Is SCORM a barrier to learning?

Is SCORM a barrier to learning?:
Short answer: No, but the way we use it might be.

Long answer:

First of all, let's just remind ourselves what SCORM is, and what it's for...

SCORM (Shareable Content Object Reference Model) is a collection of ideas that describes how to put "Content Objects" together in a way that they can be reused (Shared) across multiple, different systems.

These ideas cover:

1. How to describe such content with metadata
2. How the content should be bundled together into a single package
3. How the content should talk to the receiving system
4. How the content should be sequenced to other pieces of content

In corporate learning, (1) and (4) are very rarely used - because they're pretty complicated, which leaves us with very little of use.

The SCORM bundling process takes something very simple (putting files into a zip package) and adds an unnecessary layer of complexity by requiring an XML file which describes the contents of the zip package. If we were using SCORM as was intended, we would be breaking our content down into component parts which would make use of the XML file. But usually we don't.

Similarly, the data transfer between content object and receiving system is usually limited to simple end-of-unit test scores and progress information. How often this is for the benefit of the learner is questionable. SCORM is capable of much more in terms of data transfer, but it's rarely used, often because you start to lose the ability to move content between systems easily.

Comparison with the real world

Outside of corporate learning very few people will have ever heard of SCORM. Yet many people will have used learning content delivery systems such as Youtube, Scribd, Slideshare and Flickr.

All of these take learning content in a particular packaged format and deliver it in the most efficient way possible to the end user.

But these platforms do so much more than we get from our corporate learning systems:

• The content is embedded in the platform, not separate to it (although learners can choose to make the content operate in the whole screen - choice is the key here)
• Therefore the learner always has access to the platform's functionality when they're using the content.
• Around the content, the platform wraps social elements such as comments, ratings, and social media links.
• It also displays metrics such as aggregate ratings and viewing numbers.
• The platform displays other, related content items, based on the metadata and the way other users have behaved.
• The platforms allow users to engage with the content, again through comments, and through adding to personal "playlists" or "favourites".
• The platforms, in some cases, allow users to enhance the content, through the addition of layers containing links and explanatory text.
• The platforms allow users to embed the content in their own websites - the ultimate in shareable content.
• The platforms put "search" at the centre of their user-experience. By exposing as much content as possible to the search engines, they make the content more useful.

All these are for the benefit of the end-user. If they weren't they wouldn't get used, and no-one would publish content to them.

In contrast, how do we use SCORM packages?

• We hide content from search engines, and only allow users to search by metadata (if there is any)
• We treat the platform as secondary to the content, and ignore the user experience of getting to, from and between the content packages.
• We treat learners as if they are in isolation from each other while they're using the content, and forget the social elements of learning.
• We take away anything that will help learners exercise choice (a key element in self-motivated learning), whether that's cues to help them choose (eg. ratings and usage figures), or how they will use the content (eg. full screen, no ability to bookmark in their browser, and, often, no ability to cut and paste)

SCORM isn't necessarily the villain, but it does add a layer of complexity, which is beyond most L&D teams to embrace fully.

For most current corporate elearning, we could easily get by without using SCORM, if our systems allowed it. The ideal, of course, would be for our systems to be able to accept multiple content types (including SCORM) and display them all in a consistent user-centred way, like Slideshare, Youtube etc. It's all learning content, so why is SCORM seen as something that's special and different?

Related posts

SCORM Warning (2008)

Looking for a learner support system (2007)

Original post