Modular Learning

Owned by Jenna Makowski
Last updated: May 25, 2023
4 min read

Summary

The goal of the Modular Learning Initiative is to bring more flexibility to authoring and delivering learning experiences, by making all levels of the course hierarchy (components, units, subsections and sections) independent, composable, re-usable, and deliverable as stand-alone learning products. This will directly impact course authors and designers in a number of ways:

  • Reduce time spent on course creation by eliminating the need to recreate content and by introducing composable templates

  • Diversify the authoring experience by breaking reliance on the prescriptive course structure and offering flexible pathways to design modular pathways around learning objectives and competencies

  • Position the platform to more readily integrate with adaptive learning tools and services

Problem/Opportunity

In the short-term, this will fix a number of immediate pain points and needs in the course authoring workflow, including:

  • Making it possible to reuse any part of an Open edX course

  • Making it easier to export any part of an Open edX course to another LMS

  • Making it easier to build modular content outside of the course template/hierarchy

  • Making it easier to manage, organize, classify/tag, archive and version control content in libraries

  • Making it possible to modify a course for different audiences

  • Making it easier to add and configure LTI apps

 

In the long-term, this will unlock opportunities to:

  • Build and deliver a more diverse portfolio of learning products, in addition to courses

  • Make learning products readily available to incorporate adaptive learning tools and services

  • Enable content sharing and syndication between organizations

Supporting Market Data

We saw this project as an opportunity to introduce and refine an approach to data gathering and market input that is as inclusive and community-wide as possible. Our goal was to capture common needs and pain points that reflect the majority of user experiences across the Open edX ecosystem, and synthesize them into common user stories. 

To do so, we conducted both informal and structured interviews with over a dozen stakeholders with the aim of representing common viewpoints across the community. This included long-time and power users of the platform, as well as new organizations who wish to use the platform in novel ways. We conducted multiple interviews over a period of two months, refining user stories in the process until we arrived at a finalized set of stories.

 

Key Evidence Summary:

  1. All stakeholders agreed that one immediate pain point to resolve is being able to easily reuse any and all parts of the Open edX course in other courses. 

  2. Over half of the stakeholders indicated the desire to create content outside of the course structure, including full units and sections.

  3. At least 3 stakeholders have near-term plans (2 funded, 1 in-development) to deliver learning products that are smaller than courses, such as singular sections, singular units, or short sequences of sections.

  4. The most desired missing piece of content functionality is taxonomy tagging at all levels of the course hierarchy.

  5. The second most desired missing piece of content functionality is point-and-click integration (and configuration) of third-party LTI apps.

 

Approach and Solution

The challenge of this initiative is that it spans multiple authoring flows and delivery needs, some of which intersect and build on each other, and some of which are indirectly related. However, with a landscape-level view of the Initiative and the right incremental sequencing, we can meet the immediate needs of the majority while simultaneously pushing the boundaries of the platform to author and deliver cutting edge learning pathways. 

We propose developing this initiative over six distinct phases. These phases are incremental, designed to build on each other sequentially. Our intent is to learn as we deliver each phase, and apply learnings to each subsequent phase. 

As such, the phases become increasingly less detailed as this memo progresses, providing a high-level narrative arc for the initiative without becoming mired in prescriptive approaches prematurely. This means Phase 1 is fully fleshed out, with a recommended technical approach, benefits and tradeoffs. Phases 2-6 are works in progress, with user stories, high-level feature requirements, and an open process to gather technical approach questions. 

 

Open Technical Design Questions

  1. Where would folks add LTI components into a course in the future. Would they be added into modular learning units, or would LTI tools, effectively be peers of units?

  2. If we think about learning experiences as "implementing the interface" enrollable, would all enrollables have an opaque key? I’m thinking of support for learning presentations that are not courses.

  3. If we make the simplifying assumption that the LMS is just a course “player,” how should we handle course/block configurations that might include secrets? Where would shared confirmations for LTI tools be configured in the “authoring environment” or in the “delivery environment?”