7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.

NL
‫ 


م ا‬

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF

LEARNING OBJECT DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT: BASED ON
RELATED THEORIES

Yazrina Yahya
National University of Malaysia

yaz@ftsm.ukm.my

Abstract
Education is currently moving from traditional environment towards revenue
generation such as e-Learning. This channel has allowed learners to gain
knowledge and participate extensively in the learning process regardless of
location and time constraints. The advent of communication technology has
also led to the emergence of learning object concept (LO) which introduces
sharing of digital learning materials over the Internet. Although much work
on LO has been done spanning from technical- to practice-based, little has
been conducted on the theoretical aspects. There are limited resources
concerning LO design and development theory available and minimal
attention is given to the theoretical principles related to its development.
Therefore, this paper intends to serve as a pillar for the foundation of LO
design and development by providing the importance of theoretical
knowledge in LO design, related theories that influence its development, and
the ways the theories support the implementation of the learning object
design mechanism.

Keywords: Learning Object, LO, Theories Related to LO, Learning Object

Design and Development, LO Theoretical Principles

Introduction
In recent years, World Wide Web has grown exponentially and this has led
to drastic changes in the education environment world wide. The growth of
World Wide Web provides the channel for the expansion of delivering
education to the audience; hence the traditional classroom methods or CD-
ROMs are currently being replaced with e-Learning and virtual learning

1
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
applications. Learning materials stored in these applications are available to
a wider set of audience as they are accessible on the Internet. The
accessibility of these materials and its potential for reusability has sparked
the emergence of learning object concept.
Learning object is a reusable unit of instructions made available to the
audience through the use of World Wide Web. In other words, it is a digital
entity which not only can be searched, discovered, accessed, adapted, used
and reused on the web, but also interoperable and scalable to enhance and
extend learning by including affiliations, chronicles and suggestions on the
relevant context when using the object (Yahya, 2006). Due to its just-in-time
and adaptive nature, it currently leads other candidates for the position of
choice in the next level of learning technology, instructional design,
development and delivery.
However, despite being a world wide educational agenda for several years
now and regardless of scores of researches conducted on learning object by
various researchers such as Akpınar & Şimşek, 2005; Cook & Boyle, 2005;
McGreal, 2004; Sosteric & Hesemeier, 2002; Wiley, 2002; Mortimer, 2002;
Thompson & Yonekura, 2005; Vicente, 2005; Duval & Hodgins, 2004;
Earle, 2002; Agostinho et al., 2004; Jonassen & Churchill, 2004; Santally &
Senteni, 2005, to name a few, the work done in providing the fundamental
principles of learning object is still inadequate. The research conducted by
several researchers are shown in Figure 1and it shows that a lot has been
written about learning object subject matters specifically concerning its
design and development practices. However, there are limited resources on
learning object design and development theory available. This reveals that
limited attention has been given thus far to the theoretical principles of
learning object development.
In addition, at present the vast bulk of literature on learning object is
practice-based and they are typically presented in descriptive format. The
majority of learning object articles and presentations available consist of
issues highlighted and research description. As such the literature appears to
be fragmented and only a few common terms are used consistently. History
shows that theoretical underpinnings play a central role in the development
of practice across all fields of activity. Related exploration and debates
would provide a wider platform and a common philosophy for any field of

2
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
activity and therefore the learning object development can be achieved.
However, there are limited examples of academic literature on learning
object design and development. Furthermore, currently most academic
writings are very much technology led, as emphasis is on technology in
education, instead of theory led (Ravenscroft, 2001) causing more confusion
about the basis of learning object design and development. Hence, a theory
for learning object design and development is needed to provide the
fundamental guidelines for learning object design and development process.

A Theory Denotation
A theory, according to Berger (2000), is essential as it plays an important
role in changing, learning and understanding in greater depth the subject
matter or the field of activity. It has been described as the root of the subject
matter that determines the subject growth and expansion. A theory is also
used to provide coherent variables and relationships of subject matter to both
practitioners and researchers (Garrison, 2000). Therefore, it is crucial to
have learning object design and development theory applicable to all
instances of learning object, decision making, philosophy of practice and
effective implementation through practice.
According to Nichols (2003), the first step taken to establish a theory is to
define a common set of terms used and the meaning that is widely accepted
by the mass public or popular to the audience. Besides, it is noted that a solid
definition should also be established, as it would aid in identifying
fundamental principles of learning object design and development. Upon
obtaining the set of terms, the next move is to identify the fundamental
principles required for learning object design and development. The
principles derived would then aid practitioners and researchers understand
more about learning object, and its design and development.

Common Set of Terms Used

The definition of learning object is given in the previous section and the set
of common terms used in the learning object environment is provided below:

3
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
1. Online This term describes education that occurs only through the
Learning: web or the Internet as the medium of interaction.
Therefore, it does not consist of any face-to-face contact.

2. Pedagogy: This term is used to describe the application of sound

education practice in the learning object environment.

4
:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫اد‬

C la s s ific a tio n o f R e s e a r c h Is s u e s

L O M o d e l D e te rm in a tio n In c o rp o ra tio n o f O th e r
D e fin itio n L e a r n in g O b je c t A v a ila b ility
& Id e n tific a tio n o f O b je c t M e a n in g fu l L e a r n in g R e s e a rc h
R e c o g n itio n E s ta b lis h m e n t
T yp es E vent Is s u e s

L O D oes N ot R e trie v a b ility &

S tru c tu re G ra n u la r ity In te ro p e ra b ility
D iffe re n t D e fin itio n S u pp ort R e u s a b ility U se of
A bound M e a n in g f u l In fo rm a tio n
( A k p in a r & S im s e k , L e a rn in g V is u a lis a tio n
2 0 0 5 ; C o o k & B o y le , (J o n a s s e n , 2 0 0 4 ; LOM LOR T e c h n iq u e in
2 0 0 5 ; M c G re a l, 2 0 0 4 ) W ile y , 2 0 0 3 ) In d e p e n d e A c c e s s in g
U n c le a r n t P o rta ls LO
A b sence o f L O A b s e n c e o f C o n te x t
D e s c r ip tio n o f L ack of R e q u ir e m e n t ( R ic h a r d s (D u v a l &
S tr u c tu re /M o d e l a n d M e ta d a ta
A b s e n c e o f W e ll L O G r a n u la r ity P e d a g o g ic a l fo r R e u s a b ility e t a l., H o d g in s ,
(M o r tim e r, 2 0 0 2 ; (A lle r t, e t a l., 2 0 0 1 ;
F o u n d e d D e fin itio n ( E a r le , 2 0 0 2 ; M o d e l in C u rr e n t E v a lu a tio n 2004) 2004)
T h om p so n & R e c k e r & W ile y , ( S ic ilia &
( S o s te ric & T ho m p so n & L O S ta n d a rd s
Y on ekura, 20 05 ; 2 0 0 1 ; R o b so n , G a r c ia , 2 0 0 3 )
H e s e m e ie r, 2 0 0 2 ; Y o nek ura , 2 0 0 5 ) (K ra a n & W ils o n , In te g ra tio n
V ic e n te , 2 0 0 5 ) 2 0 0 4 ; S a c k s e t a l.,
W ile y , 2 0 0 2 ) 2002) 2002) o f A gent
A r g u m e n ts in R e q u ir e m e n t
B ased
N e e d fo r D e te r m in in g fo r N e w
P ro b le m s w ith L O F a ils T o F it A b se nce o f M e ta d a ta C o n c e p t w ith
F o u n d a tio n a l A p p ro p r ia te
E x is tin g T e r m s & In to T h e C o n te x t P e d a g o g ic a l E le m e n ts to LO
M o d e l fo r L O G r a n u la r ity
D e fin itio n o f L e a rn in g I n s tr u c tio n a l R o le P r o m o te (L in , 2 0 0 4 )
(M c L e a n & (M u rp hy, 2 0 0 4 ;
(F rie s e n e t a l., 2 0 0 4 ) (K o p e r & E s , ( C o w le y & W e s s o n , R e u s a b ility
L ynch, 2003) S o u th &
2004) 2 0 0 0 ; F r ie s e n , (D u val & U se of
M o n so n , 2 0 0 4 )
20 04; R ecker & H o d g in s ,
D is a g re e m e n t o n th e S e m a n tic
A b sen ce of W a lk e r , 2 0 0 3 ) 200 4; Sam pson
E x is tin g D e fin itio n s L O P r e d ic a m e n t W e b in
G e n e ra l in D e te r m in in g &
(R e h a k & M a s o n , L im ite d N u m b e r o f D e v e lo p in g
A p p lic a b le L o th e T y p e s & K a r a m p ip e r is ,
2003) V o c a b u la r ie s in D e c e n tra lis e
A r c h ite c tu re F o rm 2004)
M e ta d a ta E le m e n ts d M e ta d a ta
(D u v a l & ( A g o s tin h o e t
a n d R e le v a n t I n a d e q u a te (P a lm e r ,
H o d g in s , 2 0 0 4 ) a l., 2 0 0 4 ; W ile y ,
M e ta d a ta E le m e n t to E le m e n ts T o 2004)
2002)
E s c a la te T h e O b j e c t S u p p o rt
R e u s a b ility R e u s a b ility
W id e V a r ie tie s
( D illo n , 2 0 0 0 ) (S a n ta lly &
of LO
G ra n u la ritie s S e n te n i, 2 0 0 5 )
R e q u ir e m e n t fo r A n
(D u v a l &
A g r e e d V o c a b u la r y
H o d g in s , 2 0 0 4 )
( P h illip s e t a l,. 2 0 0 4 )

