1. News from Norway Eva Mjovik, Head Advisor
Norwegian Centre for ICT in Education
chair Norwegian SN/K 186, mirror committee

2. Bio Previous Norwegian Computing Center: ( Simula): Researcher
Norwegian Telecommunications Directorate: Advisor / Head of departent: Laws / Regulations. International: CCITT / ISO / ETSI, Eu expert committee telecom, Advisor to ministries within EFTA, EEA, GATT negotiations
UNINETT- Norwegian Reaserch Network : CEO of subsidiary named UNINETT ABC ( K-12): Infrastructure, Identity Management, Standardization, Information Security, Guidance for Schools
Norwegian Centre for ICT in Education : Head of Department “same” as UNINET

3. Content
Will cover:
Learning technology: Metadata for learning resources, new national standard
National working group on Learning Analytics
Will not cover:
Work in progress Norwegian Directorate for Education on mapping content / /curriculum
( Webinar ?)
Learning technology: Metadata for learning resources, new standard
National working group on Learning Analytics

4. Now:
Centre for ICT in Education : Head Advisor / Special Advisor:
Working with : Standardization, Initiative for harmonization ICT projects in the education sector , new technologies
Passionate: Initiate and participate in projects using ICT for building global infrastructure/ ecosystems that facilitates the best we want to provide students / learners

5. Norwegian standards committee for learning technology
Ongoing projects under the national standards committee for learning technology
The committee has currently about 70 members from 40 organizations. Participants all represent interests in the educational sector in Norway
Relatively high level of activity. During 2016 there were 15 formal meetings, joint meetings and project meetings
Work with metadata started in 2012
Three projects in Learning Analytics started in February 2016

6. Learning Analytics

7. Open and shared data
Standardization
Privacy and ethics

8. Learning Analytics – 3 projects
Data sources and conditions for sharing data — The project aims to clarify data sources in the Norwegian market, and conditions for access and sharing. First version of a Technical Report is being circulated for comments
Activity Data – Vocabulary for Exchange — There is a desire and need for far more flexible methods to capture activities of a variety of different types. The relevant specifications give great freedom in how to “formulate”. Linguistic interoperability is a major challenge.
During the coming few months we want to conduct a practical trial among suppliers delivering Learning Analytics products. Aiming for a Technical Report
Goal : Practical test
Prosjekt 3
Ffff
ffff 1)
The project aims to clarify what is today the most important data sources for learning analysis in the Norwegian market, and what conditions regulate access and sharing. Possible sources of data for learning analysis are currently spread across a number of players (students and students, publishers, tool providers, educational institutions, authorities, etc.).
Furthermore, the project will look into conditions and methods for accessing data that can be made available to more actors. 2)
The challenge for suppliers, municipalities, counties and UH institutions is that all the relevant specifications give great freedom in how to "formulate". This also states that although there is a relatively high degree of technical interoperability at present (integrations), linguistic interoperability is a major challenge
In order to further develop the opportunities provided by learning analysis, we need to facilitate a wider range of data that can be exchanged between different actors and different systems (without compromising privacy and information security).

9. Projects
Privacy — Legislation and national regulations may not be adequate to give students, parents, school and institution owners, suppliers and others a perception of security for safe learning (especially during primary and secondary education). How do we prevent that fear of privacy violates the trust of systems and services?
We have had a number of meetings that have involved all the national stakeholders, including the Norwegian Data Protection Authority, the Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training, school owners (counties and municipalities), universities, government agencies, commercial actors
The aim of the project at start-up: A Technical Report as the basis for best practice

10. Metadata
Activity data
AICC, SCORM , xAPI,
CC/LTI, CMI-5
Learning Activity Store
Data lake
For å videreutvikle mulighetene læringsanalyse gir, trenger vi å legge til rette for ett bredere sett av data som kan utveksles mellom ulike aktører og ulike systemer (uten å sette personvern og informasjonssikkerhet i fare).

11. In order to further develop the opportunities provided by learning analytic, we need to facilitate a wider range of data that can be exchanged between different actors and different systems (without compromising privacy and information security).

12. Metadata Activity data
LRMI , LOM, CX Metadata
LTI, Xapi, scorm etc.
Adaptive vurdering
Adaptive
nettverk
Structured Experience
Hopper over denne  
hva de har gjort, hvor lang tid de har brukt på oppgavene, hvor godt de har gjennomført oppgavene og hvor mange ganger de har gjennomført en oppgave eller sett en læringsressurs som en video eller presentasjon hva de har gjort, hvor lang tid de har brukt på oppgavene, hvor godt de har gjennomført oppgavene og hvor mange ganger de har gjennomført en oppgave eller sett en læringsressurs som en video eller presentasjonMemory retention systems are most applicable to
individuelle fremgang
faglige kompetanse innenfor gitte læreplanmål
tidsbruk på skolearbeidet
arbeidsvaner på skolen og hjemme
memory intensive learning activities such as
learning language vocabulary or medical exam
study.
Adaptive assessment efficiently identifies a
learner‟s level of knowledge with respect to the
population of other learners, within a specific bank
of questions
Learning activities (assessments, content and
other activities) are stored in a network, with
learning relationships defined between them. As
the student works through a topic, an algorithm is
used to identify the next most appropriate item in
the network for the student.
Inputs can include the learner‟s knowledge profile,
elements of the learner‟s behavior, retention recommendation and profile data. These inputs
are used to provide a recommended sequence to
the learner. At each new step, the sequence is
recalculated based on the latest information about
the learner.

