Abstract: The success of eLearning heavily relies on the design of Learning Objects to communicate in an effective way. This article proposes to discuss the design issues of learning objects in eLearning 3.0. A period of collaboration through Social Networking has passed by in eLearning 2.0 phase and we’re out here to create our own avatars in eLearning 3.0. What would be the implications of learning objects in this environment? This paper sheds some light on what will be the new methodologies that will improve the realm of digital learning for both the students and the trainers. Despite the promoted benefits of eLearning 2.0, learners‘ füll participation in the learning process is lacking. It only indicates that these Learning objects for eLearning, has not been designed with end-users, i.e. the learners, in mind. It is imperative that eLearning must provide ways to actually improve the learning process. The aim of the article is to analyze existing LO’s in eLearning 2.0 and to discuss the design issues related to the modifying these LO’s to categorize them under eLearning3.0. A generic architecture that can be applied to various domains in eLearning 3.0 would be proposed and the set of attributes related to the context in which the LO is used, would be defined. This would ensure more participation from learner’s side to take up responsibilities for setting up their own activities. Further the most important issue of interoperability among the different e-Learning systems that would enable different LOs to be exchanged and reused among the different e- Learning platforms would also be taken into consideration for designing LO’s for eLearning 3.0. This transition is not any more optional, it becomes inevitable and can be perceived as not just new set of methods, but new, innovative ways to make the learners creatively design their own methods of learning.
in: Issham Ismail (Hrsg.): Procedings of the 5th International Conference on e-Learning (=Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang Malaysia, 12-13 July 2010), Readling 2010, S. 300-306, hier S. 300