1. WP 2: Ontology & Metadata Models ITD
Preliminary Draft
WP 2: Ontology & Metadata Models
ITD
Annual Review meeting
CNR, ITD in Genova (IT), September

2.
Results achieved
Definition of the semantic foundations of the system
Teacher Education Ontology (TEO): it allows cultural-linguistic personalization of the system
Common Metadata Model (CMM): it draws on international standards and guarantees semantic interoperability of the system
Multicultural Metadata Model (M3): linguistic and cultural interoperability and corresponding binding for overcoming cross-cultural barriers
R2.1 – A Teacher Education ontology (TEO) for defining the Common Metadata Model (CMM) and for allowing cultural-linguistic personalization of the Share.TEC system
R2.2 – Common metadata model (CMM) for European TE contents that draws on international standards and guarantees semantic, linguistic and cultural interoperability of the system R2.3 - Establishing a sound basis for effective brokerage through the definition of ontology-based user profiles. R3.1 – linguistic and cultural interoperability based on a multicultural metadata model (M3) and corresponding binding for overcoming cross-cultural barriers
11/4/2017

3.
TEO’s roles
To support the design and development of key facets of the Share.TEC system
To guide the definition of the Metadata Models (CMM & M3) for digital educational resources
To trigger reasoning mechanism supporting personalised user interface and inferential search engines
From an operative viewpoint, the design of some applications (eg. Workpackage 4 and 5) is based on TEO, which also supports the definition of a common metadata model for digital educational resources (Workpackage 2, Task 2.2). In these contexts, TEO provides the semantic foundations for key facets of the Share.TEC system. Namely, it allows for consistent pedagogical characterization of digital content (via the Common Metadata Model) and of user profiles and competencies across multilingual and multicultural approaches; besides, it supports personalized interaction with reasoning-based adaptive user applications, including the implementation of advanced recommending functions and of inferential search engines.

4.
TEO’s structure
Digital content (educational resources and artefacts closely related to the concept of LO)
Competencies (both at subject-matter level and transversally - socio-affective, metacognitive, etc.)
Knowledge domain
Context (various contexts of action within the domain of TE)
Actor & Role (people in the TE context and in the Share.TEC system)
From an operative viewpoint, the design of some applications (eg. Workpackage 4 and 5) is based on TEO, which also supports the definition of a common metadata model for digital educational resources (Workpackage 2, Task 2.2). In these contexts, TEO provides the semantic foundations for key facets of the Share.TEC system. Namely, it allows for consistent pedagogical characterization of digital content (via the Common Metadata Model) and of user profiles and competencies across multilingual and multicultural approaches; besides, it supports personalized interaction with reasoning-based adaptive user applications, including the implementation of advanced recommending functions and of inferential search engines.

5. Branches development Digital content Competency Knowledge domain
Branches development
Digital content
IEEE Lom, POEM model
Competency
Ontology for competency modeling (PAQUETTE, 2007)
Ontology for Human Resource Management (DORN, 2007)
Knowledge domain
EUROSTAT standards for Education (Dewey’s Classification)
Context
ISCED standards (UNESCO, 1997)
Actor & Role
- IMS LIP, Ontology-based Student Modeling (PANEVA, 2006)
From an operative viewpoint, the design of some applications (eg. Workpackage 4 and 5) is based on TEO, which also supports the definition of a common metadata model for digital educational resources (Workpackage 2, Task 2.2). In these contexts, TEO provides the semantic foundations for key facets of the Share.TEC system. Namely, it allows for consistent pedagogical characterization of digital content (via the Common Metadata Model) and of user profiles and competencies across multilingual and multicultural approaches; besides, it supports personalized interaction with reasoning-based adaptive user applications, including the implementation of advanced recommending functions and of inferential search engines.

