WEAVING THE FABRIC FOR INDIVIDUALIZED AND ADAPTIVE LEARNING The U.S. experience … Diny Golder, JES & Co. Stuart A. Sutton, University of Washington

‘NOT-SO-SMART’ METADATA FOR VERY SMART SYSTEMS Where we started… ‘SMART’ METADATA FOR VERY SMART (AND SOME NOT-SO-SMART) SYSTEMS Where we are headed…

So, what metadata is ‘smart’? Semantic metadata! We want to go – From closed, smart systems—and even not-so- smart systems — with their sophisticated algorithms & processes working with not-so-smart metadata embodied in RDBMS, XML files, spreadsheets etc. – To open/closed/hybrid, smart systems—and even not-so-smart systems—using smart (semantic) metadata embodied in RDF

INTELLIGENT SILOS Today’s very smart systems

Individual/Adaptive Learning Systems PulseOn Pearson MyLab (with Knewton) Innovative, complex solutions…

Individual/Adaptive Learning Systems PulseOn Pearson MyLab (with Knewton) No! Innovative, complex solutions…

Adaption Engine Student Data (Identity / Performance / Preference) Trajectory Mappings Competency Frameworks Learning Resources Actual proficiency of the Student Proficiency required by Competency Proficiency required by Resource The Silos

Adaption Engine Student Data (Identity / Performance / Preference) Trajectory Mappings Competency Frameworks Learning Resources Linked Data – Open Web Student Data (Identity / Performance / Preference) Competency Frameworks Learning Resources Trajectory Mappings Actual proficiency of the Student Proficiency required by Competency Proficiency required by Resource The Silos

Path from Silos to Open Systems Infrastructure ASN—where it’s been – The emergence of the U.S. “standards movement” – Addressing the data issues of the “movement” First Driver: Education publishing in a complex, heterogeneous market Second Driver: Enhanced resource discovery & retrieval Third Driver: Data-driven decision making – Policy & design of curricular frameworks – Individualized & adaptive learning ASN—where it’s headed – An emerging competency ecosystem From formal competency frameworks to digital badges

THE U.S. “STANDARDS MOVEMENT” U.S. Competency Frameworks

“A Nation at Risk”—1983

U.S. Developments— National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (1989) American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (1989) National Council for the Social Studies (1992) National History Standards Project (1992) Consortium of National Arts Education (1992) Center for Civic Education (1992) Geography Standards Education Project (1992) National Council of Teachers of English, International Reading Association, and the Center for the Study of Reading (1992) National Standards in Foreign Language Project (1993) American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) Project 2061 (1993) Standards Project for English Language Arts (1994) Consortium of National Arts Education Associations (1994) National Council on Social Studies (1994) Geography Education Standards Project (1994) Center for Civic Education (1994) National Association for Sport and Physical Education (1995) Joint Committee on National Health Education Standards (1995) National Council on Economic Education (1995) National Business Education Association (1995) National Science Education Standards (1996) National Council of Teachers of English (1996) Voluntary National Content Standards in Economics (1997) English as a Second Language Standards for Pre-K- 12 Students (1997) National Center on Education and the Economy (1997) National Communication Association (1998) American Library Association (1998) National Standards in Foreign Language Education Project (1999) International Technology Education Association (2000) International Society for Technology in Education (2000) National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (2000)

U.S. Developments— National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (1989) American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (1989) National Council for the Social Studies (1992) National History Standards Project (1992) Consortium of National Arts Education (1992) Center for Civic Education (1992) Geography Standards Education Project (1992) National Council of Teachers of English, International Reading Association, and the Center for the Study of Reading (1992) National Standards in Foreign Language Project (1993) American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) Project 2061 (1993) Standards Project for English Language Arts (1994) Consortium of National Arts Education Associations (1994) National Council on Social Studies (1994) Geography Education Standards Project (1994) Center for Civic Education (1994) National Association for Sport and Physical Education (1995) Joint Committee on National Health Education Standards (1995) National Council on Economic Education (1995) National Business Education Association (1995) National Science Education Standards (1996) National Council of Teachers of English (1996) Voluntary National Content Standards in Economics (1997) English as a Second Language Standards for Pre-K- 12 Students (1997) National Center on Education and the Economy (1997) National Communication Association (1998) American Library Association (1998) National Standards in Foreign Language Education Project (1999) International Technology Education Association (2000) International Society for Technology in Education (2000) National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (2000) 1995 – 2012 An explosion of frameworks across the 50 U.S. states + its territories

U.S. National Curriculum? Not likely... Common Core State Standard (CCSS) – Not a national curriculum – Cooperative initiative of the states – Limited in curricular scope Mathematics English Language Arts

U.S. National Curriculum? State adoption (voluntary): – A state must adopt 100% of the CCSS competency framework (if it adopts at all) – Fuzzy guidelines allow an adopting state to add up to 15% new material to Conform to state legal requirements Regional needs Resulting in up to 204 versions of the CCSS

The Data Dilemma How do you make sense of all these competency frameworks and how they relate?

The Data Dilemma How do publishers make sense of all these competency frameworks and how they relate? How do publishers create learning resources for use across a U.S. national market?

Internal Representations Phase One: Each publisher creates an internal representation of each state/territory competency framework for analysis and indexing; and/or Focuses development on one or more key, high population states Phase One: Each publisher creates an internal representation of each state/territory competency framework for analysis and indexing; and/or Focuses development on one or more key, high population states Phase Two: Commercial services provide publishers with competency framework data services reducing the need for proprietary replication Phase Two: Commercial services provide publishers with competency framework data services reducing the need for proprietary replication

Open Public Representations (ASN) Phase Three: U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) funded the initial development of the ASN from 2001 through 2011 as public infrastructure supporting the entire education and training sectors (public & private) Gates Foundation funding currently supports further development of the ASN framework and the ASN-US repository* Phase Three: U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) funded the initial development of the ASN from 2001 through 2011 as public infrastructure supporting the entire education and training sectors (public & private) Gates Foundation funding currently supports further development of the ASN framework and the ASN-US repository* * Creative Commons Attribution data license open to both public and private sectors

ASN is Unapologetically Commitment to RDF Linked Data Principles Use URIs to identify [all] things that you expose to the Web as resources. [Always] use HTTP URIs so that people can locate and look up (dereference) these things. [Always] provide useful information about the resource when its URI is dereferenced. [Always] include links to other, related URIs in the exposed data as a means of improving information discovery on the Web (‘share the wealth’ principle).

ASN AS RDF METADATA INFRASTRUCTURE Linked Data

Is ASN a Vocabulary or an “Application Profile”? It’s an RDF vocabulary! – – For markup (e.g., RDFa) – For developing application profiles (i.e., specific ‘record structure’ with constrained sets of properties from 1-n namespaces) Used in multiple application profiles... – Among others ASN-US (United States) – ASN-AU (Australia) –

Is ASN a Vocabulary or an “Application Profile”? Thus, the U.S. and Australia are in harmony (although they sing different tunes) – Both are federal—i.e., comprised of distinct sovereign states and a central federal authority – Local control of education

ASN-AU — Australian Curriculum

Globally Linked ‘Application Profiles” United StatesAustralia

Globally Linked ‘Application Profiles” United StatesAustralia The Netherlands Germany France United Kingdom Sweden China

ASN-US as Repository of U.S. Competencies ASN-US is an “application profile” of ASN – ASN-US is an open repository – 1,147 competency framework descriptions from the 50 U.S. states and territories Competency framework descriptions are made up of: – 395,530 individual competency descriptions » Competency descriptions are made up of: 4,914,666 RDF triples

ASN-US 1147 Competency Framework Silos