5
:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫اد‬
Figure 1: Learning Object Research Area

6
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬

3. LOM: This term describes the metadata used to detail the

learning object attributes or particulars. LOM is always
associated with a standard known as learning object
metadata standard (LOM Standard) and the most widely
accepted LOM standard is by the IEEE LTSC.

4. LOR: This term describes the learning object database or

currently known as learning object repository. A learning
object repository stores the learning objects developed and
the LOR system provides functions that allow the
accessibility, retrievability and reusability of the learning
objects.

5. Context: This term refers to that extra, associated, related, assumed

and also any priori information or knowledge that is
required to meaningfully interpret the learning object
content from any given information sourced. It also
describes the how, when and where and if the learning
object might be applied.

6. Application This is the subset of LOM standard where only certain

Profiles: metadata elements (from the 77 elements identified by
IEEE) are adopted for a particular local application.

7. LCMS: Or Learning Content Management System includes the

authoring tools to produce content objects, the tools for
content tagging and the assembly functions for creating
learning objects from lower level content objects, content
repository for storing learning objects and delivery
interface which include functions for searching and
organizing learning objects.

8.e-Learning: The use of tools that are web-based, web-distributed or

web capable for education purposes.

7
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
Fundamental Principles for Learning Object Design
The determination of fundamental principles for learning object design and
development largely depends on theories related to learning object. Due to
the lack of established principles for learning object, related theories are
looked at to determine the learning object design and development
fundamentals. These principles will then assist the development of the
learning object concept framework.
According to Koppi & Lavitt (2003) learning object is classified as a new
concept in educational technology or instructional technology field. The
instructional technology is defined as the theory and practice of design,
development, utilization, management and evaluation of processes and
resources for learning. Its purpose is to affect and effect learning (Cohen &
Nyez, 2006; Seels & Richey, 1994). The instructional technology field deals
with five specific domains mainly the design, development, utilization,
management and evaluation. These domains are considered to be related to
learning object as it inherits the parent (i.e. instructional technology field)
domain. Details of the domains, their meanings, sub categories and related
theories and themes are presented in Table 1. The table summarizes the
relation between the domain of instructional technology and its related
theories and themes. The theories and themes indicated represent the
potential ideas used to develop learning object fundamental principles.

Table 1: Instructional technology domains and related theories and

themes
Instructional Domain Sub Categories Related Theories and
Technology Definition Themes
Domain

Design The process of • Instructional • Behaviorism,

specifying System Design Cognitivism,
condition for • Message Design Constructivism,
learning • Instructional Humanism
Strategies • Systematic Design
• Learner of Instruction

8
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
Characteristics • Psychomotor
• Behavioral
Perceptual
• Drill and Practice,
Recalling Facts
• Concept Map,
Elaboration Theory

Development Process of • Print or • Information

translating the Publishing Retrieval
design Technologies • Activity Theory
specification • Audio Visual • Knowledge
into physical Technologies Representation
form • Computer • Communication
Based Theory
Technologies • Social Construction
• Integrated of Technology
Technologies • Digital Divide
• Media: Hypertext,
Internet
• Computer Support
Collaborative
Network

Utilization The act of using • Media

process and Utilization
resources for • Diffusion of
learning Innovation
• Implementatio
n
• Institutionalizat
ion
• Policies and

9
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
Regulations
Management Involves • Knowledge • Knowledge
controlling Management Management
instructional • Tacit • Content Management
technology Knowledge • Organizational
through • Explicit Learning
planning, Knowledge • Learning
organizing, • Persistent Management
coordinating Modification System
and supervising • Learning Content
Management
System
Evaluation Process for • Problem
determining the Analysis
adequacy of • Criterion
instruction Referenced
Measurement
• Norm
Referenced
Measurement
• Formative and
Summative
Evaluation

Learning Object and Its Related Theory

There are a considerable number of theories and themes related to
instructional technology field as described in Table 1. However, it can be
inferred that relevant theories related to learning object design and
development are learning and technology related theories and themes
particularly the learning theories, instructional system design, information
retrieval and content management. This is due to the fact that learning object
is used in learning and teaching process and is accessible and retrievable via
the network or on the Internet.

10
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
Learning Object and Learning Theory
The basic purpose to establish learning object is to educate learners
anywhere and anytime, and to promote the concept of learning object
reusability. Therefore, it should contain meaningful educational content
together with specific learning outcomes, which are tailored to specific
learner’s needs. As such, learning object should embed sound pedagogies
and approaches in the content to ensure that meaningful learning will take
place during the learning process (Hadjerrouit, 2007). A number of
pedagogies and approaches to learning are widely mentioned and available
in the learning theory of behaviorism (Dembo, 1994; Good & Brophy, 1990;
Skinner, 1968), cognitivism (Bruner, 1960, 1966, 1971) and constructivism
(Glassersfeld, 1990; Resnick, 1983; Saunders, 1992). These three principal
learning theories are useful in providing the foundation for establishing
learning object design and development (LO D&D) principles.

Behaviorism: its implications to the LO D&D

Behaviorism is a theory based on observable changes in behavior
(Thorndike, 1913, 1914; Pavlov, 1928; Skinner, 1974). It focuses on a new
behavioral pattern being repeated until it becomes automatic, based on the
study of overt behavior that can be observed and measured (Good & Brophy,
1990). Therefore, behaviorism learning is defined as a sequence of stimuli
and responses to actions in observable cause and effect relationships. The
Pavlov’s experiment led to the establishment of the behaviorism principles
which influenced the traditional learning and teaching process. Currently
with the advent of computer technology, behaviorism influences are also
discovered in drills and practice applications, where questions provided act
as stimuli and rewards given to learners are used to strengthen their interest
in continuing the exercises given. This is in agreement with the Pavlov’s
experiment indicating the possibility of using behaviorism theory in
instructional technology application specifically in learning object design
and development. In addition to the establishment of goals and objectives
during design phase, the measurement taken to show learning occurrences
and the separation of instruction into different levels can be used in LO
D&D.

