Who re-uses learning objects?

Norman Lamont is frustrated again. This time, in Re-use Revisted, he wonders whether the idea that learning objects can be reusable is just a myth - sounds good on paper, doesn't work that way in practice. He asks whether anyone else out there ever finds they can re-use their learning objects. Good question.

The idea behind the concept of learning objects is an elegant one. At the time when the idea was first mooted, ten years ago or so, object orientation had already proved to be a great success in the world of programming, allowing small objects of code to be easily re-used in multiple applications, considerably reducing wasted effort. Somebody obviously saw parallels in the world of world of learning content development, by that time almost exclusively a digital activity but still tackled in the way you might approach the writing of a book - as one, large, hard-wired entity.

The intention behind object orientation in content development was to make it easier for content to be reapplied in multiple settings, within different subject areas and for different student groups. Learning objects could be aggregated to form complete courses of study, whether intelligently, by learning content management systems, by teachers or by learners themselves. To make this possible, learning objects had to be self-contained and as context-free as possible.

Reality is somewhat different. I'm doubtful if anyone really got themselves organised enough to have their LCMS configure content automatically to meet the needs of individual students. If they did, then well done to them. And re-using content on a systematic basis across subjects and in different contexts also requires a great deal of organisation, most probably on a centralised basis. As we know, this is not typically how learning and development works.

And of course, it is difficult to create good content that is free of context, certainly not content that anyone would want to use. The cases, examples and stories are what brings the subject alive and makes it memorable. You can introduce context into an object-orientated approach without breaking the rules, but only by carefully concentrating the context-specific material in a limited number of objects that can then be swapped out for different audiences.

But, looking back over my own use of learning objects in the past ten years, I can see many more pluses than minuses:

• When you organise your material into really short chunks, you reduce the risk of overloading the learner.
• You also make it easier for the learner to organise their study and to find material at a later date.
• As a developer, you spend less time creating complex navigational aids, because this becomes the responsibility of the LCMS/LMS or of the teacher.
• Organised into objects, it's much easier for your material to be employed in a variety of contexts, not only as a formal piece of self-study, but also perhaps for reference or as a classroom aid.
• Creating content in small chunks encourages you to use that content in more imaginative ways, perhaps as catalysts for collaborative learning, and not merely as elements of some  monolithic and excruciatingly dull self-study programme.

And believe it or not, I've also been able to re-use many of the learning objects that I've created, sometimes I'll admit with a few tweaks, but often in their original form. And even if you aren't lucky enough to experience much re-use, thinking in an object-orientated way can't do you any harm and will certainly help you avoid some of the excesses of the past.