Specifying Learners on Create an Assignment Page

Topics: Developer Forum
Aug 4, 2006 at 6:14 PM
Will the Create an Assignment page handle a very large list of learners for assignment?

In it's current incarnation, the page lists all of the learners with checkboxes next to their name (in addition to the group assignment).

What if a site contains 1000+ learners?

It would be nice to have a field where an instructor could enter the accounts they want to assign an assignment to, similar to the field that is used by Sharepoint when adding a new user.

Any thoughts on how large numbers of learners can be handled by this page?

- Nick MSFT
Aug 4, 2006 at 6:58 PM
Some additional background on our senario:

We have massive churn in our learner population and would like to be able to give everyone who is part of particular domain the "SLK Learner" role.

Is it possible to assign a domain group the SLK Learner role?
Aug 5, 2006 at 3:21 AM
We have gotten several questions about large group assignment and specifically our support for AD groups. In general, our architecture should scale well to large numbers of learners, but as you indicate the current user interface for selecting learners and grading assignments is not geared towards 1000+ learners. Also, the grading page design has a grading chart listing every learner for an assignment, which has similar scalability issues for large numbers of learners.

We are currently investigating some of these issues, and it would be interesting to hear from you and other users what your core scenarios are, including the complete workflow. For example, how many users do you expect to work with for any given assignment? If you assign a single assignment to 2000 users, do you have an instructor who will grade all 2000 learner assignments? Do you expect a mostly self-driven learner workflow, or instructor guided? Is it mostly expected to be automatic, or include manual interaction with an instructor (grading, comments, etc.).

It would be great to discuss this and get a feel for how everyone plans to use SLK. To get started, please post your scenarios to this discussion thread.

Thanks,
Mark
Aug 7, 2006 at 6:32 PM
Here is an overview of a simple common workflow we have:

1. Trainer logs in and navigates to a particular piece of update training that needs to be assigned to a student.

2. Trainer chooses to assign this training to an student who is part of a site that contains 1000's of students. All assignments will be autograded/returned

3. Trainer chooses individual student from list of 1000+ students. Here's where it breaks down

Here is another more complex workflow we have:

1. Trainer logs in and navigates to a page in an SPWeb that will assign a set list of assignments to a particular set of users (< 50). This page will be a custom page that leverages the SLK API

2. The trainer set's the properties for the assignments and enters the user names of the students and the page does the rest. All assignments will be auto-graded/returned

3. The trainer delivered notice w/
URL to students indicating their training is ready to take.

In both of our senarios, their will be no grading done by the instructor, and all assignments should be auto-graded and returned to to students immediately.

- Nick MSFT
Aug 15, 2006 at 9:12 PM
In reply to your request for scenarios to use SLK.

First I want to express that the current slk roadmap makes sharepoint even more usefull for educational purposes.
-----


In relation to constructivitic learning/ competence based instructional design I would like that there is more attention for:

IMS LD(a,b,c). Learning design specification can provide mechanism for collaborative learning (my workflow is dependent on progress of other learners in my group). Scorm does not implement in any form collaborative learning.

And peer feedback on ‘my’ (other than that from the instructorgrading…) / group progress is non existing in IMS specifications(to my knowledge).

----So it seems that SLK facilitates only a small portion of the today instructional designers needs:
IMS SS specification can provide an adaptive learning path :( within a learningpackage. Scorm 2004 adopts IMS SS.

----I would like to see that IMS LD specifications are incorporated in MLC(SLK). Without this, tracking constructivitic learning/ competence based performance (and peer feedback..)is not possible.


Telcert IMS LD application profile:
http://www.imsproject.org/telcert/D04ApplicationProfiles/Documentation/D04OUNLLDProfilev2.0.pdf
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Our SLK scenarios:
For suggestions about relevant worlkflows see IMS LD, paragraph 2.7 - 2.9 - 2.10 http://www.imsglobal.org/learningdesign/ldv1p0/imsld_bestv1p0.html



Aug 16, 2006 at 9:50 AM
In my previous posting I've tried to give arguments for a more instructional approach(different pedagogical models) for the SLK development.
Here a(EU funded?)roadmap for an implementation of the IMS Learning Design specifications: http://dspace.learningnetworks.org/retrieve/561/UNFOLD-SIX.pdf
--- What is the change that such initiatives are considered valuable for the (future) SLK roadmap/ implementation?
Aug 16, 2006 at 10:47 AM
What about tapping into this knowledge "..IMS Learning Design Engine that supports all three levels of IMS Learning Design (A, B and C)." http://coppercore.sourceforge.net to gear SLK for more challenging instructional design issues.