11
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
Cognitivism: its implications to the LO D&D
The Cognitive learning theory was introduced to address certain social
behavior that had occurred mainly in children that the behaviorist theory
could not explain (Piaget, 1962; Gagne, 1985; Vygotsky, 1978). The theory
sees learning as internal process that involves memory, thinking, reflection,
abstraction, motivation and metacognition (Ally, 2004); knowledge
acquisition is measured accordingly based on a learner’s knowledge. It also
emphasizes the understanding of a learner’s mental structure and views
learning as involving acquisition or reorganization of the cognitive structures
through which human process and store information (Good & Brophy,
1990). In addition, according to the theory, learning involves storage,
encoding and retrieval; it is an active process, which involves mental
structure organization, knowledge construction based on current and past
experiences, self-learning monitoring process and context influences
(Doolittle, 2001; Doolittle et al., 2004). These aspects are applicable to
learning object design and development process which suggests that relevant
knowledge or skills pertinent to learning object should be included or
attached to learning object. In addition, the activity of cognitive processing
suggests the inclusion of prior knowledge information and related
knowledge relationship in learning object. Consequently, cognitive theory
also suggests that learning activities must be focused on building
understanding through the use of examples, problem solving and reading.
This is put forward in learning object design in which learning object
content should include activities that facilitate the recall of related existing
cognitive structure, through the use of hypertext. Additionally, the theory
also suggests the use of network concept in storing information (Ally, 2004),
which brings about the use of information maps or topic maps in learning
object. In other words, learning object design should encompass a
mechanism for generating information maps in order to provide the
visualization of all related information relevant to learners.

Constructivism: its implications to the LO D&D

The Constructivist theory differs from behaviorism and cognitivism; it
emphasizes mostly on the activity to obtain experience and formulate a
learner’s own knowledge and understanding (Fosnot, 1996; Jonassen, 1991a,
1991b; Merrill, 1991; Steffe & Gale, 1995; Duffy & Cunningham, 1996). In

12
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
brief, constructivism views learners as being active during the learning
process and hence knowledge is obtained and created by the learners’ own
understanding, experience and the mental model established. It highlights
the importance of a learner’s role in the learning process and place emphasis
on meaning construction where it views learning as a process of searching
for significant, relevant, important and valid information through a learner’s
own understanding based on related parts and the learning context. In
addition, it also promotes the establishment of mental models through self-
paced learning. This is further incorporated in learning object design and
development through the use of learning object aggregation (Bannan-Ritland
et al., 2002). The aggregation concept used allows learning object to be at its
lowest level where content is context dependent. The learner is then able to
use and combine these objects to form a new one according to his or her
personal interpretation. This reveals that self-paced learning promoted by
constructivism is applicable and can be implemented in the learning object
concept. Beyond that, learning object repository system can also provide
templates or facilities to allow learners to create their own new objects and
make them available to others.
Besides using constructivism principles to aid learning object design, the
central strategies used for building CLE (Computer Learning Environment)
are also equally important to assist the learning object design and
development. Situated learning, one of the strategies used in CLE has put
forward the concept of enculturation (Ally, 2004; Jonassen, 1994; Jonassen
et al., 2002) where learners are able to interact with the environment (Brown
et al., 1989; Jonassen et al., 2002). Therefore, it emphasizes the factors of
collaboration, realistic representation, knowledge construction, negotiation
among learners, exploration, coaching and social interaction (Harman &
Koohang, 2005). These features are certainly useful to facilitate the learning
object design process.
Enculturation is achieved in learning object concept through the use of
historical information attached to learning object and the availability of
interaction mechanism with the previous users’ learning object (Yahya &
Yusoff, 2005a, 2005b). On the whole, it can be concluded that
constructivism fundamentals do have influence on the learning object design
and development. Consequently, it can be deduced that these fundamentals

13
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
will provide the indications to assist in designing and developing the
fundamental principles of learning object.

Learning Object and Instructional Design Theory

Instructional design theory is drawn from many theory bases such as the
general system, communication, learning and instructional theories (Smith &
Ragan, 1999). These theories have brought forth substantial impact on
instructional design development procedures, particularly learning and
instructional theory, which has the most substantial influence in developing
instructional design principles. It is a theory that shows how to go about
tackling a problem that links the theoretical solution to the technology of
practice (Wilson, 1997). This results in the development of instructional
design model, which is used and utilized during the instructional design
process.

Instructional design model: its implications to the LO D&D

Instructional design model provides the visualized representation of an
instructional design process illustrating phases carried out in creating and
designing an instruction. Various instructional design models such as the
Dick and Carey Model (Dick et al., 2001), the Kemp Model (Kemp et al.,
1998), and the Hannafin and Peck Model (Hannafin & Peck, 1988), to name
a few, have been proposed by practitioners and researchers. Most of these
models share three major activities, which are analysis, strategy
development and evaluation. The analysis activity requires investigation of
learning context, learners’ learning task and assessment tools related to the
instruction developed. Upon completion of the analysis, a set of goal
statements, principle learning environment, target learners’ learning
objectives and test items are identified and explained. These will assist in
designing the instruction, as a goal statement will indicate learners or users
of the instruction, and skills and tools needed during the learning process. In
addition, identification of target learners will provide information on their
characteristics, entry behavior, attitude and potential delivery system. The
learning objective, on the other hand, will provide information on the
expectation upon completion. Consequently, test items will bring forth the
possible assessment instrument to measure performance or quality of the
instruction. As such, the activity will be relevant and useful guidance in

14
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
learning object design and development process. The activity performed can
be utilized to acquire well-designed learning object. For instance, the set of
goal statements derived will reveal the importance of identifying
instructional goals. Therefore, in designing learning object, there is a need to
identify the goals or the main purpose of learning object content. This should
be made available to learners through some form of mechanism, in addition
to the principle environment and tools needed to operate learning object.
Making this information available will assist learners in identifying the
required objects and as a result the time consuming activity of accessing
unnecessary learning object can be avoided. Nevertheless, the identification
of target learners during the second analysis activity indicates the importance
of identifying target audience for learning object. The detailed information
of target audience will be used in designing the learning object content as it
helps to identify the appropriate speed of content presentation, its response
mode, the level of learner’s control and the media of instruction. Learning
objectives procured in the course of a learner’s analysis demonstrate the
significance of having a clear objective for learning object design. Clear cut
and definite objectives for learning object design can assist learning object
authors or creators in deciding the appropriate content, strategy and
evaluations used in learning object. Consequently, the availability of
objectives to learners would add merit to learning object as it provides
perspectives on the findings procured upon completion of using learning
object (Nash, 2005). Finally, the assessment models and tools identified
suggest that learning object should embed test items in the content, as it will
provide an indicator for a learner’s level of understanding of the content
presented. In conclusion, the analysis activity in instructional design models
can assist the learning object design and development through the highlights
given on the importance of each results obtained (i.e. the goal statement, the
target audience, learning objectives and test items).
The strategy activity results in the determination of instruction sequences,
content essential components, content presentation and classification of
target learner during the learning process. The instructional sequence
indicates the importance of sequence and the need for identifying instruction
cluster size, while the identification of content essential components will
generate established components of the instruction. One of the main

15
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
components established is the preinstructional component which includes
content, sequence prerequisite, objective, content presentation, activities and
assessment tools. In addition, the content presentation will integrate
component, incorporate time required to learn the content and integrate
content with media and delivery selection. These results are helpful in
guiding learning object design and development process. For example, the
instruction sequence described in instructional design model reveals the need
to particularly arrange learning object and its content. Past works have
proved the importance of learning object sequencing to provide relevant and
well-arranged content tailored to learners’ needs (IMS, 2005; Keogh et al.,
2003; Mohan & Brooks, 2003; Wiley, 2000, 2002). Furthermore, the
determination of instruction cluster size indicates the necessity to make
known the object size to the learner as it indirectly indicates the time needed
to learn the object. This certainly adds credit to learning object, as it allows a
learner to identify the expected time taken to use a specific learning object.
Finally, the appropriate media selection and delivery system denotes the
notability of identifying suitable media for the content designed. Upon
completion of the strategy phase, the final step involves the execution of
instruction development. This requires the use of previous results such as
instructional goals, learning objectives, test tools, target learner
characteristics and principle environment identified earlier in the analysis
activity. The end result of this particular phase is a complete draft set of
instructional materials. Accordingly, this final step gives rise to the
importance of having previous results mentioned for usage and reference
during the learning object design and development process as it will result in
effective, well arranged and well devised learning object specifically tailored
to the learner’s needs.