6. CMM’s Roles & structure
CMM’s Roles & structure
To ensure interoperability by supporting the process of metadata migration from/to repositories inside and outside the consortium.
To provide a formal representation of digital content descriptors embedding both standards and pedagogy-oriented features.
To inform the design of the Metadata Migration Facility tool (MMF)
The CMM consists in two main components:
Sections 1 to 8 are derived from LOM;
Sections 9 and 10, which embed most of the culturally dependent elements, come from the TEO common layer.
From an operative viewpoint, the design of some applications (eg. Workpackage 4 and 5) is based on TEO, which also supports the definition of a common metadata model for digital educational resources (Workpackage 2, Task 2.2). In these contexts, TEO provides the semantic foundations for key facets of the Share.TEC system. Namely, it allows for consistent pedagogical characterization of digital content (via the Common Metadata Model) and of user profiles and competencies across multilingual and multicultural approaches; besides, it supports personalized interaction with reasoning-based adaptive user applications, including the implementation of advanced recommending functions and of inferential search engines.

7. MMM’s Roles & structure
MMM’s Roles & structure
To adapt the system (eg. user interface) to the individual user language and culture while describing the digital resources or querying the repository
To adapt and translate the CMM elements to the various cultures/languages.
To inform the design of the Resoruce Integration Companion Kit tool (RICK)
Specifically, the MMM gains its multicultural dimension by:
translating the vocabularies of Sections 1 to 8
adapting the elements of Sections 9 and 10 by deriving their names and vocabularies from TEO.
This works under the hypothesis that all the CMM terms and vocabularies have a direct translation in all the languages; If this is not the case, we will have to force some approximation where needed/possible.
Specifically, the MMM gains its multicultural dimension by:
translating the vocabularies of Sections 1 to 8 (there already exist translations in various European languages);
adapting the elements of Sections 9 and 10 by deriving their names and vocabularies from TEO.

8. Fragment of “Context”: common level
Fragment of “Context”: common level
Context
Cultural
Agency
Educational
Institution
Teacher
Practice
Pre- Primary
Primary
Secondary
Lower Secondary
Upper Secondary

9. Fragment of “Context”: cultural levels (IT,SP,BG)
Fragment of “Context”: cultural levels (IT,SP,BG)
Context
Cultural
Agency
Educational
Institution
Teacher
Practice
Pre- Primary
Primary
Secondary
LowerSecondaryGeneral only in Italy, Spain, Bulgaria
Lower Secondary
Upper Secondary
Lower Sec. General

10. Fragment of “Context”:cultural levels (IT,SP)
Fragment of “Context”:cultural levels (IT,SP)
Context
Cultural
Agency
Educational
Institution
Teacher
Practice
Pre- Primary
Primary
Secondary
LowerSecondary Vocational only in Italy & Spain
Lower Secondary
Upper Secondary
Lower Sec. General
Lower Sec.
Vocational

11. Fragment of “Context”:cultural levels (IE)
Fragment of “Context”:cultural levels (IE)
Context
Cultural
Agency
Educational
Institution
Teacher
Practice
Pre- Primary
Primary
Secondary
Transition Year only in Ireland
Lower Secondary
Upper Secondary
Transition
Year
Lower Sec. General
Lower Sec.
Vocational

12. Fragment of “Context”:common & cultural levels
Fragment of “Context”:common & cultural levels
Context
Cultural
Agency
Educational
Institution
Teacher
Practice
Pre- Primary
Primary
Secondary
Lower Secondary
Upper Secondary
Transition
Year
Lower Sec. General
Lower Sec.
Vocational

13.
TEO, CMM, M3 synergies

14. Performance Indicators
Performance Indicators
To be done
Current scenario for digital resource use & sharing across Europe:
11/4/2017

15. Challenges & remedial actions
Challenges & remedial actions
Ontology & Metadata Models integration
Quantity of Metadata fields obligatory
Collaborative development of the Ontology
Multicultural dimension in Share.TEC
(to be expanded)
Federation, metadata aggregation/harvesting
11/4/2017

16. The multicultural dimension in Share.TEC
The multicultural dimension in Share.TEC
a highly expressive Multilingual-Multicultural Metadata Model (M3).
experiential annotations attached to resources and related to user profiles.
a fully multilingual user interface (scalable multilingual support that begins with 6 languages and allows easy extendibility);
In summary, Share.TEC’s response to multicultural and multilingual issues is borne out in the following ways:
experiential annotations attached to resources and related to user profiles. These are an essential element of the Share.TEC multicultural dimension. Multicultural information is more effectively transmitted via narration of experience (the difficulties faced, the solution adopted);