations of resource aggregations and their properties. This document provides an overview of the conceptual model. Available in: http://www.ieeeltsc.org:8080/Plone/working-group/resource-aggregation-model-for-learning-education- and-training-ramlet-working-group-13/RAMLET%20conceptual%20overview.pdf ◦ RAMLET Use cases: This document describes several use cases that were used to inform the approach to the development of the conceptual model that will described in the standard. Available in: http://www.ieeeltsc.org:8080/Plone/working-group/resource-aggregation-model-for-learning-education- and-training-ramlet-working-group-13/RAMLET%20use%20case.pdf
  17. 17.  Working Group 20 (WG20) has been working on a draft standard for Reusable Competency Definitions (RCD) and is studying the possibility of adding other related competency technology standards.  STANDARDS: ◦ P1484.20.1 Reusable Competency Definitions Draft 11: This is the latest draft (Working Draft 11) resulting from the work of the Comment Resolution Committee (CRC) that resolved the comments received on the first ballot for this draft standard. It incorporates corrections resulting from proofreading. The zip file includes two .pdf files, one "clean" and one showing the changes from the first ballot draft, as well as the worksheet that summarizes the comments and the resolutions of the CRC. Available in: www.ieeeltsc.org:8080/Plone/working-group/competency-data-standards-working-group- 20/IEEE_1484.20.1.D5.WD11.zip ◦ P1484.20.1 Reusable Competency Definitions Draft 10: This is the next to latest draft resulting from the work of the Comment Resolution Committee (CRC) that resolved the comments received on the first ballot for this draft standard. It still needs proofreading. The zip file includes two .pdf files, one "clean" and one showing the changes from the first ballot draft, as well as the worksheet that summarizes the comments and the resolutions of the CRC. Available in: www.ieeeltsc.org:8080/Plone/working-group/competency-data-standards-working-group-20/IEEE_1484.20.1.D5.WD10.zip ◦ P1484.20.1 Reusable Competency Definitions Draft 8: This Standard defines a data model for describing, referencing, and sharing competency definitions, primarily in the context of online and distributed learning. This Standard provides a way to represent formally the key characteristics of a competency, independently of its use in any particular context. It enables interoperability among learning systems that deal with competency information by providing a means for them to refer to common definitions with common meanings. Available in: http://www.ieeeltsc.org:8080/Plone/working-group/competency- data-standards-working-group-20/IEEE_1484.20.1.D8.pdf ◦ P1484.20.1 Reusable Competency Definitions Draft 7: This is IEEE 1484.20.1/Draft 7 Draft Standard for Learning Technology— Data Model for Reusable Competency Definitions, as prepared in May 2007 with final technical and editorial cleanup for submission for the second recirculation ballot. The zip file includes two .pdf files, one "clean" and one showing the changes from the previous ballot draft, as well as the worksheet that summarizes the comments received with the the first recirculation ballot and the resolutions of the Comments Resolution Committee (CRC). Available in: http://www.ieeeltsc.org:8080/Plone/working- group/competency-data-standards-working-group-20/IEEE_1484.20.1.D7.pdf ◦ P1484.20.1 Reusable Competency Definitions Draft 6: The first ballot was affirmative, but also resulted in 184 comments. A Comment Resolution Committee (CRC) composed of volunteers from WG20 has been reviewing those comments. Some of the technical comments point to issues that need to be resolved in the draft. Technical changes will require a recirculation ballot. The CRC is currently attempting to resolve all the comments in preparation for the recirculation ballot. This zip file contains the latest working draft and comment resolution spreadsheet that reflect the work in progress of the CRC. Available in: www.ieeeltsc.org:8080/Plone/working-group/competency-data-standards-working-group-20/IEEE_1484.20.1.D5.WD6.zip ◦ P1484.20.1 Reusable Competency Definitions Draft 4: P1484.20.1 Draft Standard for Learning Technology -- Standard for Reusable Competency Definitions, draft 4. This is the draft that was approved in the first formal ballot. This is the basis for Draft 5 that will be resubmitted for a recirculation ballot after comments from the first ballot are resolved. NOTE: If you are using an older version of Acrobat Reader, you may need to update to view this document. Available in: http://www.ieeeltsc.org:8080/Plone/working-group/competency-data-standards-working-group-20/IEEE_1484.20.1.D4.pdf

×