Learning Object and Information Retrieval

Learning object needs to be accessible and retrievable from some form of
storage or database. Therefore, it needs some kind of mechanism to allow a
learner to search and access required learning object. This leads to
information retrieval theory as it provides the basis to organize information
in one or more subject areas and bring forth the mechanism to deliver the
right information as requested by the users. Relatively an information

16
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
retrieval theory is used to deal with issues of design and development
information retrieval system. Therefore, to allow learning object
accessibility and retrievability, some form of information retrieval system
needs to be designed. According to Chowdhury (2004) an information
retrieval system consists of three major areas, which are information items
(in this case it is the learning objects), user’s queries and the matching
queries process with the database or the repository. As such, three major
system components are needed to support the area application namely
document, user and searching sub-system. Focus is given to searching sub-
system as it promotes the accessibility and retrievability of learning object.
The searching sub-system is established through the use of retrieval methods
identified in existing literature. The current methods available in information
retrieval systems are content-based and metadata retrieval methods.
However, the focus is given to metadata retrieval methods as they are used
to describe and retrieve digital objects according to selected attributes or
metadata elements. Metadata retrieval methods reveal that metadata
elements are used to describe details or particulars of the digital object. The
elements vary according to subject domain, users and their use behavior, and
specific description related to the domain. This leads to the significance of
identifying specific metadata elements needed to describe learning objects.
Therefore, the concept used in metadata retrieval methods is utilized to
derive required elements for accessing learning objects. For instance, in
identifying metadata elements, the first step taken is to identify metadata
potential users (that can be individuals), tools, applications or metadata
repositories (Tannenbaum, 2001). Upon obtaining potential users, it is
essential to identify metadata requirements, typically the required metadata
elements that comprehend element name, definition and source. It is also
important to identify the metadata requirements according to potential user
categories, as this can provide specific elements required by the users.
Following this the tool or the repository interfaces are determined to allow
metadata maintenance throughout the execution of metadata process. The
process of identifying metadata elements is constructive to learning object
design and development, as metadata can be used to describe learning object
to allow its accessibility and retrievability. The process identified will assist
in determining the appropriate and required metadata for learning object.

17
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
Learning Object and Knowledge Representation
Knowledge representation is used for processing concepts in an information
system and it is widely utilized in the artificial intelligence and problem
solving research area. The main purpose of using knowledge representation
is to simplify the problem representation and solution, in which the semantic
network technique is used to represent the knowledge. The use of semantic
in knowledge representation is further extended to the semantic web and
topic maps concept.

Semantic web: implications to the LO D&D

According to Berners Lee et al. (2001) semantic web is a concept that
extends the current web usage whereby information is given well defined
meanings, hence better enabling computer and people to work as
corporation. Therefore, the essence of semantic web is the use of ontology-
based semantics that represent relations between concepts in taxonomies or
to describe some areas of knowledge (Shum et al., 2000). The ultimate use
of semantic web leads to several advantages to any web applications;
therefore, search mechanism is enhanced with respect to exactness and
amount due to standardized web annotation and service description. On the
other hand, the use of ontology-based semantics in searching mechanism
will filter unwanted results and provide more meaningful results to the
audience.
In addition, the use of ontology is applicable to e-Learning system as it
provides all means for ontology development, ontology based annotation of
learning materials, their composition in learning courses and proactive
delivery of learning materials through e-Learning portals (Araújo & Ferreira,
2004; Snae & Brueckner, 2007; Lytras & Sicilia, 2005; Stojanovic et al.,
2001; Muñoz & de Oliveira, 2004). The advantages of using semantic web
and its currently available technology in the e-Learning domain have
evidently confirmed its applicability to the learning object design and
development. The high probability of obtaining better search results through
the use of semantic web indicates the importance of incorporating the
semantic web and its technology in the learning object design and
development; hence the ontology’s technology can be adopted.

18
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
Furthermore, the ontology technology can also be adopted by the learning
object model allowing the objects organization through the use of
semantically annotated learning objects. The use of ontology technology in
learning object design and development will further enhance the learning
object accessibility and retrievability as semantic querying is made possible
and conceptual navigation enable.

Topic maps: implications to the LO D&D

Topic maps are an ISO standard (Biezunski, 1999; Biezunski et al., 1999)
that is viewed as an interchangeable hypertext navigation meta-layer above
diverse electronic information sources and is one of the technologies to
support the semantic web application. It supports topical findings of various
kinds of resources such as documents, graphics, database models and others,
whereby the meta-layer is used to find the related resources, through the
occurrence links that connect the resources and the topics.
Topic maps is used to represent information using topics, associations and
occurrences (Garshol, 2004; Pepper, 2002; Rath, 2000) and as such, it is
similar to semantic network and mind maps respectably. Inevitably topic
maps provide a language to represent conceptual knowledge with which
language is able to distinguish the learning materials semantically. The use
of topic maps in the e-Learning environment will enhance the value of
learning materials stored in the e-Learning repository. It allows learners to
acquire new topical knowledge, as they are able to access learning materials
and their associated topics or domains. Further use of topic maps in e-
Learning system reveals a learner to procure deeper understanding of the
learning domain and its conceptual associations (Dichev et al., 2004; de
Marchi et al., 2005; Fernandez et al., 2005).
As learning object is a component of LCMS (which is a subset of e-Learning
system), likewise topic map fundamentals are also applicable to learning
object design and development. It is equally important to incorporate topic
maps into learning object design as it promotes better browsing awareness as
a learner has greater understanding of the learning object conceptual
structure. Therefore, the procedures used in developing topic maps for
resources should be adaptable to the learning object design and development
principles. Therefore, in identifying the topics, the content of the object

19
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
should be analyzed to characterize the object according to its content and
context. The content of the topics includes the content type (i.e. video, audio,
image and text) and the context, on the other hand, indicates the concept
identified and the relationship existed (i.e. through the use of hypertext).
Therefore, during the design of learning object, the topics and its relation to
other objects should be made available to assist the use of topic maps in
learning object repository system.
In addition, the topic maps technology is also applicable to learning object
metadata standard, in which the occurrences can be described by using the
metadata element particularly the relation element using a specific
vocabulary. The occurrences component in topic maps can also be
incorporated in the learning object metadata standard through the use of
rhetorical relation (El Saddik et al., 2000, 2001a, 2001b; Fischer, 2001;
Mann & Thompson, 1987, 1988; Seeberg et al., 2000) as rhetorical relations
may provide clues of text coherence. This is achievable through the use of
relation element in learning object metadata standard.

Conclusion
This paper has reviewed the theoretical knowledge and themes relevant to
learning object design and development. The review reveals that there are a
considerable number of theories and themes related to the instructional
technology, the parent field for learning object. The review also indicates
that only specific theories and themes will have an impact and influence on
the learning object design and development, namely the learning, the
instructional design, the information retrieval theories, and knowledge
representation and content management themes. In respect of the theories,
further analysis conducted reveals that each theory and theme has
fundamental design principles that are applicable to the learning object
design and development. These fundamental design principles are then
adopted and enhanced so that they can be used as the learning object design
and development principles. The theories and themes of the principles used
to derive the learning object fundamentals are presented in Table 2. It also
illustrates the determining of possible learning object components based on
the fundamentals derived. The results confirm that solid fundamental

20
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
principles apply to all instances of learning object, and can assist in effective
implementation of learning object as reported by Nichols (2003).
The fundamental principles of learning object design and development
derived are then used to assist in learning object design as it underlines the
necessary actions to be taken to provide a well-designed and useful learning
object. This coordination is presented in Table 3. In brief, theoretical
knowledge and theme discussed in this paper have provided the
underpinning theories in designing and developing learning object which
will be useful during design process.

