[QTI] Hi and some questions

[Niall Barr]

Danny Kodicek wrote:
>  Thanks, Niall, this is really helpful.
>
>   
>> The best way to associate other objects with the test would 
>> be to include them all in the same content package, and use 
>> an <organization> to provide an indication that they are 
>> related, however that won't allow data to pass from an SCO to 
>> an assessment. (I'm not sure if there is a way to pass data 
>> from an SCO to a QTI 2.1 assessment - hopefully Steve will 
>> post an answer covering that.)
>>     
>
> I wasn't really expecting this would work, but I thought I'd try. What our
> software currently does is that as you skip through the sections of the
> worksheet, it updates the state of the simulation alongside. We were hoping
> to achieve the same thing in QTI by opening a separate web page for each
> section. I suppose an alternative is just to put a direct HTML link into the
> question. Another possibility would be to embed the (Shockwave) software
> directly into the QTI, is that possible? Obviously it won't work for
> non-HTML-based QTI viewers, but I'd have thought web-based LPs might support
> it.
>
>   
You can embed shockwave in both versions of QTI using normal HTML syntax.
>> You also need to decide on whether to use QTI 1.2.1 
>> (currently better for compatibility with VLEs, but rather 
>> limited) or QTI 2.1. (Very much more flexible and more 
>> clearly specified so it provides better interoperability, but 
>> so far not supported by major VLEs.)
>>     
>
> I don't think we have any alternative to 2.1: our worksheets are organised
> much more like an assessment than a single item (incidentally, am I right in
> thinking that assessmentItems can't be embedded directly into an assessment
> but have to be specified as external files?)
>
>   
Assessments are included in 1.2.1 and 2.1 - 2.0 is the only version 
without assessments. In 2.1 the items are held in separate files. In 
1.2.1 they can be in separate files, but are more commonly just included 
in the same XML file as the assessment.
>> The only comparison of QTI support  that I know of is 
>> Pierre's Quickscan report 
>> <http://www.digiuni.nl/digiuni/index.cfm/site/Internet/pageid/
>> 980AE511-AB8F-98D2-57F438FCD402F4D1/objectType/product/objectI
>> D/08E120BE-A59E-8C9C-B0620BC9B28E07F2/LayoutTemplate/tekst/ind
>> ex.cfm>. 
>>     
>
> Looks good but a bit depressing - I'd hope that the intervening four years
> have made things a bit more hopeful! No mention there of Moodle, which is
> used by quite a lot of our customers. 
>   
As far as I know Moodle supports QTI 1.2.1 import and can export items 
as QTI 2.0. Moodle are members of the Common Cartridge initiative which 
is developing a profile for content packages incorporating a subset of 
QTI 1.2.1 assessments along with Web content,  SCORM, Tools 
Interoperability and a new authentication system. The intension of the 
Common Cartridge is to make a clearly defined profile that guarantees 
that content will play correctly on any compliant delivery platform, and 
I expect Moodle will be among the first to support it.
Niall.