[QTI] Re: Hi and some questions

[Michael Piotrowski]

On 2007-09-12, "Danny Kodicek" <dragon at well-spring.co.uk> wrote:

>> 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!

You may want to have a look at QTI Quickscan 2006:

  Given the fact that there is a clear business case for the exchange of
  assessment items and even assessments and the resulting need for
  better interoperability one would have expected a significant increase
  of possibilities since the first quickscan in 2003.  Especially since
  there are no other formats that really compete with QTI, it makes
  sense for publishers of items to demand support for this format by
  vendors.  This quickscan however showed no such development for the
  applications tested then and now.
  <http://www.gorissen.info/Pierre/item/2006/12/7/qti-quickscan-2006>

> No mention there of Moodle, which is used by quite a lot of our
> customers.

As Dick Bacon wrote, "Moodle exports an almost working QTI v2.1, but
does not import any QTI at all."  I'm not involved with Moodle, so I
don't know for sure why Moodle doesn't import QTI, but since we've
implemented QTI 2.0 import and export in ECQuiz [1], I've got some
experience with QTI.  On the basis of this experience, my guess is that
this is because QTI 2.x is extremely complex and in many cases not
sufficiently specified.  So you have to put in a lot of work to get no
or only very limited interoperability.

Greetings


Footnotes: 
[1]  <http://plone.org/products/ecquiz/>

-- 
Michael Piotrowski, M.A. <mxp at ifi.uzh.ch>
Institute of Computational Linguistics, University of Zurich
OpenPGP public key ID 0x1614A044