21
 :
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫اد‬
Table 2: Influences of Related Theories and Themes in Acquiring Learning Object Fundamental Principles
Possible
Related Theory and Learning Object Design and
Mechanism to
Theories and Theme Theory Fundamentals Development (LODD)
Materialize The
Themes Element Fundamental Principle
Principle
Learning Positive Behaviorism focuses on observable LODD equips a mechanism Learning object
Theory: Reinforcement changes in behavior that is that allows constructive content design
Behaviorism strengthened or weakened by the feedback and prompt replies
immediate presence of reward and to stimulate a learner’s
punishment action

Measurable Behaviorism emphasizes on the LODD enables an evaluation Learning object

actions and use of examination and assessment mechanism embedded in the metadata
reaction (i.e. as a mechanism for measuring learning object content to
behavior) observable actions of learning. determine a learner’s level of
understanding

22
 :
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫اد‬
Behaviorism underlines the LODD includes the goals, Learning object
importance of designing goals and objectives and the learning content design
objectives when designing object purpose into the
instruction. learning object and allows
these to be viewed by
learners for quantification
purposes upon completion.

Learning The process of Cognitivism provides means of LODD permits the Learning object
Theory: receiving understanding a learner’s mental incorporation of some form content design
Cognitivism sensation structure through the memories of strategy during the design
used during learning and the process to ensure appropriate
information transferral process. amount of information is
transferred from the senses
to the sensory store.

Acquisition of Cognitivism views learning as LODD equips learning Learning object

information involving the acquisition of object with well-design and content design
based on information through the amount of effective content to enhance
attention attention given. a learner’s concentration
given. level

23
:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫اد‬
Limited Cognitivism key features includes LODD enables various sizes Learning object
capacity of cognitive processing that describes of learning object to content design
working the movement of information from maximise the use of working
memory working memory to long term memory during the learning
memory process

Knowledge Cognitivism emphasizes on the LODD enables the Learning object

construction knowledge construction through incorporation of relevant metadata
based on the self-discovery process and prerequisite knowledge and
current and discovery oriented instruction skills pertinent to learning
past object as to allow a learner
experience to comprehend the content
and assist in the self-guided
learning

24
:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫اد‬
LODD enables some form Learning object
of relation between the metadata
learning object designed
with related knowledge or
information to present
contextual relationship
between the objects thus
creating learning awareness
among learners

Cognitivism promotes the use of LODD enables sufficient Learning object

examples, applied problems to activities to be included in content design
establish knowledge the learning object content
understanding to allow a learner to process
and digest the information

25
 :
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫اد‬
given (activities such as
question and answer,
simulation, problem solving
need to be included to allow
a learner to understand the
learning object content)

Learning Contextualized Constructivism promotes a LODD enables a learner’s Learning object

theory: learning learner’s active role in the active interaction with content design
Constructivism learning process to allow learning object content;
knowledge construction and supports collaboration
meaning development based on construction among learners Learning object
the learning experience or through and various types of types
self-guided learning activities to support
different learning modalities

Constructivism emphasizes the LODD allows the Learning object

existence of context in learning establishment of metadata
materials and enable a learner to authorization to refine or
add or include related context to adapt the learning object
the content content tailored to the
learner’s needs

26
:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫اد‬
A learner’s Constructivism emphasizes on a LODD allows content Learning object
experience learner’s experiences to association with a learner’s metadata
plays a role in understand more complex level of expertise and
learning information, as self-guided prerequisite knowledge
process learning requires a learner to have needed
some form of preliminary
information about the subject or
matters learned

Learning as an Constructivism draws attention to LODD entitles a learner to Learning object

extensive the possibility of lengthy learning access and use the learning metadata
process) process due to the self-guided object repeatedly until the
learning emphasized learning concept is accepted
by the learner

LODD presents various Learning object

choices of learning paths to relation
allow more options given to
learners

27
 :
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫اد‬
Instructional Learning goal Instructional design emphasizes LODD enables the Learning object
Design Theory statement, on the importance of revealing the identification of learning metadata
target learner, learning goal statement, the object goals and purposes,
the principle principle environment, target the tools to operate the
environment learner and the learning objective learning object, the target
and specific to learners users of the learning object
objective and the learning objective
must be to be viewed by learners
established

Assessment Instructional design underlines the LODD enables assessment Learning object
tools importance of learning assessment or test items incorporated in content design
incorporated tools to evaluate a learner’s the learning object content
in the performance as to ensure learning
instruction has occurred

Instruction Instructional design insists on the LODD makes available the Learning object
sequence and significance of instruction content prerequisite knowledge to metadata
its sequence and the prerequisite learners and also makes
prerequisite sequence needed to determine the known the related
requirement instructional sequences that would secondary topic
needed lead to meaningful learning

28
 :
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫اد‬

Media Instructional design insists on the LODD makes available the Learning object
selection appropriate media selection and information of media needed, metadata
and delivery delivery system to maximise a technical equipment and
system is learner’s learning capacity others to execute the learning
made object
known

Information Search Information retrieval highlights the LODD allows metadata Learning object
Retrieval mechanism needs to have a search mechanism association with learning metadata
used to to retrieve required information object to provide learning
obtain the through the content based or object description and
information metadata based method enhance the source process
required.

Metadata Information retrieval underlines the LODD incorporates metadata Learning object
elements usage of metadata based retrieval with the learning object and metadata
used to for accessing digital documents on specific metadata elements
detail the network through specific according to learning object
information metadata elements that details the domain are identified in

29
 :
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫اد‬
document particulars which learning object
metadata (LOM) standard is
used to describe learning
object

Knowledge Semantic Knowledge representation LODD includes semantic Learning object

Representation web highlights the processing concept web concept and its relation
concept in an information system where technology to obtain better
problem representation is search results Learning object
simplified through the use of metadata
semantic web
Ontology Knowledge representation LODD enables the use of Learning object
technique highlights the use of ontology ontology technology to relation
technology in an information provide additional
system to further improve the information related to the Learning object
search quality of search results and learning object as to enhance metadata
to describe other areas of the reusability and
knowledge related to the retrievability of the learning Learning object
information stored in the object history
information system

30
:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫اد‬
Topic maps Knowledge representation LODD allows the association Learning object
promotes the use of topic maps to of topic maps with learning relation
allow discoverability of new object to create browsing
topical knowledge and to provide awareness Learning object
greater understanding of the history
learning domain
Rhetorical Knowledge representation LODD enables instruction Learning object
relation emphasizes on the instruction coherence through the use of relation
coherence relation identified between
related objects

31
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
Table 3: Influences of LODD fundamental principles in learning object
design process

Learning Object Design and Influences on the Learning Object

Development Fundamental Design and Development Process
Principles (Necessary Actions To Be Taken)

LODD equips a mechanism that Learning object should provide a

allows constructive feedback and
prompt replies to stimulate a
learner’s action
LODD enables an evaluation
mechanism embedded in the learning
object content to determine a
learner’s level of understanding
mechanism to offer prompt and
constructive feedback to learners
Learning object should incorporate
an evaluation mechanism such as test
items or quiz into the content

LODD includes the goals, objectives Learning object goals, objective and
and the learning object purpose into its purpose must be clearly defined
the learning object and allows these and made available to learners
to be viewed by learners for
quantification purposes upon
completion.

