1. Pilot with TE– Metadata Quality Evaluation Test
UVa Team
June 30th, 2010
Bologna Workshop

2. 1. The test Objective of the Session Development of the test
Evaluating the quality of the metadata of UVa resources
Development of the test
Selection of 5 resources at random (at least one of every different source that we provide -4-)
Individual Analysis of the resource
Questionnaire about the different fields tagged (including pedagogical fields)
[UVa Team] Pilot Metadata Evaluation

3. 2. The Context Participants: 5 TE
3 TE from the Educational ICT area
1 Teacher Trainer (Engineer of Telecommunication)
1 TE of Music on Education
Location: University of Valladolid. Faculty of Education and Social Work
Date:
Duration: 3 hours
[UVa Team] Pilot Metadata Evaluation

4. 3. Results
Not every TE had the time for analyzing the 5 resources (in 3 hours of test – due to they did not know the ontology and it was hard for them to try to understand it)
They did not like too much the ontology of Share.TEC. Sometimes they do not find a logic to the subdivisions of the ontology.
Information presented does not give too many qualitative information that teacher educators would appreciate
The TE that did the test will not use resources in other languages different from the more comfortable for them –their mother tongue -(they say that it also depends on the level that you have in other languages)
[UVa Team] Pilot Metadata Evaluation

5. 3. Results
Our resources: are mainly articles – It’s quite difficult to tag some fields of these kind resources without an educational real context
For example: Employment mode (Blended, distance, presence) or Knowledge Area or Skill level
This causes that the tagging of the resources would be subjective some times
Share.TEC Classification maybe should have offer a new one that would describe if the resource is a research, an article, a WebQuest, an study, a paper, etc.
[UVa Team] Pilot Metadata Evaluation

6. We reviewed and modified again most of the metadata
4. Actions that had been taken with the metadata after obtaining the results
We reviewed and modified again most of the metadata
Some URLs that did not work from one of the sources
Need for reviewing the English description of the resources
Some spelling mistakes
Currently we continue the reviewing
[UVa Team] Pilot Metadata Evaluation