This page contains trademarks of the 1EdTech Consortium, including the 1EdTech logos, TrustEd Apps™, Learning Tools Interoperability® (LTI®), OneRoster®, Caliper Analytics®, Common Cartridge®, Competencies and Academic Standards Exchange® (CASE®), Question and Test Interoperability® (QTI®), Accessible Portable Item Protocol® (APIP®), AccessForAll®, BadgeConnect®, and SensorAPI™.
Common Cartridge testimonial video from European ASPECT study
OK - so we knew that the Common Cartridge learning content interoperability standards were on target for the needs of the educational community . . . but, I have to admit that I've been a bit "blown away" with the enthusiasm that Common Cartridge received in the recent ASPECT project workshops with teachers from across Europe.
IMS had nothing to do with producing the following video that captures the teachers reactions to the workshop:
It's 4 minutes long - and if you have ever touched content interoperability standards in any way I think you will be highly pleased with this initial reception to Common Cartridge.
I just learned about this video yesterday while tuning into the IMS webinar conducted by the folks from Finland who conducted the workshop. I will post the link to the webinar archive when I get it.
The net-net of this is that (perhaps finally) with the Common Cartridge standard we have a specification driven by the educational community for the educational community. So, in the workshop, when the teachers were asked to do similar tasks with SCORM or simple web content, they greatly preferred what Common Cartridge had to offer. I certainly would have expected this. But, I guess it is the level of enthusiasm that has caught us a bit off guard (when I say "us" - it seems apparent that the workshop organizers were also surprised by the strong positive reaction to CC).
I would suggest you watch both videos and read the report (see my prior post for the project web page ). There are many "gems" in there in terms of insights that will help us in our future evolution of CC. Now, this group were kind of an advanced group - so that tends to bias the results in favor of the use of technology. But, it is also clear that there are some very appealing features of CC - especially as it relates to assessment - that were not fully exploited in the initial workshop and differentiate it even more from things like SCORM and the plain web.
I'm envisioning a new group: "Teachers/professors for Common Cartridge!"