LODD permits the incorporation of Learning object content must be well

some form of strategies during the sequenced, arranged and designed
design process to ensure appropriate whereby it should incorporate
amount of information is transferred images, audio and video if possible
from the senses to the sensory store. to attract a learner’s attention

LODD equips learning object with Learning object appearance needs to

well-design and effective content to be designed in such a way that
enhance learners concentration level colours, text arrangement, figures,
graphics, images and others are well
arranged
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫



م ا‬
LODD enables various size of
learning object as to maximize the
use of working memory during the
learning proces
LODD enables the incorporation of
relevant prerequisite knowledge and
skills pertinent to learning object so
as to allow a learner to comprehend
the content and assist in the self-
guided learning
LODD enables some form of relation
between the learning object designed
with related knowledge or
information to present contextual
relationship between the objects thus
creating learning awareness among
learners
LODD enables sufficient activities to
be included in the learning object
content to allow a learner to process
and digest the information given
(activities such as question and
answer, simulation, problem solving
need to be included to allow a learner
to understand the learning object
content)
LODD enables a learner’s active
interaction with learning object
content, supports collaboration
construction among learners and has
various types of activities to support
different learning modalities
Learning object needs to be in
various forms in which it could be an
image or the combination of an
image with texts
Learning object should include the
required knowledge and skills
needed before using the learning
object, as such, this is made possible
through the use of metadata
Learning object should incorporate
relations between the object with
other related objects in the same
parent field or semantically related
Learning object should incorporate
activities such as test items, quiz,
simple question and answer,
exercises, simulation or other types
of activities into the content
Learning object should allow a
learner to modify the content and
provide a mechanism for the learner
to communicate with other learners
who are using the same learning
object
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫



م ا‬
LODD allows content association Learning object should make the
with a learner’s level of expertise and educational level and the prerequisite
prerequisite knowledge needed requirements required before using
the object available to learners

LODD entitles a learner to access and Learning object should be kept in a

use the learning object repeatedly until repository and be accessible to
the learning concept is understood by learners at all times through the
the learner network

LODD incorporates metadata with the
learning object and specific metadata
elements according to learning object
domain identified in which learning
object metadata (LOM) standard is
used to describe learning object
Learning object should use the
learning object metadata standard
by IEEE LTSC as its point of
reference

LODD includes semantic web concept Learning object must incorporate

and its technology to obtain better semantic vocabularies into the
search results relation element

LODD enables the use of ontology
technology to provide additional
information related to the learning
object as to enhance the reusability
and retrievability of the learning object
Learning object must have another
type of metadata element to
describe other types of relation
between the object

LODD allows the association of topic Learning object must have extended
maps with learning object to create element to incorporate the topic
browsing awareness maps concept

LODD enables instruction coherence Learning object design must extend

 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
through the use of relation identified the relation vocabularies to
between related objects incorporate the use of new type of
relation

