Tagging the UoLs (Units of Learning)
15-March-2006
permalink comments (3) forum (3) email thisThere is one document provided with the specification called "IMS Learning Design Best Practice and Implementation Guide" which contains some rules for describing a UoL. We may use some of these guides for tagging the UoLs.
The point (extracted from the doc) is:
3.2.4 The Design Phase Examined in Detail
The starting point for the creation of a design is a use case narrative. For the narrative to contain sufficient detail, it should conform to the following document structure, which is derived from Alistair Cockburn's use case template:
Title - a very short description.
Narrative - a general description of the use case in educational terms (see below).
Primary Actor - student in student led learning, teacher in teacher led situations.
Scope - runtime systems involved in the delivery.
Level - description of the level of complexity.
Stakeholders and Interests - a discussion of the roles and their respective responsibilities.
Preconditions - a specification of what is needed in order to provide the student with learning experiences.
Minimal Guarantees - role specific preconditions.
Success Guarantees - role specific demands for the learning experience to be successful.
Main Success Scenario - relate to the runtime systems involved.
Extensions - various failure scenarios.
The narrative should be structured in the following way
Title - a very short description.
Provided by - author, institution, etc.
Pedagogy/Type of learning - case based, problem based, individualized linear, etc.
Description/Context - idem
Learning objectives - idem
Roles: - the various participants, such as student, tutor, assessor, etc.
Different types of learning content used - local texts, internet pages, multimedia DVDs.
Different types of learning services/facilities/tools used - external expert, groupware.
Different types of collaborative activities - among students, between students and tutors,
Learning activity workflow - how Actors / Content / Services interact.
Scenarios - e.g., the same content may be used for face-to-face and distance learning.
Other needs / Specific requirements - e.g. accessibility, specific target groups, etc.
As you can see, if one intending to develop a UoL uses this guide to seed the information about the UoL, we may get a lot of information about the Unit of learning. This information can be posted attached to the zip file or embedded on the system (that is, using the tagging method provided with the repository). So, I think it would be interesting if UoL designers followed this guide.
Well, this is just an approach we could have in mind.
By now, I am exploring the possibilities for that "UoL Preview method" that was suggested during the meeting. I will let you know what it is going on with that, and it would be nice if we all keep in contact and comment any point that can appear.
3 Replies (comments)
1 meta/data editor tools
Cancore project has a list of meta/data tools at: Meta/data editor tools
2 Quantity of metadata
I feel we need to develop a layered method of applying metadata dependent on the size and specificity of the digital material.
For example, an English course describing the parts of speech is fairly specific but a picture of the Taj Majhal may be used for many purposes. We have to make quality judgments about recording what something is for and what something is. It is not necessary to stick with a single metadata schema, indeed it is entirely reasonable to include "loose" user chosen tags to describe the materials. There is no necessity to achieve 100% exposure of all relevant material ( this would be nice but is not achievable ). Long involved UoL are by their very nature used in a more specific context and will benefit from a formal metadata application. Smaller, more granular materials will have much wider possible contexts of use and will best be tagged in a much looser and less rigorous way.
I think we may need adaptive and agile methods to tag and locate materials, possibly associated with specific user groups and communities of practice.
Librarianship is not to be underestimated; the use of formal metadata schema is "lore" that librarians learn by being part of an expert practising group. We will do well not to overcomplicate metadata entry for the general user case . A layered and adaptive approach to first instance metadata entry combined with continued adaptive adjustment and ranking by subsequent users is likely to yield the best results. And we might just need to include a little of Google in our searches.
Regards to all
AlanH
Knownet
3 Reply
Hi, Its very interesting and more informative.As i am a AeldietSabelina, 09-October-2007 09:55:28 forum / discussionLinking and trackbacks
When linking to this weblog entry, please use the 'permalink', which is http://www.opendockproject.org/main/blog/entries/8665829533