13. Metadata for learning resources

14. Metadata tagging based on the Learning Resource Metadata Initiative (LRMI)
New Norwegian standard: NS 4180:2017 “Learning technology - Metadata for learning resources”
Links:

15. Brief Introduction Metadata tagging based on LRMI
Following a mutually accepted minimum set of metadata attributes from LRMI
Practical approach, pre piloting for addressing possibilities before developing a final profile. Participants tagged their own resources and sharing results and experiences.
Strong support: All major publishing companies, public content providers, television networks, LMS providers, and other Edtech companies
Under the auspices of the Norwegian national standardization committee for Learning Technology (SN/K 186) SN/K 186 is the Norwegian mirror committee for CEN/TC 353 and ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 36
Educational to the Curriculum is at the core of the participants testing
Links:

16. Why not the IEEE Learning Object Metadata specification (LOM)?
Feedback from public and private organizations and companies, different reports and discussions all concluded that lack of a modern framework for metadata was critically important for further development for the whole educational sector.
NORLOM did never get a strong foothold in Norway (NORLOM is the norwegian application profile of the IEEE Learning Object Metadata specification).
LOM is based on a more rigorous hierarchical model. With LRMI it is easier to be more “too the point” when writing metadata.
And perhaps most importantly: In addition, all references in the model are URL-based. It makes it easier to share metadata across the Internet (and more edible for search engines)

17. … see the speech balloons in the following 3 slides:
How it works?
… see the speech balloons in the following 3 slides:

18. All elements in the national curriculum db are URL-based (URIs)
Grep
-The national curriculum
database /
API / Ontology
First, from the sense of perspective I represent - the authorities decide what learning resources will be about: Since the last curriculum reform in 2006 ("Knowledge Promotion in Primary and Secondary Education and Training"), The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training has made available all subjects and curricula on the Internet via open APIs, and the most of the objects in this database has its own unique URI (Uniform Resource Identifier). In other words, the objects has their unique addresses on the Internet. Examples:
The curriculum for the subject, Norwegian, has the address: data.udir.no/kl06/NOR1-05
This curriculum has a competence aim, that has the address: data.udir.no/kl06/K15411

19. …and can be used as references in learning resource metadata
Grep
Educational Alignment
-The national curriculum
database /
API
So, from the metadata perspective, how we can provide a standardized way to metadata tag learning resources: Here I will briefly show an example on the part of the LRMI document that is about Educational Alignment, for instance:
which curriculum
which subject
which competence aim
what level or year etc. are we talking about?
We believe it is important that all these items are machine readable, accessible on the Internet and that they have unique Internet addresses.

20. … so it is edible for search engines
LOD-cloud
LRMI
in schema.org
Norwegian-Danish language development
… so it is edible for search engines
Grep
So to summing up: From the learning resource providers' perspective: The learning resource provider, adds the metadata in the structure as the standard recommends. The search engines eats these metadata, with the structure from the standard in mind. But some assumptions, though:
The resource itself (or a representation of it) have to be available on the Internet
The metadata about the resource have to be available on the Internet
The metadata structure (the standard, if you like) should be available on the internet
In this example:
If an end user goes to a search engine such as Google, and ask: "Give me a learning resource that meets the competence aim "understand some Sweedish and Danish speech", then the user will get this film clip from the Norwegian national broadcaster NRK: "Norwegian-Danish language development", but only, of course, if NRK actually have tagged the resource in the way I have mentioned.

21. Future work
The previously mentioned standard provides good metadata possibilities. An extension may be to create a separate standard that describes the curricula in more detail (generically, so it can fit all country's curricula).
In cooperation with the chair of the International ISO Committee, we have sent a proposal to this effect. This is in an early phase, but mirror committees of several countries have reported that they are interested in participating.
Already started to consider the standard with universal design, dynamic data , support for learning analytic

22. Norwegian Centre for ICT in Education
Contact Information
Norwegian Centre for ICT in Education
Eva Mjøvik (chair Norwegian SN/K 186*)
* SN/K 186 is the Norwegian mirror committee for CEN/TC 353 and ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 36