References
Agostinho, S., Bennet, S., Lockyer, L., & Harper, B. (2004). Developing a Learning
Object Metadata Application Profile Based on LOM suitable for the Australian
Higher Education Context. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 20(4):
191-208.
Akpınar, Y., & Şimşek, H. (2005). Development of a Learning Content Management
System Based on Interactive Learning Object Approach. Proceedings of 6th
International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and
Training ITHET 2005 July 7-9, 2005 Santa Domingo, Dominican Republic, T3A-5-
T3A-10.
Allert, H., Dhraief, H., & Nejdl, W. (2001). Intelligent Online-Knowledge-Resources for
Intentional Learning. In P. Kommers. & G. Richards, (Eds.), Proceedings of World
Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2001
(pp. 29-30). Chesapeake,VA: AACE.
Ally, M. (2004). Designing Effective Learning Objects. In R. McGreal (Ed.), Online
Education Using Learning Objects (Open and Flexible Learning, (pp. 87-97).
London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Araújo, M., & Ferreira, M. A. G. V. (2004). Semantic Web and Ontological Modelling of
Learning Materials and Objects for Evolutionary e-Learning Systems. Workshop on
Ontologies and Their Applications. Sao Luis, Maranhao, Brazil, 28 September 2004.
Retrieved May 16, 2006, from. http://www.ws.onto.ufal.br/
Bannan-Ritland, B., Dabbagh, N., & Murphy, K. (2002). Learning Object Systems as
Constructivist Learning Environments: Related Assumptions, Theories and
Applications. In D.A. Wiley (Ed.), The instructional use of learning objects (pp. 61-
98). Bloomington, IN: Agency for instructional technology and association for
educational communications and technology.
Berger, J. (2000). The Importance of Theory. Retrieved December 12, 2003, from
http://www.suite101/article.cfm/8806/54817
Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., & Lassila, O. (2001). The Semantic Web. Scientific
American.com. Retrieved May 16, 2006, from
http://www.scientificamerican.com/print_version.cfm?articleID=00048144-10D2-
1C70-84A9809EC588EF21
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
Biezunski, M. (1999). Topic Maps at a Glance. Proceedings of XML Europe 1999, 16-30
April, Palicio de Exposiciones Congresos, Granada Spain, 22-30.
Biezunski, M., Bryan, M., & NewComb, S. R. (Eds.). (1999). ISO/IEC 13250:2000 Topic
Maps: Information Technology – Document Description and Markup Language.
International Organization for Standardization.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989, January-February). Situated cognition and
the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 32-42.
Bruner, J. (1960). The Process of Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bruner, J. (1966). Toward A Theory of Instruction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Bruner, J.S. (1971). The Relevance Of Education. Oxford, UK: W. W. Norton.
Chowdhury, G. G. (2004). Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval. (2nd ed.). New
York: Neal-Schuman Publishers.
Cohen, E. B., & Nyez, M. 2006. Learning Objects and E-Learning: an Informing Science
Perspective. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 2, 23-34.
Available at http://www.ijklo.org/Volume1/v1p217-228Nash.pdf
Cook, J., & Boyle, T. (2005). e-Learning and Repositories: The Power To Transform.
Proceeding Eduserv Foundation Symposium. Many for Many: Collaborative e-
Resource Development and Use, 107-134. London: EduServ.
Cowley, L., & Wesson, J. (2000). Design Patterns for Web-based Instruction.
Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and
Telecommunications (ED-MEDIA). Montreal, June 24th - July 1st.2000, 2000(1), 250-
255.
de Marchi, A. C. B., de Miranda, R. M,. & Costa, A. C. R. (2005). A Learning Objects
Repository Management System for Museum Education. Proceedings of Museums
and the Web 2005,April 13-16, 2005, Canada. Retrieved May 17, 2006, from
http://www.archimuse.com/mw2005/papers/rocha/rocha.html
Dembo, M.H. (1994). Applying Educational Psychology. (5th ed.). London: Pearson
Education.
Dichev C., Dicheva D., & Aroyo L. (2004). Using Topic Maps for Web-based Education,
International Journal of Advanced Technology for Learning, 1(1), 1-7.
Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J.O. (2001). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (5th
ed.). New York: Addison Wesley Longman.
Dillon, M. (2000). Metadata for Web Resources: How Metadata Works on the Web.
Proceedings of Bicentennial Conference on Bibliographic Control for the New
Millennium. Confronting the Challenges of Networked Resources and the Web
November 15-17, 2000. Washington, DC, 1-16.
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
Doolittle, P. E., McNeill, A., Terry, K. P., & Scheer, S. B. (2004). Multimedia, Cognitive
Load and Pedagogy. In S. Mishra & R. C. Sharma (Eds.), Interactive Multimedia in
Education and Training (pp. 184-212). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
Doolittle, P.E. (2001). The pedagogy of cognitive psychology. National Lilly Conference
on College Teaching, West, Lake Arrowhead, CA. Keynote Speaker, March 2001.
Duffy, T. M., & Cunningham, D. J. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the design
and delivery of instruction. In D. H. Jonassen, (Ed.). Educational Communications
and Technology (pp. 170-199). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.
Duval, E., & Hodgins, W. (2004). Learning Objects Revisited. In R. McGreal (Ed.),
Online Education Using Learning Objects (Open and Flexible Learning) (pp. 71-82).
London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Earle, A. (2002). Designing for pedagogical flexibility: Experiences from the CANDLE
project. Journal of Interactive Media In Education. 4: 1-39.
El Saddik, A., Fischer, S., & Steinmetz, R. (2001a, July-September). Reusable
Multimedia Content in Web-based Learning Systems. IEEE Multimedia, 30-38.
El Saddik, A., Fischer, S., & Steinmetz, R. (2001b). Reusability and Adaptability of
Interactive Resources in Web-based Educational Systems. ACM Journal of
Educational Resources in Computing (JERIC), 1(1), 18-38.
El Saddik, A., Ghavam, A., Fischer, S., & Steinmetz, R. (2000). Metadata for Smart
Multimedia Learning Objects. Proceedings of the fourth Australasian Computing
Education Conference. ACM-CSE, Melbourne, Australia, December 2000, 87-94.
Fernandez, A. P., Moura, A. M. de C., & Porto, F. (2005). Using Topic Maps to
Represent Learning Objects in a Learning Content Management System. Proceeding
of Semantic Web for Web-based Learning: Implications in the area of information
systems in education. SW-WL ’05 13-17 June 2005, Porto, Portugal, 701-718.
Fischer, S. (2001). Course and Exercise Sequencing Using Metadata in Adaptive
Hypermedia Learning Systems. ACM Journal of Educational Resources in
Computing (JERIC), 1(1), 1-21.
Fosnot, C. (1996). Constructivism: A Psychological theory of learning. In C. Fosnot
(Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives and practice, 8-33. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Friesen, N. (2004). Some Objections to Learning Objects. In R. McGreal (Ed.), Online
Education Using Learning Objects (Open and Flexible Learning) (pp. 59-70).
London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Friesen, N., Hesemeier, S., & Roberts, A. (2004). CanCore: Guidelines for Learning
Object Metadata. In R. McGreal (Ed.), Online Education Using Learning Objects
(Open and Flexible Learning) (pp. 225-235). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
Gagné, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning and theory of instruction. (4th ed.). New
York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Garrison, R. (2000). Theoretical challenges for distance education in the 21st Century: A
shift from structural to transactional issues. The International Review of Research in
Open and Distance Learning, 1(1), 1-17.
Garshol, L. M. (2004). Metadata? Thesauri? Taxonomies? Topic Maps!. Journal of
Information Science,s 30(4), 378-391.
Glassersfeld, V.E. (1990). Environment and communication. In L. Steffe. & T. Wood
(Eds.), Transforming early childhood mathematics education: An international
perspective. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
Good, T.L and Brophy, J.E. (1990). Educational Psychology: A Realistic Approach. (4th
ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Hadjerrouit, S. (2007). Applying a System Development Approach to Translate
Educational Requirements into E-Learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge
and Learning Objects, 3, 107-134. Available at
http://www.ijklo.org/Volume3/IJKLOv3p107-134Hadj296.pdf
Hannafin, M. J., & Peck, K. L. (1988). The design, development and evaluation of
instructional software. New York: Macmillan.
Harman, K., & Koohang, A. (2005). Discussion Board: A Learning Object.
Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learing Objects, 1, 67-77. Available at
http://www.ijklo.org/Volume1/v1p067-077Harman.pdf
IMS. (2005). IMS Global Learning Consortium, Inc. Retrieved December 14, 2005, from
http://www.imsglobal.org
Jonassen, D. H., & Churchill, D. (2004). Is There a Learning Orientation in Learning
Objects?. International Journal of E-Learning, 3(2), 32-41.
Jonassen, D. H. (1991a). Objectivism versus constructivism: do we need a new
philosophical paradigm?. Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(3),
5-14.
Jonassen, D. H. (1991b). Evaluating Constructivist Learning. Educational Technology,
36(9), 28-33.
Jonassen, D. H. (1994). Towards a constructivist design model. Educational Technology,
34(4): 34-37.
Jonassen, D., Howland, J., Moore, J., & Marra, R. (2002). Learning to Solve Problems
with Technology: A Constructivist Perspective. (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
Kemp, J. E., Morrison, G. R., & Ross, S. M. (1998). Designing effective instruction. 2nd
edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Keogh, S., Johnson, K., & Henly, P. (2003). Realising reusability in learning/knowledge
objects. Proceedings of EdTech 2003, the Fourth Annual Irish Educational
Technology Users’ Conference, 22-23 May 2003, Waterford, Ireland. Retrieved May
15, 2006, from www.ilta.net/EdTech2003/papers/keogh_henley_johnson.doc
Koper, R. (2003). Combining Reusable Learning Resources and Services With
Pedagogical Purposeful Units Of Learning. In A. LittleJohn (Ed.), Reusing Online
Resources: A Sustainable Approach To E-Learning (pp. 77-98). London: Kogan.
Koppi, T., & Lavitt, N. (2003), Institutional Use of Learning Objects Three Years on:
Lessons Learned and Future Directions. In E. Duval, W. Hodgins, D. Rehak & R.
Robson (Eds.), ED-MEDIA 2003 World Conference Educational Multimedia,
Hypermedia & Telecommunications. Learning Objects 2003 symposium: Lessons
Learned, Questions Asked. June 24, 2003; Honolulu, Hawaii, USA (pp. 39-43). VA:
AACE.
Kraan, W., & Wilson, S. (2002). Dan Rehak: “SCORM is not for everyone”. The Centre
for Educational Technology Interoperability Standards. Retrieved May 13, 2006,
from http://www.cetis.ac.uk/content/20021002000737
Lin, F.O. (2004). Knowledge Modelling for Developing Course Design Agents. In R.
McGreal (Ed.), Online Education Using Learning Objects (Open and Flexible
Learning) (pp. 314-330). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Mann, W. C., & Thompson, S. A. (1987). Rhetorical structure theory: A theory of text
organization.Technical Report No. ISI/RS-87-190 NTIS Identifying Number ADA
183038. University of Southern California, Information Science Institute,.
Mann, W.C., & Thompson, S.A. (1988). Rhetorical Structure Theory: Toward a
Functional Theory of Text Organization. TEXT, 8(3), 243-281.
McGreal, R. (2004). Learning Objects: A Practical Definition. International Journal Of
Instructional Technology And Distance Learning, 1(9), 23-36.
McLean, N., & Lynch, C. (2003). Interoperability between Information and Learning
Environments – Bridging the Gaps. A Joint White Paper on behalf of the IMS Global
Learning Consortium and the Coalition for Networked Information. IMS Global
Learning Consortium, Florida, USA.
Merrill, M. D. (1991). Constructivism and instructional design. Educational Technology,
May, 45-53.
Mohan, P., & Brooks, C. (2003). Engineering a Future for Web-based Learning Objects.
Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Web Engineering: International Conference,
ICWE 2003 Oviedo, Spain, July 14-18, 2003 Proceedings, 120-123.
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
Mortimer, L. (2002). Learning Objects of Desire: Promise and Practicality. Learning
Circuits. Retrieved September 11, 2004, from
http://www.learningcircuits.org/2002/apr2002/mortimer.html
Muñoz, L.S., & de Oliveira, J. P. M. (2004). Applying Semantic Web Technologies to
Improve Personalization and Achieve Interoperability between Educational Adaptive
Hypermedia Systems. Proceeding of International Workshop on Applications of
Semantic Web Technologies for Adaptive Educational Hypermedia. – SW-EL’04, in
conjunction with the International Conference on Adaptive Hypermedia and Adaptive
Web-Based Systems, August 23-26, 2004, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 348-353.
Murphy, E. (2004). Moving from theory to practice in the design of web-based learning
using a learning object approach. E-Journal of Instructional Science and Technology,
7(1). Retrieved May 13, 2006, from http://www.usq.edu.au/electpub/e-
jist/docs/Vol7_No1/content.htm
Nash, S. S. (2005). Learning Objects, Learning Object Repositories and Learning Theory:
Preliminary Best Practices for Online Courses. Interdiscplinary Journal of
Knowledge and Learning Objects 1, 229-254. Available at
http://www.ijklo.org/Volume1/v1p217-228Nash.pdf
Nichols, M. (2003). A theory for eLearning. Educational Technology & Society, 6(2), 1-
10.
Palmer, S. (2004). The Semantic Web and Metadata Decentralization. In R. McGreal
(Ed.), Online Education Using Learning Objects (Open and Flexible Learning) (pp.
279-287). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Pavlov, I. P. (1928). Lectures on conditioned reflexes. London: Oxford University Press.
Pepper, S. (2002). The TAO Of Topic Maps Finding The Way in the Age of Infoglut.
Proceedings of XML Europe 2000 Le Palais des Congrés de Paris, Paris France
GCA, 167-180.
Phillips, R. A., Rai, S., Sudweeks, F., Gururajan, R., Jones, M., Shiers, D., & O'Neil, R.
(2005). Use and Usability of Learning Objects within the COLIS Demonstrator
Framework. In J. Dalziel, R. Philip & J. Clare (Eds.), The COLIS Project. Sydney:
The Macquarie University E-Learning Centre of Excellence.
Piaget, J. (1962). Play, dreams, and imitation in childhood. New York: W W Norton &
Co Inc.
Rath, H. H. (2000). Making Topic Maps More Colourful. Proceedings of XML Europe
2000 Conference, GCA, Alexandria, VA, 1-19.
Ravenscroft, A. (2001). Designing E-Learning Interactions in the 21st Century: revisiting
and rethinking the role of theory. European Journal of Education, 36(2), 133-156.
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
Recker, M., & Walker, A. (2003). Supporting 'word-of-mouth' social networks via
collaborative information filtering. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 14(1),
79-98.
Recker, M., & Wiley, D. (2001). A non-authoritative educational metadata ontology for
filtering and recommending learning objects. Interactive Learning Environments:
Special issue on metadata, 1-17. The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Rehak, D., & Mason, R. (2003). Keeping the Learning in Learning Objects. In A. Little
John (Ed.), Reusing Online Resources: A Sustainable Approach To E-Learning, 30-
55. London: Kogan.
Resnick, L. (1983). Toward a cognitive theory of instruction. In S. G. Paris, G. M. Olson,
& H. W. Stevenson (Eds.), Learning and motivation in the classroom. Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Richards, G., Hatala, M., & McGreal, R. (2004). POOL, POND and SPLASH: Portals for
online objects for learning. In R. McGreal (Ed.), Online Education Using Learning
Objects (Open and Flexible Learning) (pp. 236-243). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Robson, R. (2004). Learning Objects, Context and Standards. In R. McGreal (Ed.),
Online Education Using Learning Objects (Open and Flexible Learning) (pp. 159-
167). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Sacks, L., Earle, A., Prnjat, O., Jarrett, W., & Mendes, M. (2002). Supporting Variable
Pedagogical Models in Network Based Learning Environments. Engineering
Education: Professional Engineering Scenarios IEEE, 1, 22/1-22/6. London, UK:
IEEE.
Sampson, D. G., & Karampiperis, P. (2004). Reusable learning objects: Designing
metadata management systems supporting interoperable learning object repositories.
In R. McGreal (Ed.), Online Education Using Learning Objects (Open and Flexible
Learning) (pp.. 207-222). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Santally, M. I., & Senteni, A. (2005). A Learning Object Approach to Personalized Web-
based Instruction. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 1-16.
Saunders, W.L. (1992). The constructivist perspective: Implications and teaching
strategies for science. School Science Mathematics, 92(3), 136-141.
Seeberg, C., Steinacker, A., Reichenberger, K., El Saddik, A., Fischer, S., & Steinmetz,
R. (2000). From the User’s Needs to Adaptive Documents. Proceedings of
IDPDT’2000, Texas, USA, 41-49.
Seels, B., & Richey, R. (1994). Instructional technology: The definition and domains of
the field. Washington, DC: Association for Educational Communications and
Technology.
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
Shum, S. B., Motta, E.M., & Domingue, J. (2000). ScholOnto: An Ontology-Based
Digital Library Server for Research Documents and Discourse. International Journal
on Digital Libraries, 3(3), 237-248. Springer-Verlag.
Sicilia, M-A., & Garcia, E. (2003). On The Concepts of Usability and Reusability of
Learning Objects. International Review Of Research in Open and Distance Learning.
Retrieved July 17, 2005, from http://www.irrodl.org/content/v4.2/sicilia-garcia.html
Skinner, B. F. (1974). About Behaviourism. New York: Knopf.
Skinner, B.F. (1968). The Technology Of Teaching. New York: Appleton-Century Crofts.
Smith, P.L., & Ragan, T.J. (1999). Instructional Design. Second Edition. Hoboken, NJ:
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Sosteric, M., & Hesemeier, S. (2002). When Is A Learning Object Not An Object: A First
Step Towards A Theory of Learning Objects. International Review of Research in
Open and Distance Learning. October 2002, 3(2).
South, J. B., & Monson, D. W. (2000). A University-wide system for creating, capturing
and delivering learning objects. In D. A. Wiley (Ed.), The Instructional Use of
Learning Objects (pp. 223-240). Bloomington: Agency for Instructional Technologies
and Association for Educational Communications & Technology.
Steffe, L. & Gale, J. (Eds.). (1995). Constructivism in education. New Jersey: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associated, Inc.
Stojanovic, L., Staab, S., & Studer, R. (2001). eLearning based on the Semantic Web.
Proceedings WebNet2001- World Conference on the WWW and Internet, Orlando,
Florida, USA 2001, 1174-1183. Virginia: AACE.
Tannenbaum, A. (2001). Metadata Solutions: Using Metamodels, Repositories, XML and
Enterprise Portals to Generate Information on Demand. Boston, MA: Addison-
Wesley Professional.
Thompson, K., & Yonekura, F. (2005). Practical Guidelines for Learning Object
Granularity from One Higher Education Setting. Interdisciplinary Journal of
Knowledge and Learning Objects, 1,163-179. Available at
http://www.ijklo.org/Volume1/v1p163-179Thompson.pdf
Thorndike, E. L. (1913). Educational Psychology 1. New York: Teachers College Press.
Thorndike, E. L. (1914). Educational Psychology: Briefer Course. New York: Teachers
College, Columbia University.
Vicente, C. (2005). Learning Object Manipulation By Means of Shared Structured
Workspaces and Argumentative Discussion. In A. Méndez-Vilas, B. González-
Pereira & J. M. González (Eds.), A Recent Research Developments in Learning
Technologies (pp. 1278-1282). Spain: FORMATEX.
 7th Year: I July- 2009  :42 ‫ اد‬:
‫ ا
ا‬WWW.ULUM.NL
‫ 


