 Hello, good afternoon. So University of Europe is in Greece. I don't know if I can translate it in Greek, if you want my presentation. So it's really a pleasure being here. I've been with some of the audience, actually, met in Greece 10 years ago when we had a research conference, actually. And some people might have seen something like that. So what I'm going to present is one of the things I would like to discuss today is how to help designers, learning designers. And I know that some of you might see people just go to the movie, just choose the topics, choose the activities, then assign them to resources, et cetera, and then the course is there. Some people might say, OK, I might use a tool like associate with the design method like learning designer from UCL. Or we have seen new tools like that, a cursor, for example. Hello, guys. And so what I would like to show you is an evidence-based design method supported by a tool that came out of research, of years of research, and that actually guides the designers, design a course. This tool is called CAVMOS. I will give you more details about that. But let's start. First of all, designing a model course. Is it a science? Is it science? Or is it art? Both. It's like Etcher, a very famous graphic designer and that tried to create using imagination, creativity, and geometry. This is one of these. So since we are there, when we design, we are using lots of theory behind it and pedagogical strategies, lots of years of research about how people learn. But also, we need creativity. We don't need prefabricated courses. We might use prefabricated courses and then reuse them and add our own style. How can we support this? So I'm talking about learning design. It has a little bit difference about instructional design. I'm not going to go into details. But what we care mainly in learning design is which activities we are going to use associated with goals, which resources or services will support these activities and how we orchestrate the flow of that. So we want to answer specific questions of what the students are going to do, when, and how. And all that in order to promote positive learning experiences. So that's it. Now, we have tools. We have, for example, the pedagogical wheel from the one with the typology of UCL and Diana Lorela, the ABCLD. We have also Bloom in order to support all this. But is it enough just to know the theory and also have a great tool and very usable tool? Yes and no. And I'm saying yes and no, because I remember one discussion that we had here, actually, a presentation by Martin Duyama saying that the percentage of tools that are being used or activities that are being used in Moodler are very specific. We do not use all the different features that we offer. But why is that? Probably because we have not tried to combine the activities and the tools with the goals and associated learning activities. So it's not enough. But are we using a common language in learning design? Do we develop? When I ask you to give me a lesson plan or a learning design, are we all going to give the same thing? No. So we don't have a common framework. We have bits and bytes. We have templates, but not a common language. Actually, we can see in Merlot, they have different things. In other, the MOOCs have different styles. Other people are using other PDF styles. Different, different templates. So we cannot compare them. We cannot take it and use it and reuse it and then put it in real practice after that. But architects, which is very close to design, have common language. They have also tools. So they start from sketches. They go into very detailed designs and also designs in layers. The plumping, where there will be the windows, the doors. And so they do not start just flat. They start with the design. And up to that, they put different layers of different detail. And then, do they stop there? No. You, as a customer, you want to see how this might look like. So they go a bit before. They make a step ahead. And they create rendering of a 3D model of how this would look. Another view. So they have different views. So why don't we have that in learning design? So why should we start with a word, different templates, and then take it and put it in a tool, in a model, and then create the course? So that was the inspiration. Of actually creating learning design tools. I mentioned some of that. There is 20 years back, we tried to standardize this process with IMSLD, some of you might remember that. And based on that, they created the tools or tried to create these tools. But designers, teachers, especially novice practitioners, they need graphical stuff. It's OK to have forms, but they need more graphical stuff to play around. And also, what they want is to close the gap between design and deployment or enactment. To take the design, as I saw it, and then put it into a platform and realize it. Not with all the resources. No, resources you can create in an authoring tools and then assemble that. Or the quiz might be very platform specific. But at least the skeleton and most of the details will be there. And also, if we have this kind of tools, we can reuse these designs. We can take that, adopt something, play with that, and then re-enact it in our own style. So we need this kind of tools. And this is actually the trend at the moment. So let me present you how we support all this with a tool called Katmos. So what we do is we exactly support what we are talking about. Is that we want to have different views, different layers, exactly as architects are doing. Also, to be a stepwise approach in order to guide them, to make very specific