CMI Data Model Harmonization

Current SCORM Use of the Data Model
SCORM has enabled interoperable tracking of learner progress since its inception through the ADL Data Model. Originally founded on the AICC CMI Data Model, ADL has continued to participate in the data model’s evolution into and through IEEE LTSC [ Currently, SCORM 2004 4th Edition provides a stable and well-defined basis for capturing learner performance.
Shortcomings
Over time, ADL has received feedback and requests for other data capture. ADL recognizes that the current SCORM Data Model does not meet all needs, nor is it sufficient for some forms of content.
Some of the common concerns regarding SCORM Data Model include:
  • Data is only available for a single attempt
  • No LMS reporting requirements are imposed by SCORM, making data tracking less relevant
  • The size/type of data supported by SCORM are not sufficient for all communities of practice
  • Binding limitations restrict where and how the Data Model can be effectively used
  • Missing ‘context’ information that would enable more effective evaluation recorded data
  • Insufficient guidance on defining and using ‘objective’ information – especially in regard to competency/performance tracking
  • SCORM 1.2 and SCORM 2004 have different data models – legacy content needs to be supported directly
ADL’s Approach to CMI Data Model Harmonization
ADL is committed to facilitating a conversation that captures the Data Model requirements of the SCORM user community. We have established a facilitated discussion forum [ and a broader IdeaScale [ site to capture bugs, issues, recommendations, and experiences people have had with the SCORM Data Model. While this activity is focused on the SCORM 2004 Data Model (as realized from the IEEE CMI Standard), we also want to hear any and all concerns regarding the SCORM 1.2 Data Model and legacy content support issues.
You and your organization are invited to join the broader discussion between ADL, AICC, IEEE LTSC, and LETSI. A meeting to discuss harmonization of the CMI Data Model will be hosted at the ADL Co-Lab Hub in Alexandria, Virginia on September 7th [ – virtual participation will be available. For those of you unable to attend, a Twitter stream with the hash tag #cmiharmony will provide a real-time capture of the discussions. ADL will summarize the meeting and steps ahead via this site.
ADL is considering future updates to SCORM and believes that a harmonized approach to the CMI Data Model, one that enables future learning applications, will benefit the SCORM User Community. To foster multi-lateral collaboration with other interested groups (AICC, IEEE LTSC, LETSI and possibly others), ADL will capture SCORM User Community feedback and represent that community in the discussions.
Principally, ADL is interested in four areas of feedback:
  • Bugs, Issues, Constraints related to using the current SCORM Data Model – Please reference the SCORM 2004 4th Edition Run-Time Environment (RTE) Book[ to provide specific examples and/or missing use cases. If you are encountering issues migrating data tracking from legacy SCORM 1.2 content to SCORM 2004, please let us know.
  • Recommendations and New Feature Requests – What is missing from the current Data Model, from both capture and reporting points of view?
  • Methods and Approaches to Extending the CMI Data Model – Do you have community of practice data tracking requirements?
  • Binding Issues and Use Cases – Are there types of content, modes of delivery, or delivery environments that you would like supported that cannot be addressed by the current dot-notation (SCORM) binding? Have you used the IEEE CMI Data Model XML Binding? If so, what experiences have you had?
ADL will actively participate and monitor multiple channels for feedback and exchange:
  • ADL will share announcements, events, findings & recommendations, milestones and pertinent information on this site.
  • ADL will seek and discuss feedback on the SCORM Harmonization IdeaScale site [
  • ADL will host and moderate a CMI Harmonization Google Group for deeper discussions.
  • ADL will disseminate links to relevant activities and discussions through the Twitter account @scormharmonyand the hash tag #cmiharmony.