م ا‬
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wiley, D. A. (2000). Learning Object Design and Sequencing Theory. Unpublished PhD
Thesis. Brigham Young University, June 2000.
Wiley, D A. (2002). Learning objects need instructional design theory. In A. Rossett
(Ed.), The 2001/2002 ASTD Distance Learning Yearbook. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Retrieved September 11, 2004, from http://wiley.ed.usu.edu/docs/astd.pdf
Wiley, D. A. (2003). Learning Objects: Difficulties and Opportunities. Utah State
University.Retrieved December 13, 2005, from
http://wiley.ed.usu.edu/docs/lo_do.pdf
Wilson, B. G. (1997).Thoughts on Theory in Educational Technology. Educational
Technology, 37(1), 22-27.
Yahya, Y., & Yusoff, M. (2005a). Learning Object Types and Metadata Extension: From
Theoretical Perspectives. Submitted to World Conference on Educational
Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunication. USA. 27 June- 2 July. (Accepted).
Yahya, Y., & Yusoff, M. (2005b). The Perception of a Learning Object Model, Its
Characteristics and Metadata: From Theoretical Perspectives. Submitted to E-Learn
Conference. Vancouver, Canada. 24 – 28 October. (Accepted).
Yahya, Y. (2006). Learning Object Recognition: Model and Components Establishment.
Unpublished PhD Thesis. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia December 2006.