decisions at each specific view and at each specific process. Traceability, what you did and what you changed. And of course, to enable redesign, sharing, and also enactment of the designs. I put, you know, I promise a lot. Let's see if this works. So in this way, you will see we divide the design in two main views. One is the conceptual, when we select the activities and the resources, but not playing around with preconditions with visibility tools, with rules, or grading rules that one flow the other. So one is the conceptual, basically like the way of a syllabus. And then you go and say, now, let's see how we orchestrate that. In order to give you an idea, my assistant will give you some. If the video, no, the video is not working. Why is that? Welcome to Katmos. Katmos is your gotographical learning design tool, tailor-made for educators like you. Whether you're a seasoned educator or just starting, Katmos makes creating lesson plans and seamlessly integrating them into modal abrees. Let's dive in. You've got three fantastic options to kickstart your online course design journey. Start from scratch to let your creativity run wild. Craft a course design that's as unique as your teaching style and content. Use a template to explore an array of pedagogical e-learning strategy templates. Find the perfect match for your subject and goals with ease. And for those with already designed courses, even in a modal format, our import feature ensures a seamless transition. Katmos advocates a systematic design approach, ensuring every step is traceable in the process. You can craft learner-centered designs for collaborative work facilitated by an instructor. Begin by shaping your course into a conceptual model. Add topics and activities associated with a learning resource. See real-time analytics. Come to life for your design. Simultaneously, Katmos crafts a flow model to visualize your course's structure. Need to make changes? No worries. Return to the conceptual model, tweak, and watch the flow model adapt seamlessly. This dynamic feature lets you determine the ideal order for learning activities and define types, preconditions, rules, and goals for each activity. Sharing and reusing your course designs is now easier than ever. Simply export them in word format or for use on various platforms, including Moodle. But that's not all. At the end, you can assess your design and decision-making with our handy rubric. Katmos is here to empower your teaching journey. Start creating, innovating, and inspiring with confidence. Join the Katmos community today. I will say the same thing later on. So why we design in different views? For example, when we are talking about the first thing that we think, and actually I had the discussion during lunch, that at the beginning, all the teacher, all the novice designers say, I have a PowerPoint slide, I have a PDF, I have a quiz, I want to put them. They don't think about activities, they think about resources. So however, resources are associated with activities that the students should do, and also they have specific types. So we support this. So you think of a type, you know, Bloom taxonomy could be MSLD types, whatever, but we have Bloom taxonomy here. And then you associate with the activity. You don't like the resource, you take out the resource, you change it, but you keep the same skeletal, the same structure. So this is why we are talking about reusability. And then while you are creating, you see like in the learning designer, you see the analytics, you see the type of the course you are creating. It's more assessment-driven. No, it's more remembering-driven. And you need this. And for the instructional designers, when there is also a specific pie that shows if you have described all the details of the resource that you are going to do. Because sometimes you design something and you give it to a second teammate and that you, in order to upload the resource, and you need to facilitate this. And so we keep some extra properties for that. I'm not going to say more about that. And then automatically, no, we don't create a second view automatically from the topics. We have a new view, which is the orchestration. In a swim lane, we don't care about resources anymore. We care about what the student or the groups are going to do. And also, where the instructor is going to come and facilitate this process. And in this way, if I want to say no, and also I can change, I see the time, the duration. No, it's not okay, I can change it. And then it goes back automatically and updates the conceptual model. But you are working here. It's like I just think about how architects are working. They are seeing, they are looking at a specific view, not everything in one page. And of course, we can hear at this one, we can add height conditions, grade conditions, all of the things that Moodle or other platforms are supporting. But again, we have a learning design. We don't have a course. What we care is a course. Because this is why we want to close the gap and save time, basically. And exactly. So the tool, actually, of course, creates CADMOS files, but also creates package everything into Moodle. It works perfectly with the current version of Moodle and also previous ones. But if you can see here, there is a very important thing that we do not only open a CADMOS file, CTM files, we can open an MBZ, a Moodle file, and we can X-ray this into annotations. Because in a Moodle we don't know, we have forum, we have pages, we have that, but we don't know exactly what type of this. So you take this and you annotate and then you have the same design, but in a common