From sites.google.com/a/adlnet.gov/scorm-harmonization/cmi-data-model-harmonization5 September 2010

Agenda

Attending (in person) / Attending (virtually)
ADL Hub Co-Laboratory
1901 N. Beauregard St, Suite 600
Alexandria, VA 22311 /
703-575-2000 / 218-486-8700 Access Code: 197551
September 7 - CMI Data Model Harmonization Meeting
Time / Topics
08:45 – 09:00 / Opening Remarks and Introductions
09:00 – 09:45 / Position Statements (The state of your organization)
-AICC
-ADL
-IEEE/LTSC
-LETSI
09:45 – 10:45 / Discussion and Resolution of IEEE CMI Data Model Issues
10:45 – 11:00 / Break
11:00 – 12:00 / Discussion and Resolution of IEEE CMI Data Model Issues (cont.)
12:00 – 13:30 / Lunch (working)
13:30 – 14:30 / Method of Extending IEEE CMI Data Model
14:30 – 15:30 / Scoping and Discussion of IEEE CMI Data Model Binding(s)
15:30 – 15:45 / Break
15:45 – 16:45 / Discussion of Conformance Testing and an Open Test Suite
16:45 – 17:00 / Closing Remarks and Next Steps
September 8 - AICC Summit
8:00 – 8:45 / Coffee
8:45 – 9:00 / Brief summary of previous day's outcomes
9:00 – 11:00 / Discussion of e-learning standards' progression across different groups
11:00 – 12:00 / Lunch
12:00 – 13:00 / Namesets presentation
13:00 – 14:00 / Content as a Service
14:00 – 14:15 / Break
14:15 – 17:00 / Discussion of new approaches to managing the CMI data model
  • Extension mechanism vs adding elements
  • Passing nested SCO/AU data back to the LMS
  • Reporting data approach
  • Web services approach

From sites.google.com/a/adlnet.gov/scorm-harmonization/cmi-data-model-harmonization/cmi-data-model-harmonization-meeting-agenda 5 September 2010

CMI Data Model Harmonization

AICC Position Statement

The AICC recognizes that there are multiple problems within our industry caused by having redundant standards. One of the most obvious ones for software developers is the increase in development cost with virtually no benefit. For content producers the increase in cost is slightly less but still significant and for consumers its nothing but confusion. Having redundant standards over the past 10+ years has not been to anyones benefit and ultimately has done damage to the credibility of all the organizations.
The AICC would like to propose that work on the existing SCORM and AICC e-learning standards be brought to an end and that AICC, ADL, IEEE, LETSI and other organizations work together to define the next generation of e-learning standard. In order to do this properly and prevent the types of mistakes made in the past the roles of each organization must be clearly defined as well as the process for producing the standard.
The combined working group will have a list of criteria for adding new capability; A process for ensuring that the specification meets the new capability and a published process for producing the specification associated with the new capability. This will allow vendors and consumers to monitor the entire process as well as being able to adjust their production and implementation schedules accordingly.
The goal of the new standard would be to encompass some of the following characteristics:
  1. Simplification of the data-model by reducing the number of industry specific elements and adding an extension mechanism to allow for greater use across more industries. Ultimately, the data model should consist only of core elements common to everyone with the
  2. Further de-coupling of the data-model from the transport mechanism to support additional transports.
  3. The development of an open-source industry test suite that can be scripted to accommodate different vertical use cases.
It is also the desire of the AICC to have the new standard controlled by the working body. It is important that the group focuses on preventing derivative works not through legal measures but by eliminating the need by creating a capable extension model.

From sites.google.com/a/adlnet.gov/scorm-harmonization/cmi-data-model-harmonization/aicc5 September 2010

CMI Data Model Harmonization

LETSI Position Statement

LETSI’s mission is to shorten the adoption cycle for innovations in elearning: new products, teaching methods, and business models.
Convenient data exchange with installed systems is a critical requirement for moving successful innovations out of the lab and into the marketplace. A service-oriented architecture will allow new products and services (enterprise software, websites, mobile apps) to more easily integrate with installed systems without extensive modification.
Going forward, the CMI data structure should be replaced by a set of small, logically coherent data payloads to allow greater efficiency and flexibility – different kinds of apps sharing specific kinds of data. Variation across communities of practice can be accommodated using abstraction, extension, and a scriptable conformance regimen. Open, agile, focused projects involving software implementation and testing cycles will improve future standards. More importantly, we see the open software activity itself serving as an interim interoperability solution for innovators and early adopters in the years before accredited standards are feasible.
Finally, it is LETSI's belief that broad, cross-market participation and unrestrictive IP policies will facilitate the rapid spread of educational innovation.

5 September 2010

From sites.google.com/a/adlnet.gov/scorm-harmonization/cmi-data-model-harmonization/letsi-position-statement