March 17, 2005
Reusability is a fallacy??
D’Arcy Norman Dot Net » Blog Archive » On Reusability (in learning objects)
"Real reusability is only effectively possible when dealing with smaller resources."
Let me pose another side to this argument. While smaller bits might sometimes have more potential reusability, entire sites can be reused if certain design considerations are taken into account. I agree with Wiley's Reusability Paradox and the focus is primarily on automated use of learning objects and not by-hand reuse.
In other words, if you plan for reusability with the instruction you are creating, then larger segments of the intervention can be reused. For example, I am creating a lesson on blogging. I am building this lesson so that I can drop it into any number of other courses I teach or even as a mini-lesson I can post to my site. In this case, the smaller bits (animations) are useless without the larger context of the lesson. The entire lesson, however, is easy for me to drop into any course I might teach.
This issue does, however, point to an apparent difference that I have mentioned previously between formal and informal learning objects. Formal learning objects are created primarily to support an instructional objective (i.e. part of a course) and informal learning objects are the other trillion potential digital resources that may not have been created for instruction but could be reused or repurposed for an instructional goal. When discussing informal learning objects, I take much more of the approach that Stephen Downes described in his FLOSSE Posse interview (it is how the content is used that determines whether an object is a learning object). Formal "objects" can be built to facilitate reuse much easier than informal ones.
You can design for reusability. To think that everything should be reusable is part of what makes this topic seem so overwhelming to many people. From a business perspective, one colleague of mine has conducted an ROI on reusability and discovered that significant returns are available if we reuse only 6% of what we create. Thinking in those terms, it is much less overwhelming to think that one or two "objects" in every course might be reusable (even large objects like an entire lesson)!
I plan to discuss some of my work on this topic at the upcoming AERA meeting in Montréal at the Technology, Instruction, Cognition & Learning (TICL) SIG meeting.
Posted by Rovy at March 17, 2005 4:12 AM
Comments
Good points! The distinction between formal and informal learning objects (assets/resources) is valuable. Also, the 6% reuse ROI is something I hadn't heard before. Obviously not everying can/should be reused. If the threshold for significant returns occurs at the 6% reuse level, then we should be able to work with that quite easily...
Posted by: D'Arcy Norman at March 17, 2005 10:56 AM