language. And then you can change it, package it, and put it online. So this is a preview. So in the tool, when you click the preview, you see how it looks like. Exactly as it is. So we have this dream of sharing and reusing courses. Actually, Moodle.NET was actually, it has been developed and designed in this. But if you go to Moodle.NET, you will see just the course and the MBZ file. Why not having the MBZ file? Why not having the description of the course in a more illustrative way, not as a preview or the different two views. The conceptual or the flow. Because this will help the decision maker to say, yes, it works for me or not. Or take it back, change it, and then put it back. But we don't stay there. We have the visualizations, we have the different views, but we do also quality self-check. So what we care is, okay, I believe that my course is excellent. My design is super great, not the content, the design. But can you validate that? So in the tool, we have implemented a rubric with specific quality indicators based on all the basic standards like quality matters and all that. So that either the designer does a self-check, so the course, the MBZ file is associated with self-check or someone else can take it, grade it, and give you back what you want. So are we close to this dream? I feel yes. So this is the vision. If we want open learning design principles, we want common languages. We want, of course, repositories. We want tools for quality checking and, of course, the community to discuss, share, and facilitate all this process. So as I tell, join the movement. The tool is open, it's a beta. We have a beta version upload, so you can, with your Google account, you can, or create one, you know, you can just sign in and use it freely. Thank you very much. We'll open some minutes for questions if some of you have them. First, thank you for the talk. Does the tool provide any, like, accessibility ratings? Like, if you have your design and then we'll give you a rating on how accessible that is? There is, no, no, the rubric has accessibility, but we have not implemented that because, basically, this is about the content and the platform. We are talking about the design, so we don't care much about the resources, which is something else. So yes, in the quality criteria, we ask this if your content is, or your design is UDL-based, but we cannot check it. So this is something like, you know, the ones that tools, other tools are doing better than what we are doing. Thank you. Are you planning to make it downloadable and open-sourced? It is open. Now it is open. Anyway, it's open. So that may be some forms of... Well, we don't know exactly how we'll do, but for the moment, and especially for the Moodle community, you know, we want to keep it the way it is. Now, open-sourced is another discussion about how it is open, definitely, and definitely there will be an open version for that. And if you see, we do not have any constraints, how many designs you are going to do, what will be the export, et cetera. No, you just download the CDM, the MbZ, and that's it, go. Thank you. And I want to know how the quality rubric works. And if you have, for example, very bad grading or something, if the platform suggests you how to improve your course or something. Thank you. First of all, this gives me a very good opportunity to tell you that there are several publications that you can do with the tool. So we have a very formal process for learning design with the tool, but even without any tool. So the satisfaction rate is high. Of course, there are problems, I mean, it takes time. So this is why we say a tool by itself might be great, but if you understand the philosophy, because I told you about the philosophy behind it, it's a design method, this is where we give some emphasis on that. Definitely, you know, it takes some time to understand a little bit of the process. But the tool, you know, if you don't know the process, then the tool is easy. So the quality now, it's a big topic, you know, what is the quality of a designer in design? So we have, if this is another talk, you know, I will give you, so the indicators that you saw, it's based on another research that we have. So we have our own proprietary, you know, quality rubric for designs, and based on that, there will be, next year probably, if I am here, there will be the AI checker that will be based on that, and more automatic, not AI, but automatic decision tools like a bot. So we have, it's based on two basic standards. One is the quality matters. It's the US basic, no, it's not standard, but it seems to be, you know, the golden standard in the US, and the open ed up, which is the European one. So based on that, we adapt this and trim it out like the accessibility and all that, only for the issues that we care about the design, not the course as a whole. So this is how we ended up with this. And also we added our own pictures, you know, as a philosophy. Any other questions? Is that from the learning design itself, is that like, you've been looking at different learning designs like ABC, learning design, or? At the moment, the typology is based on bloom. We have to discuss with, I mean, I know Professor Lorela several years ago, and I have to discuss with the UCL team, how to do that. I mean, it's a matter of association, it's not much on that. But for the moment, because we wanted to make it open without discussing with other teams, no, I mean, going into details about the way of exploiting this, we said we are going with bloom. But it's a matter of, you know, technical easiness, you know, which is a binding thing. Thank you.